The following articles are part of the series “Seizing Lebanon’s Moment,” a joint initiative with the Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI). The contributors to this series — who comprise top scholars, policymakers, and professionals from Lebanon, Europe, and the United States — set out to identify Lebanon’s critical problems and propose specific reforms aimed at practitioners and officials dedicated to helping the country recover from its deep, multi-year crisis. The series has been compiled in a report, whose findings aim to carry forward the constructive policy dialogue initiated during this year’s Mediterranean Dialogues Conference.
A realistic, step-by-step approach to restoring Lebanese sovereignty
Seizing Lebanon’s once-in-a-generation opportunity hinges on its ability to resolve its core dysfunction: reclaiming the state’s monopoly on force and its exclusive authority to determine matters of war and peace. Beirut, backed by deepening US support, must focus on achieving tangible milestones and strategic victories that momentum, making Hizballah’s disarmament unstoppable and the state’s reassertion of authority irreversible.
Lebanon’s judicial independence and the end of impunity
Judicial independence is at the core of any successful democracy, and for decades, this issue has been a matter of public concern in Lebanon. At a time when a credible window of opportunity for change has opened in Lebanon, restoring judicial independence is both a necessity and a prerequisite to enable the judiciary to carry out its duties and end the impunity under which it has historically operated.
Priority policies for an economic recovery in Lebanon
The current government in Lebanon is keen to encourage financial recovery and find a new path to economic growth. A thorough understanding of the causes behind the country’s recession and the factors constraining a recovery are necessary to shape policy priorities. These are also important as an input into the discussions of the 2026 budget and to the ongoing negotiations with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Using the wrong framework for these decisions could yield low economic growth, which would be harmful for a quick and decisive economic recovery. Conversely, improved economic outcomes and broad buy-in, following public consultations, will ease the implementation of politically difficult reforms. Thus, policymakers must take great care to develop a narrative about how to achieve progress in the short and medium terms that is adjusted to local circumstances.
