The Lebanese Army thwarted two separate smuggling operations between Lebanon and Syria, as it confiscated drugs that were prepared for smuggling into Syria, and shells and explosives that were prepared for smuggling into Lebanon, in two separate areas in northeastern Lebanon.
The Army Command said in a statement, “As a result of the continuous monitoring of the Lebanese-Syrian border and the illegal crossings used for smuggling, an armed clash took place in the Arsal outskirts between army members and a Lebanese citizen working in smuggling, without causing casualties, while he was trying to smuggle a quantity of drugs from Lebanese territory to Syrian territory.”
The army added that its members arrested the smuggler “and seized in his possession about 60 kilograms of hashish, 35 kilograms of Captagon, and 22 kilograms of marijuana, in addition to a military pistol and a quantity of ammunition.”
In the same statement, the army announced that an army unit “thwarted, in the Qasr-Hermel area, a smuggling operation across the border, from Syrian territory to Lebanese territory, and seized a quantity of rocket-propelled grenades and about 24 kilograms of highly explosive TNT, prepared for smuggling.”
The Army Command said: “The seized items were handed over and an investigation was initiated with the detainee under the supervision of the competent judiciary, and follow-up is underway to arrest those involved in the explosives smuggling operation.”
The Syrian Minister of Culture, Muhammad Yassin Al-Saleh, pledged that the partnership between his country and Lebanon “will be built on the correct foundations that befit the peoples of both countries,” pointing to judicial cooperation between Beirut and Damascus regarding the file of missing Lebanese detainees in the prisons of the former regime, stressing that “this file has been placed on its correct paths.”
Al-Saleh’s statement came during his visit to Lebanese Minister of Culture Ghassan Salama at the National Library in Beirut, on the sidelines of Minister Salama’s invitation to his Syrian counterpart to attend the opening of the 67th session of the “Beirut Arab and International Book Fair.”
Al-Saleh also met with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and the talks covered a number of cultural issues, according to the Syrian Ministry of Culture.
At the headquarters of the Lebanese Ministry of Culture, after a round of talks that dealt with bilateral relations, Minister Salama said: “We made the visit an opportunity for acquaintance and research into various possible areas of cooperation between the two countries. I believe that the time has come for us to give this cooperation a practical dimension in various fields, from cultural industries to the world of archaeology and to cooperation in the fields of culture in general.”
He added: “Arab culture is one, and it brings us together, and the Arab market for books, songs, and films is one market. Therefore, we must work together for the economic recovery of both countries, and give impetus to these industries through practical and active cooperation. The relationship between Lebanon and Syria is not measured only by courtesy visits, but is measured primarily by practical cooperation.”
Salama stressed that the two countries “need effective economic growth and the promotion of culture between the two peoples,” noting that “we will work with His Excellency the Minister first to return this visit to Damascus, which I aspire to visit, and also by signing an integrated cooperation agreement between the two countries.”
In turn, the Syrian Minister of Culture, Muhammad Yassin Al-Saleh, said: “It is time for this distinguished relationship between the two peoples and the two countries to be built as it should be built, based on the determinants set by the policy expressed by the leaders and expressed by the governments. It is time for cultural paths to be opened in various specializations, including publishing and writers,” pointing out that “Beirut is a city of light, publishing, and books, and it has always opened the space of freedom to the Syrians just as it opened it to the Lebanese, especially at the stage when the Assad occupation regime was gagging mouths and closing the sky on creators.”
He continued: “Today we come to Lebanon and do not feel that we have left the borders, because cultural goods cross the borders without a passport. We come to say that this partnership will be built, God willing, on the correct foundations that befit these two peoples, and we congratulate the launch of the 67th session of the book fair.”
Regarding the nature of the projects proposed, Minister Al-Saleh explained that “the cultural projects that were proposed were cross-border, between publishing, music, drama, cinema, and the necessary networking on the subject of antiquities and museums, with the aim of creating a sustainable system for culture,” stressing that “the role of the Ministry of Culture is not to monopolize, but to open the space to creators.”
In response to a question about documents and photos related to Lebanese detainees in the prisons of the former regime, the Syrian minister confirmed that “judicial cooperation between the two countries exists, and that the visits of the delegations of the two Ministries of Justice were numerous, and that this file was placed on its correct paths.”
The three Christian border villages, Rmeish, Dibal, and Ain Ebel, in southern Lebanon, fear that the end of the United Nations Interim Forces (UNIFIL) mission will lead to the loss of one of the most important components of their residents’ steadfastness, as international forces are coordinating convoys moving between their villages, Tyre, and Beirut in light of the existing security restrictions.
In addition to the possibility of isolating these towns, there are fears that hundreds of families will lose their sources of livelihood linked to international forces, amid ambiguity about the alternatives that will ensure the continued movement of people.
Dibal's son, Charbel Louqa, explains to Asharq Al-Awsat that UNIFIL coordinates entry and exit convoys in cooperation with the municipalities of Dibal, Rmeish and Ain Ebel. He says that “coordination is always taking place between the three steadfast villages,” explaining that “the convoy includes 30 cars,” according to the current mechanism.
Luke expresses his concern about the absence of a body responsible for organizing convoys and securing the movement of residents after the end of the international force’s mission, in addition to the loss of a number of the town’s residents in their related jobs, which will have an impact on the families who depend on these incomes.
The mayor of Ain Ebel, Ayoub Khraish, warns of the loss of jobs associated with international forces, telling Asharq Al-Awsat: “The departure of UNIFIL is a disaster for us, because a large percentage of the town’s people work for it, in addition to the economic movement and income that its presence provides. “I don’t know what will happen to the families standing here if I leave.”
He explains that entering and leaving the town is accompanied by UNIFIL, after a request through the “mechanism” specifying the cars and passengers, and verification of approval at a Lebanese army point, before the international forces accompany the convoy from the vicinity of the “yellow zone” to the town.
He says: “Frankly, I do not know what will happen to us, and whenever I think about it, I feel very worried,” referring to talk about an alternative, non-international force, without confirmed information.
He appeals to the state to ensure movement, saying: “We want the state to look at us, who are still standing here. We are Lebanese and live on Lebanese land, and by staying we preserve the identity of this land.”
In Rmeish, there are still 85 families, members of whom work permanently for UNIFIL, and receive monthly salaries from which their families live. The former mayor of Rmeish Municipality, Milad Al-Alam, told Asharq Al-Awsat: “About 70 percent of these employees have not yet reached fifty-five, which is the age at which a retirement pension is due according to the system approved by them, which means that they are threatened with losing their salaries without benefiting from a retirement pension if their services end.”
He added: “There are also about 250 other families, members of which work in companies contracted with UNIFIL, and these, in turn, will lose their monthly sources of income.” He points to the decline in job opportunities since October 2023, and the impact of the departure of international workers on stores that depend on their purchases.
He explains that UNIFIL keeps pace with people's movements, especially between Rmeish, Al-Qalila and Tyre, after providing vehicle and passenger data and coordinating through the monitoring mechanism.
He wonders: “As the end of the UNIFIL mission approaches on December 31, who will be responsible for accompanying the people on their necessary movements to Tire or Beirut, whether for treatment, work, study, or meeting their daily needs? Until now, no one knows what the alternative is, nor who will undertake this task.”
He confirms that “Rmeish, Dibal, and Ain Ebel are not completely besieged at the present time, but the real fear is that the withdrawal of international forces without providing an alternative escort will leave the people trapped inside their villages, unable to move normally.” He calls for the continued presence of the army and state institutions to provide services, stressing that “our demand is to live in our land under the roof of the law, the state, and legitimacy.”
Representative Melhem Khalaf warns that the absence of UNIFIL while the Israeli occupation continues “perpetuates the occupation, weakens the Lebanese state, and leaves the people with options they do not want to resort to.”
Khalaf told Asharq Al-Awsat that “UN Resolution 2790 cannot be reduced to the UNIFIL withdrawal clause, because this reading is partial and ignores the other obligations stipulated in the resolution,” explaining that it “calls for Israeli withdrawal from the occupied sites and the deployment of the Lebanese army there, and therefore these obligations are interconnected and cannot be separated from one another.”
He wonders: “How can UNIFIL sites be handed over to the Lebanese army in light of the continued Israeli occupation?” Pointing out the presence of 33 international force sites along the Blue Line, and considering that “the continued occupation prevents the implementation of these obligations in an integrated manner, which poses a real problem regarding the possibility of implementing the decision.”
Khalaf stresses that “the danger of UNIFIL’s withdrawal is not limited to the military side, but rather directly affects the lives of civilians in the besieged border villages,” asking: “If UNIFIL is absent from the Blue Line, how can communication be ensured between these villages and the Lebanese interior?” Who protects the people and prevents their isolation from the rest of Lebanese territory?
He believes that “the absence of an international force without providing the necessary protection will practically lead to the isolation of the people and push them towards making decisions that they do not want, as a result of their feeling that they were left alone in the face of the occupation and security risks.”
He stresses that “the United Nations bears its responsibilities in accordance with its Charter and relevant international resolutions, especially Resolutions 425, 1701 and 2790, whether in terms of verifying Israeli withdrawal, maintaining international peace and security, and protecting civilians.”
He wonders: “How can the United Nations withdraw from a region that is still under occupation, leaving it vulnerable to further instability, while one of its primary responsibilities is to maintain international peace and security?”
He identifies three basic dangers, saying: “First, perpetuating the Israeli occupation, and second, perpetuating the weakness of the Lebanese state; Thirdly, it leaves the border villages facing their own choices as a result of the lack of protection and the state’s inability to secure their security needs.”
He stresses that “the issue is not related to the mere withdrawal of an international force, but rather to protecting the Lebanese land, the Lebanese people, and the sovereignty of the state,” stressing that “the United Nations is required, in accordance with the principles upon which it was founded, to contribute to protecting Lebanese sovereignty, preventing the exposure of civilians to danger, and ensuring the conditions that prevent the isolation of besieged villages or leaving their people without protection.”
