Exclusive JNews Lebanon
However, the highly critical timing of this visit, intersecting with a raging domestic power struggle over the US-brokered “Framework Agreement” signed between Lebanon and Israel, opens the door wide for an in-depth reading of what transpired behind closed doors—specifically within Ayn al-Tineh and Mukhtara.
The Backstage of the Political Pivot
Exclusive diplomatic sources have disclosed to JNews Lebanon that Al-Shaibani brought a calm, measured Syrian approach to Beirut. While demonstrating an unprecedented and highly visible openness to all factions, including Hezbollah, and sending clear reassuring signals that “the new Syria will not align with one Lebanese faction against another,” he placed Damascus’s explicit advice squarely on the table: “Do not rush into swift understandings with the enemy that fail to guarantee long-term, sustainable stability. Address internal rifts through calm dialogue.”
Geopolitical Repositioning: Berri and Jumblatt Open Room for Maneuver
The JNews political radar captured clear signals of strategic repositioning by the two leaders of the opposition front, Speaker Nabih Berri and Walid Jumblatt, in tandem with the high-stakes Syrian talks:
- Nabih Berri and the “Experimental Zones” Gambit: Following his sharp public denunciation of the framework agreement as “harmful and unjust,” the Speaker suddenly opened the door for a political settlement, declaring his camp’s readiness for dialogue if the counterparty shows similar willingness. Berri exposed a hidden tactical shift, revealing that Baabda Palace backtracked on the initial formula of “withdrawal by district,” replacing it with the novel concept of deferred “Experimental Model Zones.” Berri considers this maneuver a political manipulation designed to serve Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s electoral calculations.
- Walid Jumblatt and the “New May 17” Equation: The most provocative stance emerged from Mukhtara directly in front of the visiting Syrian minister. Jumblatt formulated a stark geopolitical choice: if forced to choose between a framework agreement that drags Lebanon into something far worse than the infamous “May 17 Accord,” and an independent, objective, balanced relationship with the new Syria, he will unequivocally choose the alternative Syrian track, refusing to grant legitimacy to the fragmentation of Lebanese sovereignty.
Baabda Palace Unleashes an Offensive Defense
Conversely, President of the Republic Joseph Aoun continued to lead the “offensive defense” front, backed by an influx of popular and political delegations rallying at Baabda Palace. President Aoun, who highly praised Syrian President Ahmad Al-Sharaa’s commitment to turning the page on past history, waged a “diplomatic war without bloodshed” to justify the accord. Along with the Prime Minister, Aoun maintained that the Washington formula does not constitute a legally binding international treaty but rather an elastic negotiating framework, urging political rivals and skeptics to “wait for the final outcomes before rendering premature judgments.”
Geography Dictates the Final Outcome
Despite the fierce opposition recorded by the Amal-Hezbollah cabinet ministers during the latest government session, and despite the raging constitutional debate, the physical map of Lebanon sketched out by Speaker Nabih Berri in front of the Syrian guest sums up the entire reality: “The sea is in front of us, Israel is to our south, and Syria stands behind us.”
Between Washington’s declaration of a deferred withdrawal and the formal signing of the Lebanese-Syrian Joint High Committee, it appears Lebanon is refusing to be isolated on its southern front. Instead, it is leaning on its strategic Syrian depth to establish a new balance of power, leaving the state’s legitimate weapons as the absolute red line to prevent any internal civil strife.
