��������

The Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Saturday extended its “sincere condolences to the Lebanese Republic over the death and injury of several Lebanese army personnel while carrying out their duties in southern Lebanon.” In its statement, the ministry praised “the efforts of the Lebanese army to uphold the Lebanese government’s sovereignty over all the country’s territory, in a manner that ensures its security and stability and contributes to the prosperity of Lebanon and its people.”

This statement goes beyond a standard humanitarian gesture or formal condolence; it conveys a clear political stance. At its core, it reaffirms the Lebanese army’s vital role as one of the state’s main pillars for restoring authority and strength, projecting control across all Lebanese territory, protecting borders and airspace from ongoing Israeli aggression, and preserving internal stability. That role will be especially critical in the upcoming “weapons confiscation” phase — arguably the most challenging stage — which will require the cooperation of all political forces and movements to prevent any escalation into armed clashes that could drag the country into a devastating sectarian conflict.

From the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War in 1975 to the signing of the Taif Agreement in 1989 — brokered under ��������’s auspices — Riyadh served as a pivotal mediator among the warring factions, dedicated to ending the conflict and laying the foundations for political stability. In the years that followed, the Kingdom played a major role in the reconstruction of downtown Beirut — later hailed as a symbol of Lebanon’s renaissance — providing sustained financial and political support that reflected an investment in the state as a whole, rather than in any single sect.

The Kingdom did not shape its Lebanese partnerships through sectarian considerations or favor any side based on religious affiliation.

For instance, King Faisal and former Lebanese President Suleiman Frangieh shared a relationship rooted in mutual respect. As reported by the Saudi newspaper Al-Jazirah on Sept. 28, 1971, Frangieh hosted a dinner banquet at Baabda Palace “in honor of His Majesty King Faisal, attended by His Majesty’s accompanying delegation.” At the time, an informed Lebanese source noted that “the official talks between His Majesty King Faisal and His Excellency President Suleiman Frangieh aim to strengthen the bonds of cooperation and brotherhood between the two countries, expand trade exchanges and encourage tourism between them. The broader Arab situation will be at the forefront of the discussions.” 

This statement goes beyond a standard humanitarian gesture or formal condolence; it conveys a clear political stance.

Hassan Al-Mustafa

For his part, King Fahd was a steadfast supporter of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, not out of favoritism toward the esteemed Sunni community over others, but to promote the values Hariri embodied at the time: advancing education, fostering scholarships and driving state-building projects that served all of Lebanon.

While still a prince, King Abdullah maintained a close friendship with Imam Musa Al-Sadr. Sources close to him recall that he had warned Al-Sadr against traveling to Libya, cautioning that “Qaddafi could not be trusted.” Following Al-Sadr’s disappearance, King Abdullah reportedly mobilized all his resources in support of the imam’s family, determined to help uncover the truth about his fate.

Today, King Salman maintains long-standing ties with Lebanon, anchored in media and cultural exchanges. Renowned for his broad intellect and close follow-up on media, publications and libraries, he has built enduring relationships with prominent Lebanese journalists, writers and intellectuals.

These enduring and multifaceted ties underscore a deliberate political stance: engaging with national figures over sectarian affiliations with the aim of safeguarding Lebanon’s unity and preventing it from becoming a stage for factional conflicts.

In March, President Joseph Aoun paid his first visit to �������� as head of state, meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The talks centered on key strategic priorities, including confining weapons to the authority of the Lebanese state, strengthening the army and ensuring the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the south. They also explored lifting the Saudi ban on Lebanese imports and reopening the Kingdom’s doors to Lebanese tourists. The visit aimed to revive Beirut’s stature as a prominent Arab capital with a rich and significant history.

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam also visited the Kingdom, joining the crown prince in performing Eid prayers, a symbolic act underscoring national brotherhood and expressing a shared hope for revitalized bilateral relations founded on greater trust and deeper integration. 

The Kingdom’s engagement in Lebanese affairs is not motivated by short-term gains but by the pursuit of lasting stability.

Hassan Al-Mustafa

What is the meaning and purpose of this gradual ��������n involvement in Lebanon?

Riyadh’s approach centers on the principle of “the state over the sect” and “the state over the militias,” as demonstrated by its clear support for the Lebanese army and firm stance that arms must remain under state authority. This strategy bolsters Lebanon’s stability, safeguards it from internal conflicts and aligns it with Saudi interests, while laying the groundwork for a strong, sovereign state. Such a state would be capable of ending the Israeli occupation, ensuring the return of displaced communities to their villages and driving forward national reconstruction.

If security and stability are achieved, they will pave the way for sustainable economic growth by reopening channels for trade, investment and tourism, thereby helping to break the cycle of economic collapse afflicting both the Lebanese state and its people. The influx of capital would directly improve living conditions, regardless of the people’s views of its source, and restore a sense of hope for the future.

All this stems from a long-term vision. The Kingdom’s engagement in Lebanese affairs is not motivated by short-term gains but by the pursuit of lasting stability in the Eastern Mediterranean and the creation of a barrier against the spread of conflicts into the Arab world. This approach also opens the door to wider regional agreements or truces that could help prevent future wars.

In contrast, what steps can Lebanon take to move forward, especially at this critical stage in its history?

If Lebanon’s elite — across its political, cultural and spiritual spheres — truly wish to translate this Saudi political interest, and that of the wider Gulf-Arab world, into tangible progress for its people, it must commit to deep and credible reforms that restore confidence in the state. Foremost among these are asserting full state control over borders and weapons, strengthening the army, dismantling sectarian quotas and adopting a governance model that uproots corruption and favoritism. Such a model must make every Lebanese citizen feel like they live in a state that is genuinely committed to reform, justice and equality, while being free from the grip of sectarianism, militias and partisan economics.

• Hassan Al-Mustafa is a Saudi writer and researcher interested in Islamic movements, the development of religious discourse and the relationship between the Gulf Cooperation Council states and Iran.

X: @Halmustafa