The destruction in Beirut has reminded the world of Lebanon’s devastating plight

Editorial: It will take a lot more than money or mere international goodwill to rebuild the country

Soldiers search for survivors after the massive explosion in the city this week (AP)

Given the sheer scale of the devastation in Beirut, complete with a huge mushroom cloud, it was unsurprising that some of the immediate reactions on social media were to assume it was an act of terror or an attack by a foreign power.

The rush to such judgements was predictable, even though they were wrong. Sad to say, it would not have been a surprise, given Lebanon’s ordeals over the past four decades or so, if it had been a deliberate act of violence.

The explosion involved 3,000 times the amount of ammonium nitrate that the IRA used for its “fertiliser bomb” that destroyed the Baltic Exchange and so devastated parts of the City of London back in the 1990s, for example. Other estimates put the force at about one quarter that of the “Little Boy” atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima 75 years ago this week.

Yet, despite the usual outbreak of conspiracy theories, the cause, though not the effect, was prosaic enough: a dangerous quantity of chemicals stored decaying for a long period in unsafe conditions in a city of some 360,000 living close to the blast. The casualties are grievous.

If the explosion is symbolic of anything, it is the decline of the Lebanese state. Indeed the impoverishment of the nation and its politics led indirectly but inexorably to this deadly but avoidable accident. Once a relatively stable, prosperous and open society, with Beirut a popular destination for the “jet set” of the day, Lebanon could not forever escape the instability of the region and the wars of its neighbours.

After more than four decades of terrorism, invasions, assassinations, civil wars and proxy wars, the rise of Isis, a refugee crisis and coronavirus has left the civil infrastructure weak and the economy ruined by rampant inflation. Lebanon is an independent sovereign state in name only, and corruption is rife.

The world had become inured to the troubles of Lebanon because its plight seemed so intractable and its suffering almost routine. The partial destruction of Beirut has reminded the world that Lebanon hasn’t gone away, even though its problems have been overshadowed by the medieval barbarities in Syria and Iraq and the pitiless proxy wars fought in Afghanistan and Yemen.

Israel, for example, has offered humanitarian assistance, despite its interventions that did so much to undermine Lebanon’s stability – and Israel was hardly the only regional power using Lebanon for its own ends.

Lebanon is perfectly capable of running its own affairs, and managing its ports, as it has demonstrated in the past when it was allowed to be neutral. No doubt it will receive the $3bn it needs to physically rebuild Beirut, from governments and private charities, because Lebanon’s story is such a tragic one.

The greater tragedy, though, is that the Lebanese nation cannot be rebuilt with money or mere international goodwill. Since the 1970s, Lebanon’s fate has been inexorably linked to the wider search for peace in the Middle East. As the dust settles, that baleful reality remains the cause of the agonies of Lebanon.