The fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria ended a period of rule by the family lasting over 50 years, during which the regime drew up a series of agreements with Lebanon. Since 1990, the Syrian regime has strengthened its grip on its neighbour, using local proxies to control the country's political, security and economic affairs, running what became known as the "republic of fear".
Since al-Assad's overthrow, over 40 such deals have come to light, revealing their one-sidedness in favour of Syria. Some are little-known, and others have not been ratified.
Foremost among them is the over-arching Treaty of Brotherhood, Cooperation and Coordination, which set the terms between the two nations largely in Syria's favour. Signed in May 1991 by Lebanon’s President Elias Hrawi and Syria’s President Hafez al-Assad, it placed Lebanon’s political and security decisions in near-total subservience to Syria’s regime and its interests—from minor matters such as the election of a village leader all the way to appointing a president.
It established a coordinating framework called the Lebanese-Syrian Higher Council, with a brief to cover the entire spectrum of relations—from domestic affairs to foreign policy—and even appointed a secretary-general to oversee it.
Dr Pierre Khoury, an academic and economic specialist, explained how Syria benefited from the treaty. For example, it "imposed fees on Lebanese trucks transiting through its territory and flooded the Lebanese market with its agricultural and industrial products at competitive prices due to widespread customs evasion," he told Al Majalla. As a result, Lebanon suffered from a trade imbalance with Syria as it struggled to compete against cheaper Syrian goods.
The 1991 treaty also paved the way for hundreds of thousands of Syrians to enter Lebanon to work in various fields and roles without obtaining work permits or the necessary legal licences for commercial or industrial ventures. This was also facilitated by the security backing provided by the 50,000 Syrian troops stationed in Lebanon at the time.
The deals often violated Lebanon's constitution and national law and entrenched Syrian influence in Lebanon's institutions. As the links deepened, the function of the Lebanese-Syrian Higher Council became redundant.
But the regime's fall doesn't necessarily invalidate the agreements, international law professor Dr Judith El-Tini tells Al Majalla. "The continuity of the state means they remain valid and in force," she explained.
This has prompted calls from economists and businesspeople to renegotiate the deals once a stable government is established in Damascus. They want any new agreements to be more balanced and take into account the interests of both nations.
As new political realities take shape, questions loom about which parts of the existing arrangements can be changed in the near term. El-Tini explains the difference between international treaties and ministerial or administrative agreements.
“For treaties, either state may amend them if deemed necessary, first by referring to their content to determine what’s permitted and then consulting with the other party to explore their willingness to modify or terminate the treaty, whereas decisions to amend or annul agreements can be taken unilaterally," she said.
But Khoury warns any unilateral withdrawal could lead to legal and political complications, potentially reigniting tensions with Syria, especially given Lebanon’s geographical dependence on Syrian territory. Syria is Lebanon's only neighbour (apart from Israel in the south) and almost completely surrounds it, making it a vital artery for Lebanon’s economy, particularly in transit and trade.
But this is precisely why El-Tini thinks it's time to abandon what she calls a "flawed approach of tying Lebanon's future and economy to those of Syria." She says, "Lebanon must assert its sovereignty and prioritise the interests of its people and state in any agreements or treaties it enters. All agreements must be thoroughly reviewed to ensure the fairness and balance of their provisions for both parties," she added.
Read more: Assad's fall could put Lebanon and Syria on divergent paths
The rhetoric of brotherhood and friendship has actually harmed Lebanon more than benefited it and curbed its ability to generate revenue. Following the fall of the Assad regime, Lebanese are calling for these unfair deals to be reassessed.
The influential Lebanese Economic Committee—representing chambers of commerce and industry, industrialists, traders and financial services providers—is calling for a comprehensive review of all agreements, protocols, memorandums, programmes, and contracts signed between the two countries "to ensure Lebanon’s interests are upheld in a balanced and equitable manner, particularly in economic and trade matters”.
