NEW YORK CITY: The Gulf Cooperation Council on Wednesday stressed the need to respect the independence and territorial integrity of Syria, reject foreign interference, combat terrorism and respect the country’s religious and cultural diversity as it embarks on a new chapter of its history after the fall of long-time dictator Bashar Assad.

Speaking on behalf of the GCC, Kuwait’s permanent representative to the UN, Tareq Albanai, expressed its support for a comprehensive and inclusive political process, moves toward national reconciliation, and efforts to rebuild the state.

He called for national unity and comprehensive dialogue, adding that the “stability of Syria is the cornerstone for stability in region.”

Albanai was speaking at the Security Council’s first meeting of the year on Syria. He told members that the GCC decided to participate in the meeting only “to confirm our determination to help the country politically, economically, developmentally and humanitarianly.”

GCC member states categorically reject the repeated attacks on Syria by Israeli occupation forces and call for their immediate withdrawal from Syrian territories, he added.

“We renew our firm position that the Golan is Syrian territory and condemn the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied Golan,” Albanai said.

He also called for the lifting of the economic sanctions imposed on Syria during the civil war.

Egypt’s permanent representative to the UN, Osama Abdel Khalek, speaking on behalf of the UN Arab Group, also condemned the ongoing Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights, and what he described as “Israel’s opportunistic exploitation of the current situation to occupy further Syrian territories, bomb cities and infrastructure.”

He urged the Security Council to intervene and put an end to the Israeli “aggression, occupation” and “the illegal presence of all foreign forces in Syria.”

Syria’s permanent representative to the UN, Kusay Aldahak, told the council that caretaker authorities in the country are willing to build “friendly relations with all UN member states based on cooperation and shared interests and away from the policies of polarization.”

He added that the “new Syria is willing to play a positive role in the international arena. It will promote international and regional peace and security, and will not engage in any conflict or war.”

Aldahak called on the UN to “immediately and fully lift the unilateral coercive measures; provide necessary financing to meet needs and recover basic services, mainly electricity; support livelihood projects and sustainable development; reconstruct damaged service facilities; ensure de-mining; rid Syria of the remnants of war; and allow dignified refugees to return to their cities and homes.”

The UN’s humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher, told council members that close to 13 million Syrians face acute food insecurity at a time when the World Food Programme has been forced to reduce the amount of food assistance it provides by 80 per cent in the past two years as a result of funding shortfalls.

More than 620,000 Syrians remain displaced as a result of the operation to remove Assad in November and December, on top of the 7 million who had already been displaced by more than a

decade of civil war. In the northwest of the country alone, 2 million people are living in camps, Fletcher said.

US ambassador Dorothy Shea said the transition process and the Syrian government that emerges from it must ensure any chemical weapons that remain in the former Assad regime’s stockpiles are secured and destroyed.

“We are encouraged by the cooperation to date and call for the continued commitment of relevant actors in Syria to work with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the United Nations, and other state and non-state partners to chart a course for the complete and verifiable elimination of any remaining elements of a chemical weapons program, and assist released detainees and the families of those whose whereabouts remain unknown,” she said.

Shea also urged the interim government to deter individual acts of vengeance, and to partner with international institutions to identify ways to ensure that those guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity are held accountable.

Shea said the US welcomes “positive messages from Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham but will ultimately look for progress in actions, not words. We are looking for actions and words that will explore policies that prioritize the well-being of the Syrian people.”

The UN’s special envoy for Syria, Geir Pedersen, said he stands ready to work with the caretaker authorities “on how the nascent and important ideas and steps so far articulated and initiated could be developed towards a credible and inclusive political transition.”

The UK’s permanent representative to the UN, Barbara Woodward, said she was encouraged by the timelines set by the interim authorities for drafting a new constitution and holding elections and a national dialogue, and by their early engagement with the international community.

She called for their continued cooperation with UN as she welcomed the caretaker government’s efforts “to secure the chemical weapons stock and work with OPCW to fully declare and verify the destruction of such weapons. Now is the moment to close the Syria chemical weapons file once and for all.”

Russian ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said: “Syria has more than enough problems and their severity should in no case be underestimated.”

He warned of the “fairly high risk of intensification of hostilities” in many parts of the country, in particular Aleppo and Quneitra. He also highlighted “the direct threat to the territorial integrity of Syria” arising from “the unlawful actions of Israel, which is carrying out a policy of fait accompli in the occupied Golan Heights, and 500 square kilometers of Syrian land have already been seized.”

Nebenzia blamed sanctions imposed by the US “and its satellites” for exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in the country. As result of these sanctions, the Syrian economy is “under extreme pressure and is not able to cope with the challenges facing the country,” he added.

DUBAI: Wracked by economic crisis and the recent conflict between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia, Lebanon faces a historic opportunity this week to break its political paralysis and elect a new president.

There are many contenders for the coveted role, but whoever is chosen by members of the Lebanese Parliament to form the next government will have important implications for the nation’s recovery and trajectory.

If Thursday’s election is successful, it could end the debilitating power vacuum that has prevailed since Michel Aoun’s presidential term ended in October 2022, leaving governance in Lebanon in limbo.

Settling on a candidate is now more urgent than ever, as Lebanon faces mounting pressure to stabilize its political and economic landscape ahead of the impending expiration of the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hezbollah.

None of Lebanon’s major parliamentary blocs have officially announced a presidential candidate, but several potential contenders have emerged.

One possible candidate is General Joseph Aoun, commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces, who local media have tipped as the most likely winner.

Widely regarded as politically neutral, Aoun’s military experience and perceived impartiality could bring stability and credibility, both domestically and internationally.

His success would hinge on building a capable Cabinet with a comprehensive plan to stabilize the country’s governance, economic recovery and security, as well as lead postwar reconstruction efforts and the return of those displaced.

Balancing the demilitarization of Hezbollah and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern territories in accordance with the UN Resolution 1701 would also require delicate maneuvering.

However, his candidacy faces legal hurdles due to a constitutional requirement that two years must pass between his military role and the presidency.

Another potential contender is Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces. As a vocal Hezbollah critic with significant support among some Christian communities, Geagea could appeal to anti-Hezbollah factions.

His extensive political experience and advocacy for reform could help him to prioritize state-building, which many Lebanese see as crucial for the country’s future. His anti-Hezbollah stance could also restructure Lebanon’s stance in regional conflicts and international relations.

However, his polarizing history from Lebanon’s civil war could prove to be a barrier to national unity, raising fears that his candidacy could deepen divisions in Lebanon’s already fragmented political system.

Suleiman Frangieh, head of the pro-Hezbollah Marada movement, is another possibility, but risks alienating Christian communities and international allies.

Hailing from a prominent political dynasty, Frangieh is the grandson of a former president and has himself held various governmental and parliamentary roles. However, being a close ally of Hezbollah and the former Assad regime in Syria makes him a polarizing figure.

Finally, Jihad Azour, a former finance minister and International Monetary Fund official, represents a technocratic option with broad political appeal.

He enjoys support from key factions, including the Lebanese Forces, the Progressive Socialist Party led by Walid Jumblatt, several Sunni MPs, influential Maronite religious figures and opposition groups.

Azour’s economic expertise could help to address Lebanon’s financial crisis, but some among the opposition view him as a continuation of past administrations.

Securing the presidency in Lebanon requires broad-based political consensus — a challenge in its deeply divided Parliament. Any major faction can block a nomination that does not align with its agenda.

Under Lebanon’s constitution, presidential elections require a two-thirds majority in the first round of parliamentary voting (86 out of 128 members) and a simple majority of 65 votes in subsequent rounds.

The Lebanese president’s powers, as defined by the constitution, reflect a blend of ceremonial and executive functions within a confessional system of governance that allocates political roles based on religious representation.

The president’s powers are limited by those of the prime minister, the council of ministers and Parliament, reflecting Lebanon’s sectarian power-sharing system established by the 1943 National Pact and reaffirmed by the 1989 Taif Agreement.

Lebanese presidents are traditionally drawn from the Maronite Christian community, as stipulated by the confessional system. This role is critical in maintaining the delicate political balance in the country.

Thursday’s election comes at a turbulent moment for Lebanon and its neighbors, which could impact the vote’s outcome.

Hezbollah has long dominated Lebanon’s political landscape, parliamentary dynamics and government composition. However, its devastating war with Israel, which began in October 2023 and ended with a fragile ceasefire in November 2024, gutted its leadership and depleted much of its public support.

Hezbollah’s failure to deter Israel’s war in Gaza or mount a sufficient defense against Israeli air and ground attacks in southern and eastern Lebanon has raised doubts about its remaining political influence in steering the selection of a presidential candidate.

The election also follows the sudden downfall of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria, toppled by armed opposition groups after a 13-year civil war. This shift has profoundly impacted Syria’s relationship with Hezbollah and other factions in Lebanon.

Syria’s influence on Lebanon historically included backing Maronite militias, interfering in political decisions, maintaining a 29-year military occupation and facilitating the flow of weapons from Iran to Hezbollah.

The change of power in Damascus adds uncertainty to Lebanon’s already fragile situation.

Regardless of these regional shifts, Lebanon’s next president will face the daunting task of guiding the country out of its economic mire while leading postwar reconstruction efforts.

Lebanon’s economic situation remains dire, with its financial collapse in 2019 described by the World Bank as one of the worst in modern history.

The Lebanese pound has lost more than 98 percent of its value against the US dollar on the black market, leading to hyperinflation and eroding the purchasing power of citizens.

Public services, including electricity, health care and water supply, have nearly collapsed, and unemployment has soared. More than 80 percent of the population now lives below the poverty line, according to the UN.

Efforts to secure international aid, including talks with the IMF, have stalled due to political gridlock and resistance to reforms. The new president will need regional and international standing to rally support for Lebanon’s recovery.

Whoever secures the presidency will face a formidable task in addressing Lebanon’s economic, political and social challenges. The alternative is continued paralysis, with devastating consequences for the country’s future.