Why Trump’s proposal for Syria to fight Hezbollah will send shudders across Lebanon

Trump’s Syria-Hezbollah Plan Sparks Concern in Lebanon

Why Trump s proposal for Syria – President Donald Trump has proposed that Israel permit Syria to take on Hezbollah, asserting that Damascus would manage the militant group more effectively than the Israeli military. The idea, which has been reiterated twice this month, has unsettled Lebanon’s political landscape, raising fears about renewed Syrian involvement in the country’s internal affairs. Analysts warn that such a move could deepen existing tensions and rekindle anxieties over Syria’s historical dominance in Lebanon’s political sphere.

Historical Ties and Syrian Occupation

Syria’s influence in Lebanon dates back nearly four decades, beginning with its military deployment in 1976 as peacekeepers. However, the intervention quickly evolved into a prolonged occupation, with Syrian forces maintaining a presence long after the civil war subsided. This period, marked by thousands of disappearances and civilian casualties, entrenched distrust among Lebanese citizens toward Damascus. Many view the Syrian military’s role as a period of control rather than cooperation, and its return to Lebanon could reignite fears of authoritarian encroachment.

Lebanon’s political instability has long been shaped by Syrian interference. The country’s leadership, particularly during the Assad regime, relied on Syrian support to maintain power, even as the militant group Hezbollah became a key ally. Hezbollah’s role in the Syrian conflict was pivotal, as it safeguarded critical supply lines to Iran and Iraq, bolstering Assad’s hold on power. This alliance, rooted in shared enmity with Israel and a common partnership with Iran, has left a legacy of sectarian tensions that persists today.

The Shift to a New Syrian Leader

With Bashar al-Assad’s downfall in 2024, Lebanon’s political dynamics have shifted. President Ahmad al-Sharaa, a former al-Qaeda jihadist, has emerged as the new leader, signaling a departure from Iran-backed factions. Al-Sharaa’s government has sought to distance itself from Syria’s past, promoting a more Western-oriented approach and earning praise from Trump for its “tough guy” stance. Yet, the question remains: how secure is al-Sharaa’s grip on power within Syria?

Recent statements from al-Sharaa have aimed to quell rumors of Syrian intervention in Lebanon. He dismissed reports as “completely false,” asserting that Syria no longer seeks to meddle in Lebanese affairs. However, analysts like Michael Young, a Lebanon expert at the Carnegie Middle East Center, argue that this may not be the case. “The sectarian dimension here is very risky,” Young told CNN. “It would divide Lebanon and be a disaster. I think it’s too much of a Pandora’s Box. He (Sharaa) would be making a big mistake if he did it.”

Risks to Lebanon’s Sectarian Balance

Lebanon’s political system hinges on a delicate balance of ethnic and religious factions, including a significant Shiite population. Hezbollah, which represents the Shiite community, has long been a key player in the country’s governance. But the prospect of Syrian troops entering Lebanon could disrupt this equilibrium. Many Lebanese, particularly Christians and Druze, have historically viewed Hezbollah as a dominant force, though they might still prefer it over a Syrian military presence.

Young highlighted the potential fallout: “You could potentially see the entry of a Syrian army dominated by Salafists… it would create panic among Christians, Druze and Shias. They would not welcome this,” he explained. “It would reinforce Hezbollah rather than weaken them.” This insight underscores the irony of Trump’s plan—while it aims to counter Hezbollah, it could inadvertently strengthen the group by pitting it against a more radical Syrian force.

Regional Implications and US Role

The Trump administration’s growing engagement with Iran has further complicated the situation. A senior US official revealed that the current ceasefire agreement with Iran does not mandate Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, leaving the region vulnerable to renewed conflict. This has fueled speculation about the broader implications of Syria’s potential involvement. If Damascus joins forces with Lebanon’s new government to target Hezbollah, it could drag the country back into a regional quagmire, reigniting battles with Israel and Iran.

Trump’s frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also shaped this proposal. The president has accused Netanyahu of complicating US-Iran negotiations by attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon. During a Monday evening news conference, Netanyahu publicly responded to these criticisms, though the specifics of his rebuttal were not immediately clear. His government’s actions have been seen as both a strategic move and a source of tension, particularly with Trump’s push to shift Lebanon’s allegiance away from Iran.

Lebanon’s Sovereignty and Future Uncertainty

Lebanon’s sovereignty is already under pressure, with Israel maintaining a military presence in the south. The country’s government has been striving to reclaim control of its security apparatus, opposing Hezbollah’s military influence. Trump’s proposal could further erode this autonomy, as it implies Syrian forces acting on behalf of Lebanon’s new leaders. If Syria’s troops enter Lebanese territory, it may signal a return to the country’s pre-2024 political structure, where external actors played a central role.

Young emphasized that the strength of al-Sharaa’s authority within Syria is uncertain, particularly regarding the military. “Just how firm al-Sharaa’s hold on power is across Syria remains in question,” he noted. “The army is an issue that would compound the disastrous nature of such a decision.” This uncertainty raises concerns about whether Syria’s intervention would be a coordinated effort or a fragmented one, with varying levels of commitment from different factions.

Conclusion: A Delicate Political Gamble

Trump’s plan to have Syria confront Hezbollah represents a bold political strategy, but one with significant risks. While the idea may align with the US’s desire to reduce Hezbollah’s influence, it could also reignite old rivalries and destabilize Lebanon’s fragile coalition. The success of this proposal depends on how Syria’s forces are perceived by Lebanese citizens and whether the new leadership can maintain control over the military. For now, the plan stands as a test of Lebanon’s ability to navigate its complex relationships with regional powers, with the potential to reshape the country’s future in unpredictable ways.