Syria and Lebanon used to be one territory before the first world war. After the war, the territory was split and the two countries took two different directions and paths in history. From 1975 till 1990, Lebanon suffered from a gruesome civil war which ended by the Taif agreement. In this paper we attempt to extract some lessons from the Lebanese civil war that can be applied to Syria's war which has been ongoing since 2011.

1. Lessons from the Lebanese Civil War for the Syrian War
By Moneer Barazi
Economist, Damascus University
May 2017
Introduction
Syria and Lebanon both share a common beginning. Before these two countries existed
as we know them today, they were both parts of the Ottoman empire which was defeated
in the first world war. Despite the same beginning, the two countries took remarkably
divergent paths in history, with lessons that can be learned along the way in both of them.
What is interesting as we study further the history of those two countries is how their
trajectories are still intertwined together until today with mutual influence. During the
Lebanese civil war and for a while after, Syria had presence in Lebanon. Today, the Syrian
war has been a major source of burden and instability for Lebanon and the whole region.
Lebanon entered a devastating civil war from 1975 to 1990 (Kisirwani), and even today,
27 years following the end of the conflict, there remains many political, social, and
economic issues unaddressed. Examining the case of Lebanon could give us valuable
insights into actions that can be taken in regards to the Syrian war.
With the beginning of the Syrian war in 2011, a war that is still ongoing six years later on,
we will try to extract some lessons that could be applied as the conflict progresses to reach
a peace agreement and for the reconstruction of Syria following the war.
Lebanese civil war 1975 - 1990
During its 15-year civil war, Lebanon suffered from immense destruction. The damage
was both human and physical. The Lebanese population at the time was three million.
The death toll is estimated to have been above 150,000 persons, in addition to 300,000
displaced, and 500,000 persons who emigrated (Kisirwani). The physical infrastructure
and the production capacity of the country were also vastly destroyed throughout the
decade and a half of war.
Although the civil war had ended with The Taif agreement in 1989, many residuals of war
are still there till this day. The agreement initiated the recovery, which is by no means
finished. The ramifications of war surpass damage to buildings and leave their imprint
deep in individuals’ psyche and in the society as a whole.
Historical context
To understand the political and economic sphere of Lebanon today, we must look at its
history. The Lebanese state, as we know it today, was first incepted in 1920. The Ottoman
empire was defeated at the end of World War I, after which the league of nations (UN

2. today) was formed. The lands of the Ottoman empire which were lost, among which was
Syria and Lebanon we know today, had to be divided between the winners France and
Britain, by their representatives, Georges-Picot and Mark Sykes, respectively in 1916.
Lands were carved and political borders were drawn, with the plan essentially to give
Christians a home in the Lebanon region, named after its famous Lebanon mountains.
France then received mandate over Syria and Lebanon. Disagreements had existed from
the start about whether Lebanon should have its frontiers separately from larger Syria.
War erupted in 1975, and there are many interpretations by scholars as to the true causes
of the civil war, but what is less questionable is that many regional and international
actors had tried to use the communal tensions to advance their political agendas or
objectives (Kisirwani).
Today, the country is largely politically fragmented, and Lebanon is currently trying to
navigate through its political gridlock slowly. Only in October 2016 could the country elect
a new president after a stalemate that lasted for 29 months (BBC, 2016). And even with
the president assuming position, many challenges remain. Not least of those is the fact
that Lebanon has been running without a national budget for 12 years (L.R.S, 2017) since
the assassination of Prime Minister back then, Rafik Hariri.
Syrian war in brief:
The Syrian war began in 2011, and while it may seem on the outset as a conflict between
the Syrian government and opposition groups, it is argued that the Syrian conflict is a
number of intertwined conflicts or rivalries. Patrick Cockburn argues in his book The Rise
of the Islamic state: ISIS and the New Sunni Revolution, that the Syrian conflict includes
rivalry between Russia and the US over influence in the region, and between Saudi Arabia
and Iran over influence in the Middle East, and between different religious affiliations at
large.
Adding to that, many analysts have suggested that among the causes of the conflict was
the attempt to launch Naboccu gas pipeline project to deny Russia access to European gas
market, and thereby exert economic pressure on Russia. Syria’s location was pivotal to
the success of that project, as it was the link between Qatar and Turkey. However, the
project did not manage to see daylight.
Geopolitical and ideological factors have met to make the Syrian conflict one of the
bloodiest and most ferocious in the century. Resolving it is important for the Syrian
people as well as for the stability of surrounding countries. Preventing a spillover of the
effects of the conflict should be a priority for politicians. But the main dispute remains
about the terms on which the conflict should end.
Transition to peace:
AlTaif agreement effectively ended the lengthy conflict in Lebanon. A similar agreement
needs to take place in Syria, but in order to succeed it must surmount a number of
challenges.

3. Emily O’Brien and Richard Gowan (2012) argue that one of the key elements for the
success of international agreements is that the agreement should win the support of the
different parties involved. Indeed, that was an important element of agreement and power
sharing between different warring parties in Lebanon to conclude the agreement. Seats
in the parliament were distributed equally between Muslims and Christians, for example.
Given the ethnic diversity of the Syrian community, any agreement should take into
account those different groups, which make the community largely heterogeneous as it is
comprised of many ethnicities such as: Sunnis, Shite/Alawites, Kurds, Turkman,
Assyrians, and Druze. Agreements that do not consider the views of those different groups
about the future of Syria are likely to be short-lived, if at-all reached.
The second factor in the success of international agreements is their impact on their
surrounding environment, rather than their own exact terms (Emily O’Brien, Richard
Gowan 2012). In AlTaif agreement case, for example, there was agreement on the
sovereignty of Lebanon and the imperative of carrying out reforms, in addition to
cooperative relationship with neighboring Syria. These elements have had an important
effect in rendering the agreement successful since the outcome is generally good for most
actors involved. In such conditions, much resistance to the agreement is avoided. In the
case of Syria, where fighters come from all across the world and major powers hold stakes
and have geostrategic interests, it is imperative for the agreement to take into account the
proximate and larger environment in which it is being implemented, in addition to its
implications in the political and economic spheres. In this sense, international
agreements are not necessarily effective in their design per se, but by virtue of their
expected outcome. An important point here is that during negotiations between different
parties, the likelihood of the success of the negotiations relies on how much each party
can maximize their benefits, or at least minimize their losses.
It has been suggested by Jonathan Haidt (2012), a researcher in social psychology, that
the presence of a common threat might provide a motivation for different parties to work
together to address that threat. Today, different parties disagree on the real source of
threat, but chances for cooperation become significantly higher if there is agreement on a
unified source of threat.
Differences between the Lebanese civil war and the Syrian war
It is worth noting that even though lessons can be drawn from the Lebanese civil war,
there are many elements that are different between the two countries.
First, despite the war with Israel during the Lebanese civil war, the Lebanese war
remained largely civil, and reaching agreement took place when it was evident that no
single faction or group would eventually prevail. In Syria, there is disagreement on
whether the current conflict is actually a civil war, or an attempt to engineer regime
change by foreign powers.
The second distinction is that in the Lebanese conflict, the majority of civilian Lebanese
grew intolerant of the civil war, and there was agreement on the importance of the

4. sovereignty of Lebanon. On the other hand, some groups who are considered as key
players in the Syrian conflict, such as the Kurds, have their aspirations in establishing
their own sovereign state.
The third distinction is that in Lebanon the percentage of Christians is somewhat even to
the percentage of Muslims, whereas in Syria the Sunni Muslims are the majority, and
Alawis, Christians, Druz and Kurds are all minorities.
Fourth, in terms of geography, Lebanon has land borders with only Syria and its enemy
Israel. Therefore, the only outside influence on Lebanon came from them, whereas Syria
has borders to the north with Turkey and to the east with the already destabilized Iraq,
and to the south with Jordan. Because of this vast geographic area and largely loose
borders, there has been an influx of militant from different directions, and Syria became
largely a hub for terrorism, especially when considering the fragile state of Iraq.
In terms of proportions, the Syrian catastrophe is significantly larger in the size of its
destruction, number of deaths which exceeded 400,000 by some estimates, and the
number of displaced both internally and externally which is in the millions.
On the international sphere, the geopolitical environment was different. In the years from
1980 to 1988, Iraq was at war with Iran, and Russia did not have a strong presence on the
international stage. America’s influence back then did not meet with rising influence from
Russia over the region, as is the case right now in the Syrian war.
The above differences make reaching an agreement a far more elusive endeavor in Syria
that it was in Lebanon, although it is still not entirely out of the question. What aggravates
matters is that there are many factors that are likely to increase the length of the war in
Syria, such as the large number of factions fighting on the ground, and the interference of
large foreign powers, among others.
But still there is a glimpse of hope, as peace talks on 4 May 2017, in Astana have resulted
in a memorandum on establishing de-escalation safe zones in four areas in Syria: Idlib
governorate, to the north of Homs, Eastern Ghouta and in the south part of Syria. The
specific coordinates will be determined later in May 2017 by guarantor states, which are
Russia, Iran, and Turkey (Mangal, 2017). This agreement is important in that it could help
initiate political dialogue and potentially reach a conflict resolution deal.
Certain factors can increase the chances of success of any deal reached. Research on
enforceable agreements to resolve conflicts highlights that the legitimacy of a government
depends on it being consensual. Examples from South Africa, Mongolia, and others show
that government officials after the war are likely to prefer consensus politics more than
opposition politics (Jung and Shapiro, 1995).
As a matter of importance here, there are two competing views about the constitutions.
The first view contends that the constitution is a social contract, and thus according to
this definition it needs to enforced by a third party, or an external force. The other view
posits that the constitution is a coordination device. According to the second definition

5. the constitution is enforceable only as much as different political partner agree on its rule,
and its enforceability is not derived from an outside factor. Based on the second
definition, the stability of the agreement depends on the trust in political parties to
implement it and eventually return to national unity (Jung and Shapiro, 1995).
There are advantages and disadvantages to both definitions. It can be required to use the
aid of outside forces to enforce an agreement temporarily, until trust is built up to a
sufficient level so that involved parties can sustain the agreement independently.
What needs to be done once the conflict is over
Transition to peace only begins with the ending of the armed conflict. Damage to property
is relatively much easier to repair, whereas human losses are mostly irreversible. In order
to address the needs of the victims and those of the society at large, transitional justice
has to take place. In fact, the real work that has to be done after any major conflict is the
reconstruction of human spirit. Conflicts, especially civil wars, are usually wrought with
human rights violations, and justice is a crucial element in order to return to the rule of
the law, and the new political system emerging after the war must include clear elements
to address the needs of those victims and give them justice.
Transitional justice consists of both judicial and non-judicial measures, and it can be a
cornerstone in building a peaceful society since it helps address the core reasons why
violations of human rights have occurred in the first place, and thus helps prevents further
conflict in the future.
Good Governance
Good governance during transition from conflict to peace is paramount. The right
governance strategy should be adopted especially in fragile post-conflict settings. The
objectives of the strategy should include re-building trust, restoring security, re-
establishing governance and social services, and initiating economic recovery. Rebuilding
trust, in particular, should be given more weight since the success of governance depends
much on it, and for that end the legitimacy of the state should be restored, social dialogue
should be convened, participatory decision-making should be employed, and appropriate
mechanisms for resolving disputes should be set in place. Furthermore, there should be
leadership committed to craft its governance strategy around integrity, engagement of
multiple actors, transparency and unity.
In Syria’s case, the building trust component can be the base on which good governance
can be established. The willingness of all parties involved to be held accountable is crucial.
And as the Syrian war is a case of many states fighting a proxy war on Syria’s land, then
the major powers behind it should provide the guarantees to sustain any potential
agreements. But the challenge here is that major powers are also striving for influence
over strategic territories in the Middle East, which makes the likelihood of such
agreement somewhat remote until those major powers reach agreement.
The importance of subjective wellbeing (SWB)

6. An important study conducted to uncover blind spots in reform policy in Lebanon has
uncovered key insights regarding postwar policy formation. The study recommended
subjective well-being as a pivotal aspect of public policy, and emphasized that this
element is crucial to consolidate peace in postwar fragile societies. The argument is that
individuals’ actions are motivated by seeking happiness, and that public policy can seek
alignment with those motives for better impact (Yones M, 1998). The study elaborates
that rulers usually are not fully aware of the extent of people’s unhappiness. An
environment where many social agents are unhappy can foster conflict. Governments can
address a shortcoming in their policy by addressing this particular aspect. The ability of
the public policy to effectively address issues that reflect on individual’s happiness can be
among the best measures of its success. Issues like corruption, pollution, income,
pollution, physical safety, and others with impact on individuals’ happiness should not be
ignored, as they might undermine the entire social system.
This study can be useful not only in Lebanon, but also in postwar Syria. Indeed, the new
public policy in Syria after the war should heed the study’s recommendations, such as
addressing issues that undermine trust in the government, conducting subjective
wellbeing surveys on an annual basis and in different geographic areas to monitor
subjective wellbeing trends, adapting the constitution to produce a balanced system that
provides equal opportunity to all, changing the old conflict mentality into peace mentality,
appealing to expatriates and providing them with the incentives to return, changing the
educational curriculum and its underlying values into one that fosters a culture of peace,
promoting independence of the judicial system, and leveraging digital capabilities to
facilitate the implementation of the new policy (Yones M, 1998).
The other equally important landscape is the economic landscape. Syria had suffered
from harsh drought before the war, lasting from 2006 to 2011, leading the large
percentage of people who depend on agriculture for their income to suffer massively. In
addition, Syria had suffered from uneven development in different geographic areas, and
rising level of poverty, reaching up to 2 or 3 million inhabitants living in “extreme poverty”
by some UN estimates (Polk, 2013). Competition for access to resources is among the
fundamental factors leading to war, and postwar Syria must address the large income gap,
inequality, and uneven development, in order to foster an environment that promotes
peace.
Conclusion:
The Syrian war is largely ideological and complex. Third parties can play a crucial role in
reaching an end to the conflict. However, foreign powers will likely reach or endorse an
agreement when that agreement meets with their geopolitical and strategic interests.
Once we see convergence of the interests of those different actors, we can expect an
agreement to follow. For the time being, hope can be placed on local small-scale
conciliations in the country and on the Astana memorandum to pave the way for a larger
scale and wider reaching agreement that would end the bloodbath.

7. From a different angle, it is hard to separate between the fates of Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
For that reason, any peace agreement in Syria must be a part of a larger and more
comprehensive settlement in the region. Without such settlement, the region will remain
prone to bouts of violence and strife.
Once the conflict ends, new innovative policy tools, such as SWB survey, can be used to
understand the psychology behind conflict and identify discontent before it turns into
anger and violence against other demographic sectors. The SWB framework can help
guide policy makers to build peaceful and prosperous socioeconomic system.

8. Works cited:
Governance Strategies For Post Conflict Reconstruction, Sustainable Peace And
Development". N.p., 2007. Web. 14 May 2017.
Gowan, Richard, and Emily O’Brien. "What Makes International Agreements Work:
Defining Factors For Success". CENTER ON INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION.
N.p., 2012. Web. 14 May 2017.
Haidt, Jonathan. "How Common Threats Can Make Common (Political) Ground".
Ted.com. N.p., 2012. Web. 14 May 2017.
Jung, Courtney, and Ian Shapiro. "South Africa's Negotiated Transition: Democracy,
Opposition, And The New Constitutional Order". N.p., 1995. Print.
Kisirwani, Maroun. "AUB: The Rehabilitation And Reconstruction Of
Lebanon". Ddc.aub.edu.lb. Web. 14 May 2017.
Krayem, Hassan. "AUB: The Lebanese Civil War And The Taif
Agreement". Ddc.aub.edu.lb. Web. 14 May 2017.
Why Lebanon Has Not Passed A Budget For 12 Years". Economist.com. N.p., 2017. Web.
14 May 2017.
Lebanon: Michel Aoun Elected President, Ending Two-Year Stalemate - BBC
News". BBC News. N.p., 2017. Web. 14 May 2017.
M, Yones. "Subjective Well-Being As Public Policy - A Tool For Peace". Mtcg.biz. N.p.,
1998. Web. 14 May 2017.
Polk, William. "Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War To Post-Assad". The Atlantic.
N.p., 2017. Web. 14 May 2017.
Safe Zones In Syria: Astana’S Key To Political Settlement? | Global Research - Centre
For Research On Globalization". Globalresearch.ca. N.p., 2017. Web. 14 May
2017.
Salibi, Kamal. "How It All Began - A Concise History Of Lebanon". Almashriq.hiof.no.
N.p., 1993. Web. 14 May 2017.
The Ethnic And Religious Groups Of Syria - Syrian Civil War Map". Syrian Civil War
Map. N.p., 2017. Web. 14 May 2017.
WANTCHEKON, LEONARD. "Credible Power-Sharing Agreements: Theory With
Evidence From South Africa And Lebanon". N.p., 2000. Web. 14 May 2017.
What Is Transitional Justice?". International Center for Transitional Justice. N.p.,
2017. Web. 14 May 2017.
The Rise of Islamic State: ISIS and the New Sunni Revolution Patrick Cockburn Verso
Books 978-1-78478-040-1

9. Links:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/understanding-syria-
from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/
http://mtcg.biz/articles/Subjective_Well-
being_Public_Policy_SWB_1998_Yones_M.htm
http://syriancivilwarmap.com/ethnic-and-religious-groups-of-syria/
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/03/economist-explains-22
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37821597
http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/pspa/kisirwani.html
http://almashriq.hiof.no/lebanon/900/902/Kamal-Salibi/
http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/pspa/conflict-resolution.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/safe-zones-in-syria-astanas-key-to-political-
settlement/5588713