Caught Between Sanctions and Politics: The Plight of Syrian Refugees in Lebanon

A little over a year has passed since Syria’s readmission into the Arab League and the normalization of its relations with regional states. Yet, Syria and its refugees continue to face significant challenges. 

Among them, the implementation of the Caesar Act sanctions by the US in 2020 has compounded the country’s economic crisis, leaving roughly 80 percent of Syrians in poverty.

Economic displacement 

This heart-wrenching reality has compelled many to once again seek refuge in search of a better life, with Lebanon emerging as a likely destination. Those once seen as refugees have now come to be referred to as economic migrants.

Although specific figures regarding the number of Syrians who have crossed the Lebanese border since 2020 are unavailable, some official sources estimate that the current Syrian population in Lebanon is approximately 2.1 million – making up a third of the already-dense population of 6 million inhabitants and the highest density of refugees in the world.

Lebanon’s own economic crisis also began to intensify in 2020, further complicating the situation. Refugees find themselves trapped, grappling with limited options and uncertain futures amidst escalating calls for their return.

Now, the Lebanese government is actively working towards a comprehensive plan to facilitate the return of displaced individuals to Syria. However, amidst these efforts, some politicians are seizing the opportunity to exploit public sentiment for political gain. 

Political exploitation 

Among those politicians is Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces party. He attempted to exploit the killing of Pascal Sleiman, a fellow party official, in Jbeil city on 7 April to indirectly accuse Hezbollah. Initially, Geagea and his supporters believed Sleiman’s death was a targeted political assassination.

However, investigations by Lebanese security forces revealed he was killed in an attempted carjacking by a group of Syrians. In response, Geagea shifted focus, raising concerns about the presence of Syrian refugees in Lebanon and calling for their repatriation. This has effectively rendered Syrians scapegoats in his political battle.

Geagea was an early proponent of the belief that the Syrian government would collapse and supported the Syrian political opposition. Many believe he was willing to tolerate Syrian refugees in Lebanon if it meant President Bashar al-Assad’s removal from power, similar to other Arab leaders during the Arab Spring. 

In 2011, he said that the Lebanese state must not take any “pretext to restrict Syrian refugees in Lebanon who flee to our country for humanitarian reasons from the hell of incidents in their country, and Lebanon cannot act contrary to international law, otherwise we will confirm that we have become a rogue state.”

The US, a key supporter of Geagea, “does not consider that conditions today [in Syria] are suitable” for the refugees to return to their country. Also, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced during a recent visit to Beirut “a financial package worth one billion euros for Lebanon, which will be available from this year until 2027” to contribute to “economic and social stability.”

A tool to pressure Damascus 

Western countries seek to prevent an influx of refugees, viewing them as a tool to pressure the Syrian government. Damascus, in turn, insists on linking refugee return to its reconstruction and the lifting of Caesar Act sanctions. Consequently, the prospects of Syrian refugees returning to their homeland appear bleak.

Some of the Lebanese leaders have the answer. Among them is Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, who recently stated that the solution starts by, firstly:

Establishing a delegation to visit America and Europe. Secondly, we [Lebanese] must engage in meaningful dialogue with the Syrian government. And thirdly, we must extend our support to Syria by lifting the sanctions imposed upon it and urging the United States to repeal the Caesar Act. By abolishing the sanctions, Syria will be equipped with the necessary human resources and intellectual capacity to facilitate a swift recovery, thereby unlocking opportunities for the return of displaced individuals and allowing Syria to extend its helping hand to them.

Nasrallah mentioned that the “NGOs and the funders” are opposing the return of the refugees. He also suggested that a way to prompt the west to address this matter is to consider allowing refugees to reach Europe by sea.

In the same context, several countries clearly recognize that the only viable solution is to engage in dialogue with Assad. Saudi Arabia and the UAE are among those countries. In 2017, the President of the UAE, Mohamed Bin Zayed, decided to normalize relations with Syria. And during the 2023 Arab League summit in Jeddah, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman welcomed Assad back into the Arab League, marking his return after a 12-year absence.

Both leaders demonstrate a genuine interest in resolving the prevailing dilemma.

Sanctions are not the solution 

Giorgio Cafiero, the CEO of Gulf State Analytics, a Washington, DC-based geopolitical risk consultancy, and The Cradle contributor, tells the outlet that: 

Abu Dhabi and Riyadh both believe that the Caesar sanctions imposed on Syria have a negative impact on Syria and the wider region. The UAE and Saudi Arabia disagree with US policymakers who support the continued implementation of these crippling sanctions. This fundamental question about the legitimacy of President Bashar al-Assad and his government is a source of some tension between Abu Dhabi and Riyadh on one side and Washington and other western capitals on the other.

“There is no doubt that the UAE and Saudi Arabia would like to see the US lift, or at least ease, the Caesar sanctions. It would be no surprise if Abu Dhabi and Riyadh use their leverage in Washington to try to push the US government to soften its financial warfare against Damascus,” he adds.

“In the event that the Emiratis and/or Saudis succeed on this front, I would assume that Abu Dhabi and Riyadh would demand certain concessions from Assad’s government. Such concessions might possibly be related to demands that Syria place some distance between itself and Iran while bringing Damascus into greater geopolitical alignment with GCC states, Jordan, and Egypt.” However, Cafiero remains uncertain about the feasibility of these outcomes.

Ultimately, the resolution of this crisis lies in coordinated international efforts that address the root causes of displacement, provide immediate humanitarian relief, and pave the way for long-term stability in both Syria and Lebanon. Without such comprehensive strategies, the cycle of displacement and exploitation will likely continue, perpetuating the suffering of millions. Sanctions, however, are clearly not the answer.