Hariri in Washington to make case for continued US support
▶ Financial backing for armed forces, despite US distaste for Hizbollah, will top Lebanese prime minister’s agenda when he meets president Trump, writes Joyce Karam
Lebanese prime minister Saad Hariri’s visit to Washington comes at a curious time.
It has coincided with an escalation in the US congress against Lebanon-based Hizbollah, and as the Shiite group and Syrian army push against Sunni militants on the Syrian border.
Mr Hariri is due to meet US president Donald Trump for the first time in the White House during a five-day visit, which officially began yesterday.
The prime minister’s delegation, which includes foreign minister Gebran Bassil, will also meet secretary of defence Gen James Mattis, secretary of state Rex Tillerson, national security adviser H R McMaster, World Bank president Jim Yong-kim and members of the Lebanese community.
A lot has changed since Mr Hariri’s visit to Washington in 2015. He was not in office at the time and, while the Obama government received its share of criticism over its handling of the Syrian conflict, US support had, for the previous eight years, steadily flowed to the Lebanese armed forces.
The state department says security assistance since 2006 has exceeded US$1 billion (Dh36.73bn), which includes an average of $80 million in foreign military funding a year in support of the Lebanese security forces.
But with the Trump government seeking to slash the state department’s budget for foreign spending and military aid, there are concerns that the financing for Lebanon will be completely cut next year.
Adding to Beirut’s problem is political pressure in Washington urging congress to cut aid or put conditions on its delivery, and spending because of claims that the Lebanese army is serving as a tool for Iran-backed Hizbollah, which the US considers a terrorist organisation.
Aram Nerguizian, a senior fellow at the Washington think tank the Centre for International and Strategic Studies, says it is premature to try to define the Trump policy on Lebanon.
“This administration is still in the process of filling many open positions across the government, some that would nominally be focused on understanding and dealing with a country like Lebanon,” Mr Nerguizian said.
While acknowledging that the Trump national security team is “far more hawkish” than that of former president Barack Obama, “much of the focus on Lebanon is tied to an almost obsessive focus on Hizbollah”, he said.
Mr Nerguizian said that with the Trump team, “there is little nuance when it comes to how to fundamentally differentiate between Hizbollah and the Lebanese armed forces, let alone have an appreciation for how far the forces and Lebanon as a whole have come in a time of deep regional crisis”.
But a silver lining exists in how the department of defence remains to be a critical point of policy continuity when it comes to Lebanon and its army, said Mr Nerguizian, who specialises in Lebanon’s military dynamics.
“Today, there are no greater advocates for the positive role Lebanon and the armed forces can play than at the Pentagon,” he said.
The recently appointed commander of the Lebanese armed forces, Gen Joseph Aoun, made a successful first visit to Washington in April, making the case for stronger co-operation and continuation of US support.
But since then, the armed forces have been embroiled in controversies involving the deaths of Syrian inmates in custody and being a bystander in the fight by Hizbollah and Syrian forces to take the border.
For Mr Hariri, continuing US support for the armed forces and maintaining his governing coalition, which includes members of Hizbollah’s Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, will define the success of the visit.
“The best-case scenario is Mr Trump acknowledging that this is a Lebanon that is not defined narrowly by Hizbollah and that is worth saving,” Mr Nerguizian said.
Such a statement, he said, would give a green light to Gen Mattis to sustain the case for continued military assistance to the Lebanese armed forces.
Mr Nerguizian said that Mr Hariri would make a case for that “Lebanon is not defined by Hizbollah and that the Lebanese armed forces are not subordinated to the party”.
In the long term, this means that “if one is truly hawkish about Lebanon, then one must support the armed forces in spite of Hizbollah”, he said.
While including conditions in the state department budget in ways that allow continuity in aid to Lebanon is one way out, “none of that is a given” and Mr Hariri “will have to make the case for continuity”, Mr Nerguizian said.
During the campaign, Mr Trump reportedly bragged to influential guests about how many successful Lebanese friends he had.
Lebanese-American businessman Thomas Barrack, who spoke at the Republican convention, is one.
It is this image of Lebanon that Mr Hariri will hope to enforce in his White House meeting today and not solely the one of increased Hizbollah prowess and latitude.