Lebanese soldiers stationed near the village of Chadra in Akkar (Credit: Michel Hallak/L'Orient Today)
Over the weekend, the issue of surveillance towers installed by the British government in 2014 along the border between Lebanon and Syria stirred up discussions in the country.
While the Syrian regime had previously maintained a low profile on the matter, it suddenly emerged with strong condemnation a decade later, on what it deemed a hostile function by some 40 watchtowers situated on Lebanese territory.
Analysts are finding it challenging to explain this newfound assertiveness other than by connecting it to developments in southern Lebanon, particularly amid negotiations aimed at resolving the conflict there.
These negotiations include discussions on bolstering the role of the Lebanese Army in the area, where there are also discussions of erecting additional surveillance towers.
In a letter of protest dated Feb. 18 addressed to its Lebanese counterpart, the Syrian Foreign Ministry expressed its objection to the installation of these towers on the border between the two countries a decade ago.
Financed at the time by the British government, which also provided the necessary training for the Lebanese military, these structures, located adjacent to Lebanese Army posts, primarily aimed to enhance control of the porous 370-kilometer-long border.
During that period, Lebanon was engaged in a conflict against Islamic State (ISIS) jihadists, who were infiltrating the country in significant numbers amid the ongoing turmoil in Syria.
The construction of these towers began a few weeks before ISIS attacked the Army in Arsal, in the Bekaa region, in August 2014.
Constructed by a team of British military experts, the project formed part of a collaborative effort between London and the Lebanese Army aimed at bolstering the military’s capabilities and facilitating the extension of its authority over the entire territory up to the border.
The Syrian Foreign Ministry, however, holds a different perspective. In thinly veiled terms, Syria has accused Lebanon of acting as an intelligence platform for the British government.
“These watchtowers are equipped with sophisticated cameras and operated by Lebanese and British officers,” states the Syrian memo, excerpts of which were viewed by L’Orient-Le Jour.
“However, these surveillance cameras are also monitored by third-party cameras embedded within them and directly linked to the British embassy.”
“There are absolutely no foreigners present at the scene. The data gathered on-site is collected solely by the Lebanese Army,” said a source closely associated with the Lebanese Army. “As for the assertion that these watchtowers are meant to monitor movements in Syria, this argument doesn’t hold up, especially considering the availability of surveillance satellites and advanced espionage technologies possessed by certain states,” continued the source.
Received by the Foreign Ministry, the letter was subsequently forwarded to the interior and defense ministries, as well as to the office of the Prime Minister.
When contacted, Lebanese caretaker Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib said that he is awaiting “successive responses from the parties concerned before formulating a response, which will likely be discussed in the Council of Ministers.”
“The Syrians are likely concerned that the information gathered by the army at their border may be shared with a third party,” Bou Habib said.
However, “it should be noted that the majority of these towers — excluding those in Akkar and the northern Bekaa — do not have a direct view of the Syrian landscape,” explained Nicholas Blanford, a researcher at the Atlantic Council. “Even those with the most exposure do not offer extensive views.”
When questioned about the timing of the letter, Bou Habib said that it “could be explained by the recent proposal from London to install similar equipment in South Lebanon.”
An hour later, the Foreign Ministry attempted to adopt a conciliatory stance toward Damascus.
“We will not accept that these towers are perceived as hostile acts towards Syria. The sole purpose of this equipment is to prevent illegal infiltration and smuggling,” Bou Habib stated to the press.
L’Orient-Le Jour has learned that the Army is preparing to address Syrian objections by presenting “concrete facts,” as disclosed by a military source speaking on condition of anonymity.
Watchtowers in southern Lebanon
A few weeks ago, London proposed duplicating the watchtower experiment on the Lebanese-Israeli border by erecting surveillance towers equipped with detection devices, under the supervision of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
Both parties — Lebanon and Israel — would be required to comply with these measures with a view to a more rigorous application of Security Council Resolution no. 1701.
Hezbollah officials immediately denied having been consulted on the matter.
“We haven’t reached that stage yet. However, if the project moves forward, it will require approval from all parties involved, including Hezbollah,” said the military source.
Syria’s objection to the towers has sparked numerous questions, particularly regarding its timing.
For many observers, the only plausible explanation is its perceived connection with Western diplomatic pressures and the ongoing negotiations aimed at halting the cross-border clashes between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.
This includes the recent British suggestion, which Hezbollah is likely to strongly oppose.
Syria is said to have acted upon a request from Hezbollah, or possibly from its Iranian sponsor. Hezbollah did not respond to L’Orient-Le Jour’s request for comment.
In April 2021, UNIFIL proposed the installation of cameras along the border with Israel to deter violations, but Hezbollah opposed this initiative.
‘We have no obligations’
Syria’s abrupt objection to the surveillance towers near its border has triggered a range of responses within Lebanon’s political circles.
“I won’t speculate on the reasons behind Damascus’ reaction. I can only assert that it is our fundamental right to safeguard our borders,” said Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) MP César Abi Khalil.
“They should focus on protecting their own borders. As long as we don’t trespass into their territory, we have no obligations,” Khalil added.
The reaction of Lebanese Forces (LF) spokesman Charles Jabbour was even more vehement.
“In the light of the countless violations committed by Syria in Lebanon — including its decades-long occupation of the country and its refusal to provide proof of ownership of the Shebaa Farms occupied by Israel — it is the Lebanese authorities who should be complaining and protesting,” Jabbour stated.
The same is true of the Kataeb, whose deputy Elias Hankash stressed the total lack of cooperation from Damascus on all issues of interest to Lebanon, starting with that of Lebanese detainees in Syria.
This article was originally published in French in L'Orient-Le Jour. Translation by Sahar Ghoussoub.