The huge explosion that destroyed much of central Beirut is a daunting metaphor for the perils facing failing Middle East states.
For years, the region has been described as the world’s most unstable, as a powder-keg primed to detonate at any moment.
Last week’s awful tragedy begs a bigger question about how many shocks such fragile, vulnerable countries can absorb before they fracture, crash and blast apart. Is the Middle East as a whole about to explode?
Illustration: Mountain People
Nearly 10 years after the Arab spring’s hopes of reform were dashed in a storm of violence and counter-revolution, and at a time when regional tensions are again approaching boiling point, a possible watershed nears.
As Thursday’s visit by French President Emmanuel Macron and global offers of assistance suggest, the world is suddenly paying renewed attention. Perhaps this could supply a wider impetus for the sort of fundamental changes many in Lebanon and neighboring countries now angrily demand.
By many measures, the Lebanese republic, founded in 1943 at the close of the French mandate, was already in existential crisis. A failed state is defined as one unable to protect, feed and employ its people, defend its borders or pay its debts. Lebanon meets all these criteria.
The official negligence that allegedly caused the disaster on Tuesday last week is typically a product of governance systems hollowed out by factionalism, sectarianism, corruption and a lack of democratic accountability. Again, the Beirut government ticks the boxes.
Yet of all these many ills, the blight of foreign interference is perhaps the most pernicious — and Lebanon is a prime victim.
The 1975-1990 civil war left a legacy of division and territorial occupation by Israeli and Syrian forces. Lebanon was ill-equipped to deal with large influxes of Palestinian and Syrian refugees. Its economic well-being depends on the kindness, or self-interest, of strangers.
Power-sharing Lebanese leaders, more confessional than professional, pick sides between the US, the Saudi Arabians, Iran and its local Shiite ally, the Hezbollah.
Lebanon is regularly buffeted by skirmishing between Israeli forces and the Islamist militia. No surprise, then, that many in Beirut initially assumed that the explosion was caused by an Israeli air strike.
In 2017, then-Lebanese prime minister Saad Hariri, a Sunni Muslim, was abducted and forced to resign by the Saudi regime. Right now, Lebanon’s economy faces fresh damage from US sanctions aimed at Syria and delays to a US$20 billion IMF bailout dictated by a foreign agenda.
In the decade following the Arab spring, regional interventions and manipulation by multiple outside actors have intensified.
Oddly, this process has been accelerated by the gradual disengagement of the biggest meddler of all: The US has left a vacuum others compete to fill.
If Lebanon cracks under present strains, or descends into renewed civil strife, incessant foreign meddling and string-pulling would be greatly to blame.
A disturbingly similar picture is seen in Iraq where a new prime minister, Mustafa al-Kadhimi, is struggling to shake off the twin legacies of US military intervention and regional power games involving Iran, Turkey and the Gulf Arabs.
Kadhimi has called for early elections in response to protesters who, like their Lebanese counterparts, rose up last year in huge numbers to demand a wholesale dismantling of the political system.
Sectarian rivalries between Sunni and Shiite parties, and affiliated militias, corruption and economic pain, exacerbated in Iraq’s case by falling oil revenues and failure to invest in jobs and infrastructure, also feed instability, but so, too, do foreign states.
The Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah militia is blamed for recent attacks on residual US forces fighting Isis. Iran itself is determined to maintain the dominant influence it gained during the chaos following the US invasion.
Like his post-2003 predecessors, Kadhimi faces an uphill struggle to save Iraq’s dysfunctional democracy from collapse — and with it, the Iraqi state.
His plan for early polls could yet be thwarted in parliament. His attempts to loosen Tehran’s grip have not been helped by cuts in US financial aid.
His personal safety might also be at risk after last month’s assassination of top counter-terrorism adviser Hisham al-Hashimi.
Iraq has already broken apart, in the sense that the de facto autonomous, Kurdish-controlled northern region barely answers to Baghdad. A key player here is Turkey, which has exploited Iraq’s sovereign weakness, ostensibly in pursuit of a vendetta against Kurdistan Workers’ Party separatists.
With his armed interventions in Iraq, Syria and Libya, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recalls the Ottoman sultans of old: imperious, reckless and vicious.
What holds true for Lebanon and Iraq holds true across large swathes of the Middle East. Syria is held together only by the limitless brutality of the Assad regime, abetted by another neo-imperialist predator, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Yet Idlib Province remains defiant and there are signs of renewed opposition elsewhere. Whether the Syrian state will survive intact is still an open question.
Foreign meddling is also central to Libya’s endless agony, where Russia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have lined up against Turkey, Qatar and Islamist groups.
That Britain, France and Italy have been sidelined from this oil-fired feeding frenzy speaks to a bigger shift. The old colonial powers who set the rules and drew the borders a century ago have given way to a new generation of oppressors and exploiters.
Selfish motives and ruthless methods are the same. Only the names have changed.
This oscillating arc of deepening instability includes Yemen, a defenseless failed state and bloody playground for rivalrous regional powers.
Could vulnerable Jordan be next? Or might Iran, a country comprising myriad religious and ethnic groups, finally break asunder, succumbing to the relentless hostility of its enemies?
This latest fragmentation of the post-1918 Middle East order is no less dangerous because it is familiar. Expect more explosions. As Beirut picks up the pieces, things could fall apart.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
There appears to be a growing view among leaders and leading thinkers in Taiwan that their words and actions have no influence over how China approaches cross-Strait relations. According to this logic, China’s actions toward Taiwan are guided by China’s unwavering ambition to assert control over Taiwan. Many also believe Beijing’s approach is influenced by China’s domestic politics. As the thinking goes, former President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made a good faith effort to demonstrate her moderation on cross-Strait issues throughout her tenure. During her 2016 inaugural address, Tsai sent several constructive signals, including by acknowledging the historical fact of interactions and
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
Taiwanese men doing their alternative military service within Taipei’s and Taichung’s Department of Compulsory Military Service independently reported outlandish incidents of brainwashing. Below is a story related to propagandizing as it manifests overseas. One of my Chinese friends and a group of Taiwanese friends set off together from Sydney, Australia, in a tour group to northern Europe. The travel agency arranged for a Chinese tour guide to lead the group. The guide would start off on a propaganda blitz every afternoon at a set time, singing the praises of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The Taiwanese members of the tour seemed