April 26, 2005 – April 26, 2026. Twenty-one years. Talk is still flowing about that deep state that the Assad regime built, over the course of thirty years, in the veins of the Lebanese regime. “Al-Assad” has ended in Syria, and his presence is still present here. It is in many divisions, and in many “movements” that extend its influence beyond Syria and Lebanon. On that beautiful, sunny April day, we thought that the calvary had ended, but “not everything a person hopes for is achieved” in a country whose joints have been held captive for thirty years by those who have been held captive by their joints, refusing to admit that Hafez al-Assad died, Bashar al-Assad fled, and “Assad’s Syria” became free. On April 26, 2026, Lebanon continues to suffer under the yoke of another occupation, from the same old, defeated axis, and its tails refuse to give up the gains they have accumulated in thirty years. An investigation into a historical juncture in which the old structure “disappears” to establish a new Middle East:
“Lebanon Debate” – Nawal Nasr
Let us enter the Parliament. Let’s look at the faces. Let’s stop at the events. Let us listen to the “professor,” who carries the hammer of parliament. Let us speak to those who lived through that stage and continued to remain close to the Levant after that. Let us pay attention to those who returned and disavowed that “lion” when he escaped. There are those who did not surrender after the end of the occupation, inherited its legacy and continued in the same approach, harmonized with it, and shared the trade in contraband of all kinds, reinforcing another Iranian occupation this time. How humiliating the occupations are among us.
Prime Minister Nabih Berri is in Parliament. He is one of the most important and steadfast allies of the former Syrian regime. He is the “big brother.” The old Baathist, a friend of Hafez al-Assad, whom he trusted and saw in him as an extension of his influence. Al-Assad’s influence in Syria ended, and the influence of “the professor” continued in Lebanon.
Elie Ferzli, Deputy of State to President Nabih Berri, for several terms, also possesses a lot of skill and ingenuity, and his name has long been associated with the name of the Assad regime. He is one of the luckiest Christian politicians during the era of Syrian tutelage, perhaps because he was born in Jeb Jenin, a village near the Syrian border, to which he gave his allegiance under the slogan of the Minority Alliance. He was the difficult figure in the Syrian equation in Lebanon for thirty years. According to him, he only met Bashar two or three times. And after that, whenever they called him a Sorna, he replied, “So spread the word.” Many faces were the “Syrian air” during the days of the Syrian occupation and tried to continue after it, such as Suleiman Franjieh and Abdul Rahim Murad… some of them succeeded. Some of them walked “with the wall,” in accordance with the saying, “Walk with the wall and say, ‘O Lord, protect us’.”
Did the Syrian regime’s occupation of Lebanon end on April 26, 2005?
Elias Atallah, the very leftist, who participated strongly in the “Cedar Revolution” in 2005, answers, “On that day we all stood on the podium to announce the liberation of Lebanon from the Syrian regime, but what happened is that the majority of those who were with him that day gradually moved to consolidating the relationship with “Hezbollah” and Hassan Nasrallah, who in 2006 rushed to wage a war called “Divine Victory,” including Nabih Berri, who has since become known. That history with the “Shiite duo,” although its relationship with the new Iranian occupation continued to be ambiguous, while the “party” publicly declared its affiliation to the Guardianship of the Jurist. Don’t you remember what Mr. Hassan said, “I am proud to be a member of the Guardianship of the Jurist?”
We ended one occupation and fell into another occupation with the emergence of “the party,” according to Atallah. He says, “Hezbollah passed through two stages: the stage before the 1990s, in which Syria was entirely responsible for it. After that, a Syrian-Iranian agreement was concluded in which the latter’s presence as a firm partner was strengthened, and Iran’s control increased after the death of Hafez al-Assad, until it became the sole decision maker. Style change. It is natural for politicians in Lebanon who go with the “strong” to start with their “likes.” The “party” with its weapons seemed the strongest. Then came the events of May 7, 2008, followed by the Doha Agreement, which changed the equations at the heart of the constitution and strengthened the “obstructing third” scenario.
Today, they talk – whenever the goblet hits the jar – about the deep state that was founded in ancient Syria and which the “party” inherited in partnership with Nabih Berri. This equation remained in place until the Battle of Support in 2023, in which the “Axis of Heirs” was greatly defeated. The title of the defeat was “Long live Sinwar.”
We return to after the end of the Syrian occupation and before the outbreak of the revolution in Syria. Atallah says, “In 2008, the party became the striking force in Lebanon under Iranian occupation. The relationship with Bashar through Syria became a smuggling corridor and nothing more. Arms, Captagon, and cocaine mafias increased. Syria-Bashar’s concern for influence in Lebanon was no longer so much as monitoring what was happening in Iraq and the region. The revolution happened in Syria, and what Bashar did not expect was Iran sending about twenty thousand fighters to it from Lebanon. Thousands died. And Bashar said it: If The “party” did not support him, and he would have fallen quickly in the Levant. What Syria did during the days of its influence by making the two countries, Syria and Lebanon, “one people in two states” was achieved by “the party that overthrew the borders.” He began to come and go as he pleased.”
Thus, we ended with an occupation and fell into an occupation. The slogan before April 26, 2005 was: “Syria, get out.” “Iran is out and about.” Can we, in this case, say that celebrating the end of the occupation in 2005 is unnecessary, just as the celebration on May 25 of Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon is no longer necessary? No, the Assad regime was defeated in 2005, and celebrating that is logical and necessary. As for celebrating May 25, it is disastrous after Israel became the Litani border. Lebanon, which was liberated in 2000, became occupied in 2026 because of the “party’s” mistaken bet on support that it fought in the eyes of those who founded it, grew it, and invested in it for more than forty years. He was the one who existed for such a moment.
Let us return again to the remains of Assad’s Syria in Lebanon. It is no secret that thousands of men of the fallen regime, who fled to Lebanon after its fall, are still there. They took refuge in the last Axis strongholds in the region. While Bashar lives in Russian exile, in light of the new Syrian regime’s insistence that Bashar will not survive an upcoming trial.
What about Lebanon in light of the “vices” of the occupation?
What the Sovereigns are talking about is “the weakness of the opponents of the resistance line after the end of the Syrian occupation in 2005 led to the growing strength of the “party,” in addition to the lack of sincere alliances, sincere goals, and bold, decisive decisions. If the “Sovereigns” had continued the battle of the Cedar Revolution until the end, they would have saved Lebanon a lot.” How about today? What prevents the “deep state” from returning and imposing what it wants on those who want to rebuild the correct, impregnable state? The most dangerous thing used today – according to Elias Atallah – is the use of the phrase “deep state” as a negative. What is supposed to be confirmed today is that we actually intend to strengthen the Lebanese deep state culturally, educationally, in awareness, and in the army. As for the state that the failed regime tried to “root” and was known as the deep state, it relied on oppression and corruption for control. There is a difference between depth and depth.
April 26, 2026… Happy editing.
