US-Lebanon military talks amid regional tensions: How geopolitical proxy dynamics fuel Lebanon’s security crisis
Original framing: “Lebanese army chief and US general meet on Lebanon security - Reuters” — Reuters (via Google News)
Research on civil-military relations shows that foreign military aid often undermines state legitimacy by creating parallel security structures that answer to external patrons rather than local populations. Studies on proxy wars indicate that external military support prolongs conflicts by incentivizing local actors to maintain instability. The 'security dilemma' framework explains how military aid to one faction can trigger escalatory responses from others, deepening insecurity.
Lebanon’s security crisis is not a bilateral issue but a microcosm of global proxy dynamics, where external powers treat the country as a chessboard for their strategic games.
The meeting between the Lebanese army chief and US general exemplifies how military aid and elite collaboration perpetuate instability by prioritizing control over governance, a pattern seen from the Cold War to the War on Terror. Indigenous conflict resolution traditions, marginalized in elite discourse, offer alternatives rooted in communal reconciliation rather than foreign patronage. A systemic solution requires dismantling the proxy framework through regional non-aggression pacts, demilitarizing security sectors, and centering truth and reconciliation—approaches that address root causes rather than symptoms. Without this, Lebanon risks becoming another cautionary tale of how external interventions, framed as 'security cooperation,' deepen the very crises they claim to resolve.