Caught in a war not of its making, Lebanon is a picture of destitution, despair, and devastation.

Once celebrated as the “Paris of the Middle East,” Lebanon today serves as a cautionary tale of how entrenched sectarianism, religious divisions, systemic corruption, cronyism, mismanagement, failure of institutions, influx of refugees, armed militias and regional power struggles can dismantle a nation.

Malaysia, just as other nations, has much to learn from the fall of Lebanon.

Following independence in 1943, Lebanon emerged as a unique experiment in pluralism. For much of the mid-20th century, Lebanon was the anomaly in an unsteady Arab world. The hub of high finance and avant-garde art not only boasted a pluralistic society but also portrayed a modern democracy where Christians and Muslims could govern together in peace.

The political elite devised a power-sharing formula whereby key positions – from the presidency to the military and civil service – were apportioned according to sectarian or religious affiliation.

Political power became split by law: the president must be a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni Muslim, and the speaker of parliament a Shia Muslim. The Druze and other minorities also held designated roles.

This set-up is not too different from what we have in Malaysia, where the political elite, leading mostly race- or religion-based parties, form alliances with other parties to ensure at least a token representation of another race in the coalition.

Lebanon’s National Pact served the elites well, as it allowed for both competition and cooperation, while ensuring that leaders of these sects had access to state resources and power.

Again, not unlike Malaysia, where race-based political parties compete with each other formally but also cooperate for common benefit informally, or reconfigure alignments when it suits them, especially after elections.

In Lebanon, the National Pact era (1943–1975) saw a period of staggering cultural and economic prosperity but it hid the slow rot that was taking place.

For example, state resources were doled out based on religious affiliation rather than the greater good of the nation. Loyalty and religious affinity, not ability and professionalism, were rewarded.

The Lebanese elites played exquisite political games to secure and maintain power, often waving the flag of religion to keep citizens distracted, divided, or on their side.

The leaders convinced members of their sects or religions that only they could protect them from “the others” and that their sect or religion was under threat from the other groups. By reinforcing and amplifying animosity towards citizens of other sects and faiths, these leaders strengthened their own positions.

That should ring a bell among discerning Malaysians.

History shows that the coming of the Palestinians, especially the Palestine Liberation Organisation, had an impact on Lebanon. The PLO established a presence in Lebanon through Palestinian refugee flows following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes.

When Jordan expelled the PLO in 1970 for acting as a state within a state, it shifted its headquarters to Lebanon, where it continued the fight with Israel. The Israelis launched repeated military invasions into Lebanon in retaliation for PLO attacks devastating the country.

Also, while Beirut’s cosmopolitan elite enjoyed a high, even trendy, lifestyle, ordinary citizens in the rural areas were largely neglected by the state. This inequality created a fertile ground for tensions that – together with the disruption of the sectarian balancing act – eventually led to a 15-year civil war, a religious war, in 1975.

When the guns finally fell silent in 1990, with an agreement among the warring parties, the people expected reforms and a rebirth. What they got was warlords changing into designer suits and taking seats in the Cabinet, pardoning each other and sharing government posts among themselves.

Soon, the state transformed from a provider of services for the people to a source of spoils to be divided among the leaders. Government contracts, ministry jobs, and public resources were treated as a “prize” to be shared among those in power.

Corruption, cronyism, nepotism and political patronage became embedded in governance, with sectarian leaders deliberately keeping the state, and institutions such as the judiciary, weak so that they could continue to dole out favours and call the shots.

While the politicians were busy with their fiefdoms, the bankers were taking humongous risks in balancing debts and artificially propping up the economy. In 2019, Lebanon’s economy imploded and by 2022 the Lebanese pound had lost about 98% of its value.

Foreign nations too contributed to Lebanon’s tragic fall.

Lebanese factions often sought external patrons to fortify their sect’s power and in doing so they laid the groundwork for the country’s policies to be dictated by foreign nations. Their infighting invited decades of foreign intervention, from the Syrian occupation (1976–2005) and multiple Israeli invasions to that caused by the modern-day rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

And today, Israel has again invaded Lebanon with impunity, causing untold suffering.

Internally, Hezbollah, backed by Iran and possessing a military force more powerful than the national army, became a state within a state. While it provided protection and a social safety net for the Shia community, it also pulled Lebanon into regional conflicts as it serves as Iran’s forward defence.

Internally too, the judiciary is often blocked in its efforts to convict influential people, partly because of pliant prosecutors who follow orders, as can be seen in the Aug 4, 2020 explosion at the Port of Beirut which killed 218 people and damaged over half the city. No one has been found culpable yet.

Lebanon demonstrates that a pluralistic society cannot survive if its political structure is designed to keep people in sectarian, race, or religious silos.

When politics becomes about “us versus them,” the only ones who win are those at the top. Allowing politics to be defined by “us versus them”, allowing leaders to use religion as a shield for their greed for power is inviting catastrophe.

It also warns us to beware of foreign hands that divide us by pushing their ideologies; and to beware of systemic corruption.

Also, Lebanon teaches that without equitable wealth distribution, transparency and a merit-based system, even the most cosmopolitan and wealthy nation can degenerate.

Lebanon offers many more lessons, and serves as a cautionary tale. Will we listen and act?

Read also: Lebanon: Civilisation that gave us the alphabet in ruins

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.