Tragic Lebanon: A mirror for Malaysia

 Lebanon which today is a failed state due to religious tensions, factionalism, political and economic inequality, corruption, foreign power play and Palestinian presence has much to teach Malaysia and the world.

Caught in a war not of its making, Lebanon is a picture of destitution, despair, and devastation.

Once celebrated as the “Paris of the Middle East,” Lebanon today serves as a cautionary tale of how entrenched sectarianism, religious divisions, systemic corruption, cronyism, mismanagement, failure of institutions, influx of refugees, armed militias and regional power struggles can dismantle a nation.

Malaysia, just as other nations, has much to learn from the fall of Lebanon.

Following independence in 1943, Lebanon emerged as a unique experiment in pluralism. For much of the mid-20th century, Lebanon was the anomaly in an unsteady Arab world. The hub of high finance and avant-garde art not only boasted a pluralistic society but also portrayed a modern democracy where Christians and Muslims could govern together in peace.

The political elite devised a power-sharing formula whereby key positions – from the presidency to the military and civil service – were apportioned according to sectarian or religious affiliation.

Political power became split by law: the president must be a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of parliament a Shia Muslim. The Druze and other minorities also held designated roles.

This set-up is not too different from what we have in Malaysia, where the political elite, leading mostly race- or religion-based parties, form alliances with other parties to ensure at least a token representation of another race in the coalition. The Cabinet too has race- and religion-based representation, with the understanding that the prime minister must always be a Malay. Even suggesting that a non-Malay can constitutionally become prime minister is asking for trouble.

Lebanon’s National Pact served the elites well, as it allowed for both competition and cooperation, while ensuring that leaders of these sects had access to state resources and power.

Again, not unlike Malaysia, where race-based political parties compete with each other formally but also cooperate for common benefit informally, or reconfigure alignments when it suits them, especially after elections. This enables the political elites to continue accessing power and state resources.

In Lebanon, the National Pact era (1943–1975) saw a period of staggering cultural and economic prosperity but it hid the slow rot that was taking place.

For example, state resources were doled out based on religious affiliation rather than the greater good of the nation. Loyalty and religious affinity, not ability and professionalism, were rewarded.

Some would say that Malaysia – entrenched in the politics of race and rising political Islam – is on a similar path.

The Lebanese elites played exquisite political games to secure and maintain power, often waving the flag of religion to keep citizens distracted, divided, or on their side.

The leaders convinced members of their sects or religions that only they could protect them from “the others” and that their sect or religion was under threat from the other groups. By reinforcing and amplifying animosity towards citizens of other sects and faiths, these leaders strengthened their own positions.

That should ring a bell among discerning Malaysians.

Isn’t it a truism that when you vote for a man simply because he shares your prayers, you stop asking if he is a thief? That’s what happened in Lebanon.

Some would say this is happening in Malaysia too.

Not many Malaysians know that the coming of the Palestinians, especially the Palestine Liberation Organisation, was a major catalyst for Lebanon’s collapse. The PLO established a presence in Lebanon through Palestinian refugee flows following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes. The PLO’s armed presence grew significantly after the 1967 Six-Day War when more Palestinians flooded Lebanon.

When Jordan expelled the PLO in 1970 for acting as a state within a state, it shifted its headquarters to Lebanon. Here too, the PLO created a state within a state to fight Israel, which launched repeated military invasions into Lebanon in retaliation for PLO attacks, devastating the country.

The PLO’s presence not only disrupted Lebanon’s already precarious sectarian balancing act, it shifted the military balance — giving Muslim and leftist factions access to weapons and training via the PLO, which Maronite militias saw as an existential threat.

Also, while Beirut’s cosmopolitan elite enjoyed a high, even trendy, lifestyle, ordinary citizens in the rural areas were largely neglected by the state. This inequality created a fertile ground for tensions that – together with the disruption of the sectarian balancing act – eventually led to a 15-year civil war, a religious war, in 1975.

When the guns finally fell silent in 1990, with an agreement among the warring parties, the people expected reforms and a rebirth. What they got was warlords changing into designer suits and taking seats in the Cabinet, pardoning each other and sharing government posts among themselves.

Soon, the state transformed from a provider of services for the people to a source of spoils to be divided among the leaders. Government contracts, ministry jobs, and public resources were treated as a “prize” to be shared among those in power.

Corruption, cronyism, nepotism and political patronage became embedded in governance, with sectarian leaders deliberately keeping the state, and institutions such as the judiciary, weak so that they could continue to dole out favours and call the shots.

While the politicians were busy with their fiefdoms, the bankers were taking humongous risks in balancing debts and artificially propping up the economy. In 2019, Lebanon’s economy imploded and by 2022 the Lebanese pound had lost about 98% of its value.

Foreign nations too contributed to Lebanon’s tragic fall.

Lebanese factions often sought external patrons to fortify their sect’s power and in doing so they laid the groundwork for the country’s policies to be dictated by foreign nations. Their infighting invited decades of foreign intervention, from the Syrian occupation (1976–2005) and multiple Israeli invasions to that caused by the modern-day rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

And today, Israel has again invaded Lebanon with impunity, causing untold suffering.

Internally, Hezbollah, backed by Iran and possessing a military force more powerful than the national army, became a state within a state. While it provided protection and a social safety net for the Shia community, it also pulled Lebanon into regional conflicts as it serves as Iran’s forward defence. Often, when tensions between Israel and Iran rise, Hezbollah opens a support front to pressure Israel – as is happening now.

Internally too, the judiciary is often blocked in its efforts to convict influential people, partly because of pliant prosecutors who follow orders, as can be seen in the Aug 4, 2020 explosion at the Port of Beirut which killed 218 people and damaged over half the city. No one has been found culpable yet.

Lebanon demonstrates that a pluralistic society cannot survive if its political structure is designed to keep people in sectarian, race, or religious silos while allowing the elite to play their power games.

When politics becomes about “us versus them,” the only ones who win are those at the top. Allowing politics to be defined by “us versus them”, allowing leaders to use religion as a shield for their greed is inviting catastrophe.

It also warns us to beware of foreign hands that divide us by pushing their ideologies; and to beware of systemic corruption.

Also, Lebanon teaches that without equitable wealth distribution and without a transparent, merit-based state, even the most cosmopolitan and wealthy nation can be dismantled from within.

Lebanon offers many more lessons, and serves as a cautionary tale. Will we listen and act?- FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.