1991 Security Agreement Between Lebanon And Syria example essay topic

Nana Kwame Amponsah Contesting Forces within Lebanon Professor Schiff December 15th, 2002 The contesting forces of democratization and liberalization in Lebanon are attributed to a variety of factors within the Middle East. The factors that have the greatest adverse affect on Lebanon are its political relations with Syria and a weak Lebanese central government. These two attributes are the root causes of Lebanese political instability. Syrian presence in Lebanon has drastically altered the political, economic and social liberties within Lebanon. This presence is felt through the entire country in regard to freedom of expression and lack of political representation. Syrian hegemony has served Damascus well.

It fortified a totalitarian regime by eliminating the perceived subversive influences. It has gained international leverage in foreign policy and military strategy. Syria has taken to economic exploitation through such tactics by dumping its labor surplus and products on Lebanese markets, tapping Lebanon's precious water supply, and other illegitimate business practices. Each of these excesses helps to mask Syria's own potential instability. The reason for these actions is that Syria is dealing with the heavy burdens of a backward economy, a population explosion and internal discontent. In essence, Syria would rather export these problems, than deal with them internally.

Syrian intervention was first felt with the advent of the Taif Accords in 1989. These accords were created to map out a security plan for government sovereignty over all Lebanese territory. In essence, the accord calls for a disbanding of militias and strengthening of Lebanese governmental forces. It also calls for a withdrawal of Syrian forces inside Lebanon and the establishment of a joint Syrian-Lebanese mechanism for making future decisions about the positioning and functions of the Syrian troops. The accord contains a Syria-Lebanese security agreement and calls for taking steps to bring about a withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory.

While the intentions of this accord are positive the reality of the situation is that the Taif Accords of 1989 and the Security Agreement of 1991 have not served the interest of the Lebanese community as a whole. These bilateral agreements in reality are a veil in which Syria may control the internal and external environment of Lebanon. For example, the Taif Accords altered the political structure of Lebanon by decreasing the power of the Maronite Presidency, while increasing the power of the prime minister, the council of ministers and the Speaker. The reason for this is because Lebanese political structure is based on the having a Maronite presidency, a Sunni Muslin prime minister and Shia Muslin speaker of the house. In reducing the importance of the Maronite presidency, Syria may directly influence political matters within the government. A direct example of Syria interfering with the Lebanese political environment is the problem of elections.

Syria has ensured that the candidates that wish to be in power align with Syrian objectives. This is possible by Syria manipulating the size of electoral districts by, ? altering the distribution of delegates to favor areas of the county were Syrian forces are most concentrated and have been stationed the longest (Gam bill 2)? This is in direct violation of the Taif Accords, yet there has never been any open criticism of the Syrian regime in Lebanon. The reason for there never being any open criticism of Syrian policy is that the 1991 security agreement between Lebanon and Syria prohibits the publication of any information threatening state security in both countries including criticism of the President or foreign leaders. This security agreement in reality forces the Lebanese media to practices self-censorship.

Another contesting force within Lebanon is that of Hizabllah. This militia organization, which has close ties to Syria has taken to operating in the southern district of Lebanon without any governmental authority. An example of Hizabllah extreme civil disobedience occurred in 1991, when its former leader Sheik Tufayli, ? called for a revolt of the hungary and announced a campaign of civil disobedience in the Bekaa valley, {in which} he declared the area inaccessible to governmental authorities (Middle East Quarterly 2).? It is example such as these that explain why any confrontation with a Syrian ally { Hizabllah and Palestine groups }, will create an unwanted Syrian presence This has forced Lebanon to allow a continued presence of Hizabllah in the south as it is in direct favor of Syrian foreign policy. In the economic realm Lebanon continues to suffer as Syria has dumped it's economic surplus on the Lebanese employment market. This was possible by Syria and Lebanon jointly allowing immigrants en mass.

This principle allows for Syrian nationals to obtain Lebanon citizenship, which therefore allows a great number of Syrian nationals to work in Lebanon, while spending their money in Syria. According to a country report published in may of 2000, a reported three billion a year goes to a Syria, by way of nationalized immigrants who send the money to their families in Syria. This has been allowed to occur in Lebanon simply because there is a weak central government, in which through the 1989 Taif Accord and the 1991 Security agreement Syria destabilized economic and political freedoms. The only way in which Lebanon may directly change the impact of Syrian hegemony is by outside foreign powers, most notably that of the united States.