Banks (Page 72)

Lebanon, which is on the verge of economic and political flop, runs the risk of getting caught up in Israel and Hamas’ escalating conflict.

Since Hamas’ surprise attack on October 7, 2023, which resulted in the deaths of almost 1,400 citizens and Israel’s declaration of war the following morning, Hezbollah has been preparing for the possibility of joining the conflict.

The Iranian militant group has repeatedly attacked Zionist targets from Lebanon, drawing fire from the Israeli Defense Forces in retaliation. Over a hundred people have perished, mainly Hezbollah fighters, but there have also been some civilian deaths on both sides of the border, including one who worked for Reuters.

I have concentrated my historical exploration and instruction on the dynamics of Israeli, Palestinian, and Palestinian conflict and assistance.

The now significant violence and destruction in southeastern Israel and Gaza will probably be greatly exacerbated by additional huge casualties in Lebanon, Israel, and possibly other Middle Eastern countries if a war breaks out between Hezbollah and Israel.

Is the well-being of Lebanon or serving as a placeholder for Iran Hezbollah’s decision to completely join the war may provide an answer to the question that has been preoccupying experts of the business for decades.

A conflict that dates back centuries

Since 1948, the Israeli-Palestinian issue has been escalating into Lebanon as a result of the creation of Israel and the eviction of Palestinians, also known as the Nakba or disaster.

No Arab nation has actually been more impacted by this issue. In 1948, around 100,000 Palestinians sought shelter in Lebanon. They are denied simple right now, and there are approximately 210, 000 of them.

Some Lebanese have expressed resentment toward the Palestinian refugees living in the nation and charge them for the start of the country’s civil war, which lasted from 1975 to 1990, in research. During the battle, an estimated 120, 000 people perished, the marks of which can still be seen in Beirut’s money.

Israel was heavily involved in the civil conflict in Lebanese. It fought against Israeli armies, which used Lebanon as a foundation to start attacks against the Jewish position, and supported Christian militia groups.

Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982 in an effort to overthrow the Palestine Liberation Organization and install a pro-Israeli Religious authorities in Beirut. Neither goal was accomplished.

Hezbollah emerges as the most powerful army in Lebanon.

Lebanon and its politicians have been dominated by a religious program since its founding in 1920, in which government and state jobs are divided among the 18 formally recognized religious groups, most importantly Sunnis, Maronite Christians, Druze, and Shiites. Each faction has a requirement for representation in the state.

Since 1932, no official census has been conducted, making the Shiite population the largest sect in the nation, accounting for between 30 % and 40 % of the total population. However, an exact number is unknown due to the issue’s sensitivity.

Lebanon’s religious system has produced what academics refer to as” cross sovereignty” for decades. Political leaders who speak on behalf of their sects in a segregated method work both inside and outside of the state machinery by offering their constituents services that are typically handled by the government, such as marriage licenses and armed protection.

In order to combat Israel’s intrusion, Hezbollah was established in 1982 with assistance from Iran and Syria. It is by far the most powerful social, socioeconomic, and military power in the nation. This is a result of Iran’s backing and the strong and cohesive inner social structure among Islamist adherents there. Although not all Shiites identify with Hezbollah, there is no doubt that many of them share its triggers.

Hezbollah also functions as a state unto itself while adhering to the variant structure of the religious system. For instance, it offers Shiites social, academic, and economical services and boasts a military force that is significantly more powerful than the official Lebanese army.

In actuality, Hezbollah has benefited more from this religious cross system than any other party.

Lebanon is in unison

Even under the pressure of the 2011-starting Syrian civil war, Lebanon has managed to maintain some stability and vitality despite its poor state and shattered political system.

Years of Ponzi-like economic mismanagement, increased loans, and a sharp drop in foreign remittances caused the Palestinian economy to collapse in October 2019. It is regarded by the World Bank as one of the worst economic crisis to have occurred since the mid-19th decade.

The” October 17 revolution ,” in which the Lebanese demanded social and economic justice, an end to corruption, and the dismantling of the sectarian political system, was sparked by the crisis and spread across the nation. International donors became concerned as a result, international money fled the nation, banks closed their doors to savers, the government defaulted on its debts, and the local coin fell.

The socioeconomic and political situations in the nation were made worse by a massive explosion at the Beirut port in August 2020 that killed 225 people and caused billions of dollars in destruction. Additionally, the Palestinian political structure has been completely dysfunctional since October 2022 due to the political class’s failure to agree on a new leader and government.

Hezbollah has emerged as a steadfast keeper of the social system that supported it and has been least impacted by the country’s national problems among political forces.

Some people now view Lebanon as a failed condition, so joining another conflict is the last thing the nation needs.

” Return to the Stone Age”?

However, it is not up to the Syrian government to decide whether Lebanon finally joins the war.

Druze and Maronite political figures, who have historically opposed Hezbollah’s military identity in Lebanon, as well as the latest interim prime minister, Najib Mikati, have issued warnings against going to war with Israel.

Mikati acknowledged that he lacks the authority to decide whether Lebanon will go to war, which is a reflection of the contradictions in the Syrian social system, where Hezbollah and, consequently, Iran are responsible for making the most important choice any national leadership could make, namely, whether to declare war.

Hassan Nasrallah, the head of the Hezbollah, has frequently emphasized that the organization’s main responsibility is to uphold the independence of Lebanon.

On the other hand, its primary role in the Syrian civil war, which saved Bashar Assad’s state, has openly shown its dedication to Iran. However, that conflict was primarily fought on Arab earth. A conflict with Israel would be very dissimilar.

If Hezbollah joined the conflict with Israel out of alleged help for Palestinians in Gaza, it would be another dreadful chapter in Lebanon’s history. It might cause Israel to attempt to give Lebanon” up to the Stone Age ,” in the terms of Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. Hezbollah’s secretary-general, Nasrallah, has previously responded.

Additionally, it may probably spark the larger regional conflict that US leaders, including President Joe Biden, have fought valiantly to prevent. Additionally, Lebanon would be on the verge of total and inevitable collapse.

Professor of history and harmony studies at the University of Notre Dame, Asher Kaufman

Under a Creative Commons license, this article is republished from The Conversation. read the article in its entirety.

Continue Reading

The third global summit of President Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative( BRI ) took place in Beijing on October 17 and 18, while the rest of the world continued to sleepwalk into a cold war, from Ukraine to Israel at this point.

This summit appears quite different from the first, which was held in May 2017 or even the next in April 2019, based on the number of participants and the major results. & nbsp,

First off, just 23 heads of state took part this time, downward from 37 at the next summit. Secondly, Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, was a guest of honor among the members, many of whom were anti-Western regimes.

Another significant development was the presence of the Taliban in Afghanistan. Additionally, Viktor Orban of Hungary not only showed up as expected( he didn’t miss either of the previous conferences ), but he also formally stated his opposition to the de-risking approach taken by the European Union’s financial protection strategy. & nbsp,

Other than Orban, no other EU part joined the BRI Forum, while up to six and seven, both, attended the summits in 2017 and 2019. & nbsp,

Giorgia Meloni, the prime minister of Italy, joined the first two summits this time, breaking with her nation’s custom of & nbsp, though she had already made that intention clear at the September Group of Twenty meeting.

BRI industry decreased

Beyond enrollment, this summit was unique because it has placed a lot more emphasis on foreign policy and much less on enhancing trade and investment connectivity through infrastructure construction. This may be connected to China’s growing disengagement in some of these nations, at least in terms of financing and funding.

According to reports, one-third of BRI projects have encountered difficulties, which is likely why China has significantly reduced expense globally, including in BRIC nations.

Additionally, China’s annual economic development is just half of what it was when Xi Jinping came up with this historic project in 2012. It is challenging to continue funding BRI projects because the Chinese market is struggling with a real estate crumble and an increasing debt load. & nbsp,

The summit’s overarching topic on foreign policy was opposition to that of the US and its allies. & nbsp, This has significant ramifications for the conflict in Ukraine, which the EU and the US have already encountered when voting on Ukraine-related issues at the UN.

The Israel-Gaza issue is becoming yet another factor in the US and China’s disagreement over foreign policy. In fact, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it was siding with Palestine due to its lack of Western safety in the midst of the attacks on Israel.

In general, Beijing’s interactions with the Global South have become crucial for China, and the BRI is a great tool for this. The BRI, however, is not China’s highest-level foreign policy tool because it has been positioned below the” international community of shared future ,” which Xi Jinping uses to describe a more expansive view of where China sees itself in the world.

Any such height needs some particular milestones to be successful, even if foreign policy was the driving force, nbsp. Among the numerous steps that were announced, some of which were not always novel, a dozen stand out.

First, the main goals that accompanied the majority of references to the BRI were both” integrity-based”( which equates to anti-corruption ) and” clean ,”( green ). Second, the announcement of an international AI ( artificial intelligence ) governance initiative.

Regarding financial assets, two presentations were made, albeit on a much smaller scale than in the past: 350 billion renminbi( US$ 48 billion) worth of extra tools for policy institutions, and 80 billion and 11 billion for the Silk Road Fund, respectively. & nbsp,

Last but not least, there was no pertinent news that a multilateral framework was being developed to support BRI projects, so one should anticipate that the organization will continue to be primarily used for hub-and-spoke operations despite the current trend toward foreign policy. & nbsp,

Given everything mentioned earlier, the key issue is how significant the BRI will continue to be. China will continue to advertise the BRI as its overarching program and its top-level design for starting up and win-win global cooperation, according to Beijing’s white papers for the mountain.

In light of this, the BRI is not dissipating; rather, it is changing from being an economical application to a tool for foreign policy. China can no longer afford to finance such a large amount of system in the developing and emerging economies.

Political and diplomatic position, which suggests that the BRI does not require as many users but those who should be aligned, is what matters to China right now. Andnbsp, This is essential for advancing jobs and requirements that may encounter resistance from the US and the rest of the West. & nbsp,

In conclusion, the BRI is emerging as one of China’s main tools for advancing a more anti-Western mission. Some believe that the United States’ republican interest in halting China’s ascent toward ideology is the cause of this agenda. & nbsp, China began this race for others.

Realizing where we stand, which is essentially getting closer to a full-fledged warm war, is what matters most.

Senior research fellow at Bruegel is Alicia Garcia Herrero. Keep up with her on X @ Aligarciaherrer.

Continue Reading