They are accustomed to the rendez-vous, just as they are to the place; for them it is a collective «nostalgia», away from the reality of taking refuge in Lebanon, and away from the suffering. They remember some stories about Syria, and much more intimacy; they let their imagination wander in its streets, alleys and cities.
Every Saturday at ten in the morning, the «group» meets. The faces change; some are new and some retreat. Over the last five years, many of those who have sat around this table, in this café, have left. Only few remain in Lebanon; for its proximity to the Syrian territory or in anticipation of the hope of leaving. They come from different cities in Syria, but what brings them together is not the suffering; they admit that in Lebanon, they are leading a good life, economically.
In these meetings, the topics mix up between politics, terrorism, the regime, «ISIS» and the opposition. During the last meeting, there was a lengthy talk over Lebanon, taking refuge in it and the suffering of the Syrians in the tents, on the border and the border crossings. All of those who have taken refuge in Lebanon, even those who are considered «elite» - with personal reserve regarding the term – and enjoy the minimum level of the economic ability to sufficiency, share one explicit feeling: Lebanon has failed in dealing with the Syrian crisis and in positively exploiting it in its favor.
Around this table is another face of the repercussions of the Syrian crisis on Lebanon. The scene seems very different from the Syrian suffering; there are no tents here, there are no queues that await little aid that sometimes comes and other times is cut off, pending funds from donor states and parties.
Among the present «elite» is a jewelry designer. As the military and war element first began entering the city of Aleppo, she decided early on to wind up her business there; especially that she was a prisoner of fear of any possible acts of looting. She quickly gathered all that she owns and moved towards the border between Syria and Turkey. She was able to enter the Turkish territory through one of the border points, after going through a long hardship to resolve the transfer of her property. She narrates the decision she took; this was not the first time she tells her story around this table. She asks those present to wait, apologizes for any repetitions and continues with her story: within few weeks, she decided to fly to Beirut and resume her business there. For her, the choice of Beirut was related to her ability to pick up with what she had started in Aleppo in another Arab city, as well as to private family matters. This repetition was to convey to those present that her presence in Lebanon had actually added to the country. She admits that the Syrian crisis has actually weighed on Lebanon, but in return, there are certain positive aspects to it. And from her personal conversation regarding her situation, she points out to the dozens of similar cases; from businessmen to traders and investors who have moved to Lebanon.
Around the same table sits a Syrian filmmaker, in his professional beginnings. For him, the decision of moving to Beirut was final. As the Syrian crisis began, he expected the Lebanese capital to transform into an artistic and cultural asylum for the Syrians; and his expectations were right. According to him, a major shift took place at the Lebanese drama level in particular; attributable to the joint projects and to the Syrian expertise that found in Beirut a space in which they can practice the Syrian successes. His memory takes him to Syria, back to the school days, and he compares between the space of cultural freedom that is provided in Lebanon and that in Syria. Only the fields that are subject to the private sector, such as the field in which he works, have successfully achieved some advantages at the level of the Lebanese-Syrian cooperation.
The discussions vary; they go back and forth between the economic and cultural factors; it is said that Lebanon has failed, through these factors, to transform the repercussions of the Syrian crisis into a positive element, keeping them as negative points. The conversations diverge. Two of those present work in the field of relief; they move regularly between Beirut and Turkey. The requirements of work have imposed their presence in Lebanon. They point out, in detail, to the positive repercussions on Lebanon in this field in particular, after this small country has turned into a center and a destination for a significant number of international institutions and organizations working in this field. They excuse themselves before the meeting ends; they leave towards Bekaa to finish their work of carrying a few items of aid that have just arrived through one of the international institutions.
Even politically, and although those present always try not to delve into this kind of details, Lebanon has, for them, failed to exploit the Syrian crisis in its favor. After all that had taken place in Syria, politics has become their haunting nightmare. Dominating their conversations is a state of semi-surrender to the Syrian situation; they often draw a grim picture of their country’s future, along with the lack of hope. One of those present (working in the field of studies) suggests that the Syrian situation has actually became a reality, while Lebanon is still capable of taking an initiative, if there ever is a will.
He quickly ends the subject. This table can only carry little hope; and they often try to stay positive. The meeting ends. Those sitting around the table start to leave before a friend, living in Beirut for the last three years and working in the field of trade, surprises them with the news of his departure, for good, the following week. The destination: France. The goal: a better tomorrow. They share some intimate moments, some hugs and kisses and agree that the next meeting would be a farewell meeting…