In order to avoid drawing a mere general conclusion, I’ll present some information via the developments in the Syria crisis over the last four years.
During the first phase of the crisis, Prime Minister Najib Mikati headed a government that included members of the March 8 camp and some centrist figures (the Progressive Socialist Party and President Michel Sleiman’s representatives). This government announced that it would pursue a policy of “disassociation,” and that it would set down no obstacles to the entry of Syrian refugees. Meanwhile, the March 14 camp and Islamist groups sympathetic to the Syrian revolution announced that they welcomed the refugees and would offer them every possible type of support.
Although some March 8 groups, especially the Free Patriotic Movement, demanded a specific policy on how to deal with these refugees, the Mikati government was keen to avoid adopting any organizational measures, out of a fear of the reaction of the Islamist arena sympathetic to it.
Later on, when the number of refugees rose substantially, some political circles and media outlets, especially those close to the FPM, began to urge that the Syrians not be referred to “refugees” or the “displaced,” because these terms would have legal and practical repercussions.
And in practical terms, the entry of Syrians remained unrestricted and unregulated, free of legal obstacles.
However, after Mikati’s government resigned and Tammam Salam formed a new Cabinet, figures from the Future Movement or close to it received portfolios that included the ministries of interior, justice and social affairs. Meanwhile, the number of refugees continued to rise while their presence had a growing impact on the socio-economic situation. Ministers from the Future Movement then began to adopt the call for regulating the situation of refugees and their entry into Lebanon; they went as far as agreeing to halt their entry, with the exception of special cases.
The complaints about the refugees began to grow when political or security developments took a certain turn. For example, the presidential election in Syria saw tens of thousands of these refugees take part in the voting, particularly at the Syrian embassy in Lebanon. The mass of people made its way through the street leading to Hazmieh; politicians from March 14, the Future Movement and some pro-Syrian uprising Islamists were vocal in condemning the behavior of these refugees and demanding that they return to their country. The government decided to withdraw refugee status from Syrians entering the country, while the March 8 parties praised these refugees and their support of President Bashar Assad.
On the other hand, when security incidents take place – whether in the town of Arsal or elsewhere – such as a murder committed by a Syrian national, all Syrian refugees pay the price. They are harassed and sometimes attacked directly, or expelled from villages and towns. When bombings take place in certain areas, such as the southern suburbs of Beirut, the refugees are the first to pay the price. Some municipalities have taken security and administrative measures against them, covering their movements and living arrangements, and also conduct counts of their numbers.
There is also the issue of social assistance to refugees by political groups and humanitarian associations. In general, most of this assistance is linked to the political affiliation of refugees and their stance on the regime and the opposition. Assistance is provided based on these considerations, and not humanitarian ones.
Although the Syrian crisis is four years old and the number of refugees remains high, we have yet to see a unified vision on the part of political factions when it comes to the refugee issue. There are no precise statistics about the situation of these refugees and the impact of their presence on Lebanon’s economy, society and security. Instead, each faction views the issue from its own political or “security” perspective, which reflects negatively on the refugees’ humanitarian situation.
The danger resulting from this situation continues to grow in Lebanon and the region, but the issue is absent in the political objectives and programs of the various sides, whether we’re talking about the Syrian regime or the opposition. It’s as if the refugees are merely a number, which can be exploited for political reasons, or for financial gain by the various factions. It’s a dangerous problem that should be confronted by everyone.