With Syria hopping on the 'train of opportunities,' can Lebanon secure its place in a changing Middle East?

Report by Petra Abou Haydar, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

The region is entering a new phase shaped by shifting power dynamics, with Syria already moving ahead on the path of change, while Lebanon remains stuck at the starting line.

The United States is leading this shift, laying out clear conditions.

Syria, long under sanctions and international isolation, accepted these conditions and pledged to implement them. As a result, sanctions were lifted, and the country was placed back on the "map of opportunities."

Lebanon, by contrast, is still watching these developments from afar, seemingly unaware that the door is closing quickly. The question now is no longer: What is Lebanon waiting for? But rather, is there any time left for Lebanon?

So what does the U.S. want?

Washington’s vision for Lebanon was outlined in a policy paper Donald Trump presented to the Lebanese American community during his presidential campaign. 

In it, he affirmed that he would restore peace in Lebanon and do so in the right way to prevent crises from recurring every five or ten years. 

He also pledged to end Lebanon’s suffering and destruction, preserve equal power-sharing among all Lebanese sects, and work toward a future where Lebanese people live in peace with their neighbors.

But that vision comes with clear expectations. The United States wants Lebanon to remain fully neutral in regional conflicts, especially avoiding entanglement in axis-driven politics. It also expects the disarmament of non-state actors and the full restoration of military decision-making to the Lebanese state. 

In addition, it calls for comprehensive reform of the financial and administrative systems and a genuine fight against corruption. Judicial reform is also key, with an emphasis on ensuring an independent judiciary free from sectarian influence and political interference. 

Structural reform of Lebanon’s sectarian-based political system is seen as essential to building a true civil state. These political changes are expected to be accompanied by a series of financial reform laws, particularly in the banking sector.

Lebanon has made some attempts, but progress has been slow. So far, only limited steps have been taken on financial reforms. 

The amended banking secrecy law was passed to align with International Monetary Fund (IMF) demands. The government also approved a banking sector restructuring law and submitted it to Parliament, where it remains stalled, like many previous efforts.

As for the crucial financial gap law, which determines the size of losses and how depositors will be repaid, it has not yet been approved by the Cabinet.

Judicial reform has also seen more talk than action, and the most complex issue remains: restoring the state’s monopoly on arms. 

Officials continue to insist that no negotiations—direct or indirect—with Israel will begin until it withdraws from the five disputed hills, as previously committed.

Regardless of the reasons or justifications, the result is the same: Lebanon remains off the table. And unless the state acts quickly, it may find itself left behind as the region moves forward.

Meanwhile, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, the Gulf, and even Palestine are reshaping their futures, while Lebanon remains on the sidelines—opportunities like this don’t come around often.