In Tunis, Yasser Arafat used to gratefully look back on what he had presented to the Palestinian cause. Mohsen Ibrahim, the secretary-general of the Communist Action Organization in Lebanon, used to encourage him to reminisce about his time in Beirut. One day, Arafat asked: “Did we make Lebanon carry more than it can handle?” Mohsen replied: “If only you had asked that question several years ago.” Several years later, Mohsen would ask the same question. I knew Mohsen for more than three decades. One day, he told me: “Leave editorial work and its problems behind. I am a journalist too. I know what it’s like. Go, seek out what is more important. Form a small team to write the story of Beirut and its transformations. This is a city that changes rapidly according to the balances of power, its location and features.” “It seems destined to face an unknown fate,” he added, while refraining from saying anything more than that. We talked for a long time. He said Beirut occasionally embraces major causes that a small country, with such a diverse and fragile composition and sensitive location, cannot embrace. The absence of a capable Lebanese state that can manage this embrace will lead the country to implode because of the major cause it has taken in or the cause itself will explode, taking the country along with it. The alliance of a local group with an international or regional force is too much for Lebanon to tolerate Ghassan Charbel We used to rejoice at the Palestinian factions’ ability to worry Israel from the southern Lebanon front. The result was that Israel invaded the south. The justness of the Palestinian cause prevented us from sensing the danger of Beirut becoming a capital of the cause in a country that borders Israel and within reach of its military machine, he added. Beirut is in a very tough situation. The Lebanese capital is on the verge of becoming the capital of the Iranian project in the region. This is the greatest coup the region is witnessing. After intervening in the Syrian conflict, Hezbollah became a regional player, with roles in Iraq and Yemen. Add to that the major and fundamental changes that the party has introduced in its environment. The changes are so deep that they infringe on its understanding of its role and relationship to the Lebanese entity and its regional location, he continued. Mohsen did not hide his fear that this “role would implode in Lebanon or explode if Iran were to escalate its position toward Israel by firing more rockets and deepening its presence” in Palestine through the Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Fouad Boutros, Lebanon’s former foreign minister, was another man whose views I enjoyed listening to, given his experience. He believed that the state is the best protector of the Lebanese people. Anyone banking on anything besides the state would be disappointed. The most dangerous thing that can happen in Lebanon is for a group or a sect to be lured into turning to foreign powers to consolidate their position in the country. Lebanon has a fragile composition that does not tolerate violent coups. The alliance of a local group with an international or regional force is too much for Lebanon to tolerate. The weakest party often becomes a pawn in a project that is greater than it and in which it has no say, Boutros noted. Unfortunately, Lebanese groups have, at various instances, given in to this temptation. “The Sunnis and Maronites had both fallen for it. I sincerely hope that our Shiite brothers don’t become too embroiled in forcefully changing Lebanon’s role and features, and its internal and foreign relations. Such change could lead to Lebanon’s implosion and perhaps even nullify the reasons for its existence in its current form,” he remarked. The most dangerous aspect of the current war is that it is greater than Lebanon, even if its playing field is terrifying Ghassan Charbel I asked him what he was most worried about. He replied that it was the rabid policies that ignore the fragility of the Lebanese structure and how several politicians refuse to see the real balance of power in the region and the world. They believe that they can impose new realities through force while ignoring the heavy prices that will be paid. I recalled Mohsen and Boutros’ remarks as I watched the broad Israeli assault against Lebanon. The scenes from Lebanon are painful. The daily Israeli orders to some residents to evacuate their villages and homes are a stark reminder of the horrific scenes recurring in Gaza. The extent of the assassinations is unprecedented and so is the destruction. World powers are watching the massacre and making do with efforts to keep Beirut airport open in order to receive aid and visitors. The most dangerous aspect of the current war is that it is greater than Lebanon, even if its playing field is terrifying. No serious efforts are being exerted to stop the war. It is as if the warring parties have chosen to forge ahead to the very end. This is extremely dangerous in a country where a fifth of the population is displaced. Added to the severity of the situation is the countdown to Israel’s expected retaliation against Iran. Lebanon cannot handle Israel dealing with it as the preferred choice for war against Iran when it opts against a direct confrontation with Tehran. It is evident that the majority of the Lebanese people oppose a destructive war in support of Gaza. Several have said, openly and in private, that the war is beyond what Lebanon can handle. It is also evident that the Israeli destruction machine enjoys American support to deplete Hezbollah’s capabilities and take the southern front out of the military equation through the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. This is the most dangerous period in Lebanon’s modern history. Taking the south out of the equation will not be easy for Hezbollah, which had launched the “support front” with Gaza in the wake of Yahya Sinwar’s Al-Aqsa Flood Operation. It is not easy for Iran either. Now is not the time for accountability and the pinning of blame. It is time to save Lebanon before it is too late. Can Lebanon come up with a formula that persuades the US and the West to seriously pursue a ceasefire? Can it come up with a formula that will pave the way for allowing the state to be the guarantor for ending the war and tending to the wounded Lebanese by embracing everyone without exception? There can be no other choice than rebuilding the state and its role. Turning to open war is rife with dangers and horrors. What use is it for the Lebanese to win medals but lose Lebanon? Ghassan Charbel is editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. X: @GhasanCharbel This article first appeared in Asharq Al-Awsat.