Lebanon: China’s gateway to the Mediterranean
Hezbollah-linked media outlets have been portraying Chinese investments in Lebanon’s crisis-hit economy as an alternative to an IMF bailout.
Scroll down to listen to the audio version of this article.
The Middle East is broken. It has been broken for a long time. For the past 100 years it has been the piñata of the world, with imperialist nations all swinging at it with their bats. During the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the region was carved up into various spheres of influence, mainly by Britain and France. After World War II, the US inherited the British Empire’s power, while France gradually started the process of decolonisation, but not without leaving behind a system that would allow their imperial ghost to continue haunting their subjects.
JULY 2020 ROUNDUP: The tussle for dominance in the East Med
The former Soviet Union attempted to make inroads in the Middle East during the Cold War, and in the case of Syria, it actually succeeded in replacing French influence with its own and securing for itself a vital naval base in Tartus. This granted the Russians access to the warm waters of the Mediterranean, but by the end of the Cold War, the Russians had all but been expelled from the region as the Mediterranean became what many began to call a “NATO Lake”. Britain maintained its military bases in Cyprus, while France kept a presence in Lebanon. Meanwhile, the US positioned itself in the region as a mandatory mediator in conflicts involving its ally Israel.
RELATED:
Iran not going down easily in Syria and Lebanon
Cracks appear in the Syrian regime amid Bashar al-Assad’s spat with cousin Rami Makhlouf
Sectarian politics losing purpose in crisis-hit Lebanon
But under the Trump administration, the US has been showing less interest in the Middle East. This follows the blunderous US invasion of Iraq, which resulted in Iran taking advantage of sectarian divisions to boost its sway over the country’s Shia majority. The collapse of order in Iraq also contributed to creating the chaotic conditions into which terrorist groups like ISIS were born. Ultimately, US involvement in the Middle East was proving to be more detrimental to US interests than non-interference. Particularly in the Syrian civil war, Washington was not able to find any suitable partners from among conservative Sunni Muslim Arab population, thus leaving the US no choice but to align itself with the YPG, a Kurdish far-left militia.
With the YPG, the US was able to defeat ISIS in Syria, but due to the group’s affiliation with the PKK, which is recognised as a terrorist group by NATO-ally Turkey, further enhanced cooperation with them after the fall of ISIS would have proved problematic. The US found a handful of sympathetic elements within the YPG-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) who’d stay loyal to US interests east of the Euphrates after the withdrawal of American troops from Syria, but for the large part, the militia unsurprisingly capitulated to the Russian-backed Syrian regime of Bashar al Assad almost immediately after the US pull-out.
The decision of the US to cut back on its involvement in the Middle East left a power vacuum in the region that many have been rushing to fill. Economic and political turmoil in Syria and Lebanon has given Israel room to breathe and focus on its own growth strategy, while US allies Saudi Arabia and UAE work to ensure that unfriendly groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and Iranian-backed proxies are suppressed.
However, previous US strategies to remove Bashar al Assad from power in Syria have been counterproductive in that they have given Russia the opportunity to boost its presence there. Russia has also been able to use Syria as a springboard to enter the Libya conflict, having recently delivered fighter jets from its air base in Latakia to assist renegade Libyan commander Khalifa Haftar’s forces. But implementation of the US Caesar Act in June, which targets the Assad regime and its affiliates with tough economic sanctions, looks more likely to achieve what a military approach couldn’t. If not enough to cause the regime’s collapse completely, the sanctions may force Assad to change his behaviour, give concessions and perhaps even reconsider his allegiances.
For this reason, even Russia is starting to feel insecure about Assad’s future, and is already undertaking damage control measures by looking for alternative allies that could represent Moscow’s interests in a transitional government that would also include opposition parties. This would spell a divorce for Russian-Iranian cooperation in Syria where both have supported the regime. Knowing full well that it is the weakest link in Syria with the least options, Iran has had no choice but to double-down on its support for Assad, which could explain a string of assassinations of individuals in the regime who could have proved useful to Russia.
Hezbollah’s China card
But Iran and its allies are counting on one factor that could give them the boost they need — China. China’s interest in West Asia is growing as it looks for Mediterranean ports as part of its Belt Road Initiative (BRI). Although Beijing has avoided getting involved militarily in the region, it has been unwavering in its support for the Assad regime in Syria, and has maintained good ties with Iran. Beijing has secured access to key ports in Turkey, Israel, Greece and Egypt, and pledged to help Lebanon further enlarge its port in Tripoli in tandem with infrastructure projects in Syria. Included in those projects is a coastal railway line that would connect Beirut and Tripoli in Lebanon to Homs and Aleppo in Syria. As a sign of China’s growing influence in the region, Beijing has also established an overseas military base in Djibouti at a strategic location along the Red Sea, a choke point for cargo ships and oil tankers traversing between the Mediterranean and Arabian Sea via the Suez Canal.
Media organisations linked to Iranian-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah have particularly been pumping out news reports that China is preparing to invest in Lebanon, promising that the investments worth $12.5 billion would revive the country’s crisis-hit economy and provide an attractive alternative to a much-needed bailout loan from the IMF. Many speculate the reports are simply an attempt by Hezbollah to gain some leverage in talks with the IMF, which is demanding that Lebanon cracks down on smuggling along its border with Syria as a precondition for being granted a loan. This would be detrimental to Hezbollah, which secures an income for itself through such smuggling activities thanks to its control of the border. In fact, many Lebanese are blaming Hezbollah for stalling talks with the IMF, and in doing so, toying with the lives of 5 million Lebanese people, half of whom live under the poverty line. Hezbollah’s attitude to the talks suggests that its loyalties lie more with Iran than with Lebanon, and that instead of making sacrifices for a solution that would benefit all Lebanese people, it is only prepared to look out for itself and its Shia constituents, thus increasing the likelihood of a sectarian civil war.
There’s no doubt that Hezbollah’s invitation presents a good opportunity for China to increase its stake in Lebanon and the Mediterranean as a whole, but that’s not to say it won’t face resistance from competitors in what is already a saturated market, where the US remains the biggest donor of financial aid to the Lebanese army. Washington is watching Chinese moves in the region carefully, having already warned its ally Israel about cooperating with Beijing on the port of Haifa. Despite their rivalry, the US remains China’s number one trade partner, and Beijing is not in the habit of taking a confrontational approach when challenging US interests outside of the Pacific.
One must also keep in mind that up to a third of China’s oil imports come from Gulf countries that are not only strong US allies, but are also extremely averse to Iran. China cannot put its relations with those countries at risk for the sake of backing Iran and its allies. Even if it did, the Caesar Act sanctions, as well as any forthcoming sanctions on Iran, would make it difficult for Chinese companies to work on Tehran-led initiatives without coming under US sanctions themselves. Many of China’s planned projects in Lebanon are also dependent on its reconstruction projects in Syria, which could now be dropped because of the sanctions. The China National Petroleum Corp has already cancelled a $5 billion deal to develop Iran’s massive offshore South Pars gas field for this reason.
China cannot save Lebanon
Assuming that China was bold enough to forgo the sanctions, its investments alone still wouldn’t get Lebanon anywhere unless Beirut undertakes crucial reforms. Without those reforms, Lebanon offers very little return on investment incentives due to its being an unreliable trade partner. Lebanon already makes $22 billion a year from exports to China, while only $2 billion worth of Chinese products are imported. China may have shown to be less picky about working with corrupt governments in other parts of the world, but only when there is a real potential to make money. In the case of Lebanon, the pros are outweighed by the cons.
Nonetheless, China will continue to creep its way towards the Mediterranean by building trade corridors across Asia and the Middle East for its BRI, holding off on aggressive policies for the time-being. Instead, it is likely to take advantage of US blind spots in the region and seek out tiny air pockets in which it can establish its influence, and then gradually start connecting the dots together. Despite the US pull-out, the Middle East is still heavily guarded by American business roadblocks and economic minefields, but needless to say, Beijing for now is content with waiting on the outside to exploit a weakness in the castle walls. The Chinese certainly already have allies deeply embedded within the forts who are eager to help them to sneak in.
Ertan Karpazli is the Editor-in-Chief of Radio EastMed.
Tweets @Ertan_Karpazli
All views expressed by the writer are solely his own.
Support Radio EastMed on Patreon!
Radio EastMed is a brand new news portal that had its soft launch in January 2020. It is still in its beta stage and aims to be ready for a hard launch by the end of 2021.
We are a completely independent platform run entirely by volunteers. We have no affiliation to any state bodies, political parties, business lobbies, religious congregations, civil society groups or trade unions. We also do not receive any income from investors, sponsors of advertisers.
But in order to continue providing an outstanding service, Radio EastMed needs you, the supporters of free and fair media! Your generous donations will enable us to create jobs, hire interns and run practical training courses for young, aspiring journalism students from disenfranchised communities.
So please support us by becoming a Patron today! CLICK HERE to visit our page on Patreon and find out how you can help us provide an even better service. All donations, big and small, are appreciated.