A few weeks ago, Beirut was abuzz with rumours that the Syrian army was preparing to enter Lebanon in coordination with Israel to eliminate Hezbollah. Al-Sharaa dismissed the story outright and contacted Lebanese officials directly to confirm as much. Syrian army commanders did the same, explaining that its deployments extended along both the Lebanese and Iraqi borders to secure the frontier and prevent infiltrations intended to drag Syria into war.
Then, overnight, the narrative flipped. Suddenly, it was Türkiye that was arming and funding Hezbollah in coordination with al-Sharaa, who was supposedly facilitating the transfer of money and weapons. Some of the same voices who promoted the first story later championed the second. It illustrates how al-Sharaa’s opponents in Lebanon devote much of their energy to fabricating stories about Syria’s internal affairs.Strikingly, those who present themselves as his supporters are engaged in the same practice, trying to insert him and Syria into purely Lebanese matters, most recently the general amnesty proposal debated in parliament. The greater danger may lie in what circulates behind closed doors. Names of people wanted in Lebanon, supposed appointments, and threats and insults are being fabricated in rooms whose occupants think they are beyond scrutiny.
Lessons not learned
The Lebanese paid dearly to free themselves from the tutelage and domination of the Assad regime. It cost come of the country’s most prominent politicians and journalists their lives. It is astonishing how quickly that has been forgotten or overlooked. For decades, there was a Syrian military presence in Lebanon. Some seem to want to return to a relationship of subordination. Even stranger, some who opposed Bashar al-Assad now seem keen to emulate his regime.
President al-Sharaa continues to insist on a state-to-state relationship. During the recent visit of the official Lebanese delegation to Damascus, led by Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, he reiterated that communication should take place institutionally, between each minister and his counterpart. Yet some on both sides remain intent on resurrecting the past, as though nothing has been learned.
This is not freedom of opinion. These actors are not expressing views; they are manufacturing stories that, at best, undermine the future of relations between the two countries. The deeper risk lies beyond that: the security consequences that may follow, as certain factions convince themselves they can summon Syria into their internal battles and draw strength from it.