The Syrian -Lebanese Treaty: Champions Mechanism

Lebanon and Syria signed on 22/5/1991 the Treaty of the Brotherhood, Cooperation and Coordination, ”after which it was pursued by dozens of agreements.

Based on the text of Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Treaties Law of 1969, the treaty is considered void if it is concluded as a result of the threat or the use of strength in violation of the principles contained in the United Nations Charter.
Saeed Malik wrote in “Al -Watan Call”:
It is fixed that Lebanon entered 1990 and as a result of a US -Saudi -Syrian agreement, and as a reward for Syria, the era of the Syrian guardianship, which was deed.
Consequently, the Syrian Republic imposed on the Lebanese state its authority, and was able to compel it to sign the Treaty of the Brotherhood, Cooperation and Coordination with it under the influence of coercion on the same state. Traditional international law recognized these treaties of legitimacy.
Napoletana Guido Violensa e trantati nel diritto internascular, Milano, GuifFrè 1977. However, the Vienna Treaty of the Treaties Law changed this concept, and considered that such illegal treaties, and can be nullified within a specific mechanism.
Returning to the mentioned Vienna Agreement, it is clear that to nullify the treaties that are under the influence of coercion, a binding mechanism is a duty to follow. A bond of Article 65 of this agreement begins with a notification that the Lebanese state guides to the Syrian state that it teaches, according to which its desire to nullify this treaty and the reasons for this. The Syrian Republic has a three -month period to answer this notification. If the Lebanese state directly, the procedures in accordance with the text of Article 67 and the following of the Vienna Agreement. Thus, the road map is a delivery to amend the treaty and attached agreements or its nullification remains:
Directing a book from the Lebanese government to its Syrian counterpart, to inform it of its desire to amend this treaty or nullify it, with the reasons for this. Its qualification is three months to determine the position on that.
If the Syrian government responds, the signing of a negotiating contract between the Lebanese government and its Syrian counterpart, with a time period to reach to amend what is necessary in the event of being able, or except to agree on the mechanism of nullification by mutual consent. If the Syrian government does not respond, or the negotiations are not successful, resorting to the provisions of the Vienna Agreement of the Treaties Law of 1969, especially Article 65 and the following.
In summary, either amending the treaty by mutual consent, especially the abolition of the “Supreme Council” (stipulated in Article Six of the Treaty) or to resort to the Vienna Convention to nullify the treaty, in order to achieve the right and restore the sovereignty of the state.
The agreements in force between the countries, Dolly Beshaallani wrote in “Al -Diyar”: There is no doubt that the border between Lebanon and Syria has been drawn since the High Commissioner for the French Mandate, General Henry Guru, announced the establishment of the Grand State of Lebanon. For the demarcation of the borders of this country one day, Decree No. 318 issued, during which the limits were adopted on the basis of the Ottoman divisions. Despite the agreements and lectures that were signed between the two countries during successive years, the issue of demarcating the land and sea borders between the two countries was not terminated for political reasons, and no recent record of all these agreements with documents and maps is sent to the United Nations to fix these borders militarily on the ground permanently. Today, with the availability of the international decision at the United Nations to demarcate the borders between the countries of the region, and with the change of the regime in Syria, the completion of this file, in the land and sea, is not decreased, according to what is inferred political sources, except for the existence of a clear intention and an actual Lebanese-Syrian internal will, which are not hindered by any conditions. In addition to preventing the interference of “Israel” in these demarcation negotiations, especially as it is a greedy to seize parts of the lands of this or that country, and it rejects any demarcation of the borders of the countries of the region, but rather it wants to drop it all to establish its major country, which has been dreaming of it for decades. The issue of demarcation between Lebanon and Syria is based on what political sources confirm, historical, political, economic, diplomatic and social dimensions. It also attracted it, and still, many conditions and obstacles that prevented them from installing them, especially with the old Syrian regime, which was even refused to raise the idea of ​​demarcating the borders between the two countries, and which did not decide on the Lebanese matter of the Shebaa farms occupied at the southern border. The demarcation is divided between Lebanon and Syria, according to what is known, into wild and sea. This file is expected to be placed on the upcoming talks table between the Syrian -technical security delegation and the Lebanese delegation ready to start the demarcation negotiations with Syria. This is included in the title “Lebanese -Syrian Relations” included in the American paper carried by the American envoy Tom Barak to Lebanon and the Lebanese government agreed to it after making some amendments to it. As for marine demarcation, it is possible to talk about the existence of a “conflict” between Lebanon and Syria on it. In 2007, Lebanon demarcated the borders of its pure economic zone in a monoism, and deposited the demarcation decree to the United Nations in 2011, during which it adopted the rules and standards stipulated in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, especially the midfield base. As for Syria, it recorded its objection to the Lebanese demarcation in 2014, and deposited it with the United Nations. She in turn was drawn up by Ahmadi, the borders of her pure economic zone with Lebanon, and adopted the principle of latitude. Which created a marine conflict zone between the two countries that interfere with the Lebanese block 1, with an area of ​​about 750 km2. What complicated matters more is the approval of the Syrian parliament in the year 2021 on the signed contract with the Russian company “Capital” a year ago, which gives the aforementioned company the exclusive right to explore for oil and gas in the three border Syrian border blocks, which includes blocks 1 with the Lebanese Northern Blocs. Today, what the Syrian delegation will carry to Lebanon regarding the file of demarcating the land and sea borders between the two countries. Which will reveal the new intentions of Syria in the next stage, and if it really wants to solve the existing and suspended crises between the two countries, or does it want to use the latter as an important card in the comprehensive settlement file in the region, its future role in it, and the reconstruction of each of the two countries. Today, if the demarcation with Syria takes place, as follows the sources, the transition to the demarcation of the borders will be moved, according to the American paper, with occupied Palestine, that is, with “Israel” … but that matter will not happen before the government’s decision to limit arms in the hands of the state. The demarcation here affects the Shebaa Farms, the Hills of Kfarshoubia and the northern section of the occupied town of Ghajar. Washington works, according to its paper, that the weapons be restricted and the border is inserted with Syria, to be extracted from the Shebaa Farms from Lebanon, as it is said that there is a consent between America and Syria that the Syrians do not acknowledge its Lebanese. As for the goal, it is to withdraw the pretext of the place. The bargaining of Hizbullah. However, the words of Sharia about that: “Let“ Israel ”withdraw from the farms and we will not disagree with Lebanon on it,” this definitely denies.