Shifting Tides: The Evolving US-French Approaches to Lebanon's Crisis

A report by Nada Andraos, English adaptation by Nadine Sassine

Between yesterday and today, the US and French approaches to the Lebanese issue have evolved from agreement and understanding to undisclosed disagreement and divergence.

At the forefront of these differences today is the approach to solutions in Lebanon, from the presidency to UN Resolution 1701.

France's renewed vigor in the Lebanese arena during President Emmanuel Macron's tenure became evident following the August 4, 2020 explosion. France then sought to solidify its role in one of its last spheres of influence in the region and to reclaim its historical role as Lebanon’s "tender mother."

Macron sponsored a Lebanese dialogue at the Pine Residence to produce an economic reform paper, approach the investigations into the port explosion, and conduct parliamentary elections.

The famous French paper remained ink on paper because Paris does not have the leverage to influence a country primarily under American and Iranian influence. It is true that France took advantage of some margins, opening channels of dialogue—sometimes with Tehran and other times with Hezbollah, which the US classifies as a terrorist organization—with US approval. However, these efforts did not reach their conclusion.

Lebanon entered a phase of presidential vacancy, revealing differences between the two countries regarding the approach to resolving the presidential crisis. Washington was not pleased with the initial French initiative that attempted to promote the candidacy of the former minister Sleiman Frangieh, supported by both the Amal Movement and Hezbollah. Furthermore, divergences appeared within the quintet of ambassadors, with Washington rejecting France’s attempt to present itself as the spokesperson or sponsor of any dialogue or proposal.

Despite both sides advocating for a ceasefire in the south, Washington treated the French paper on the south with indifference. Implicitly, it believes that the solution is exclusively linked to its mission through Amos Hochstein. Meanwhile, France seeks to ensure that Washington does not monopolize the solution in Lebanon.

In recent years, US-French divergences over the Lebanese issue have distanced potential solutions. However, when the two countries agreed, they produced solutions or decisions. UN Resolution 1559, which called for the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon during the presidencies of George Bush and Jacques Chirac, united the two countries. They were also aligned on Resolution 1701, which ended the second Israeli-Lebanese war in 2006.

Thus, before the French-US summit between Presidents Emmanuel Macron and Joe Biden, French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian visited Lebanon—not to offer a presidential or southern solution, but to explore and search for any new developments amid Lebanon's stagnation, hoping that his president might bring something new that could serve as a basis for a joint approach with the US president regarding Lebanon.