With the country already on the brink of collapse, the explosion will deepen the trust gap between citizens and the ruling elite.

This piece was originally published on the USIP website https://www.usip.org/

A massive explosion ripped through the Port of Beirut on Tuesday, sending shockwaves through the Lebanese capital, killing over one hundred and injuring thousands. This comes with Lebanon already on the brink of economic collapse, struggling to address a COVID outbreak, and as the trust gap between citizens and the state is wider than ever. Although in the immediate aftermath of the explosion some suggested Lebanon had been attacked, the cause of the explosion is likely much more banal: government negligence resulted in thousands of pounds of explosive chemical material to be improperly stored in the port for years. USIP’s Elie Abouaoun and Mona Yacoubian examine what this demonstrates about the already beleaguered Lebanese government, the long-term implications for the country, and how the international community has responded so far.

Conspiracy theories have flourished about the incident. What do we know about what really happened and what does it say about the Lebanese government?

Abouaoun: Some eyewitnesses in Beirut were confused and provided contradictory or incorrect information about what happened on August 4, citing missiles or airplanes flying over the area. This fed into the conspiracy theories circulating in the media following the explosion. The source of the controversy comes from the fact that the explosive material (ammonium nitrate) in warehouse #12 of the Port of Beirut usually needs fuel and a detonator to explode, unless stored in very high temperature for long period.

So far, most indicators lead to the conclusion that the blast was an accident rather than resulting from an attack. Videos showing missiles hitting the warehouse were dismissed as fake. Some Lebanese politicians mentioned, in somewhat timid fashion, that there was the possibility of an Israeli attack, but only as part of a set of four or five other scenarios.

The key outstanding question is what acted as a detonator to trigger the explosion of the 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate? The speculative answers to this question range from a self-ignited fire as a result of the high temperature and poor storage conditions, a detonation in a nearby warehouse containing confiscated fireworks or ammunitions for Hezbollah, welding the door of the warehouse, and, as mentioned, an attack by Israel.

A clear answer to this question is necessary to end the speculation and controversy. It is equally crucial for the investigation to also uncover the responsibility of bureaucrats, military commanders, judges, and government officials who knew that such a dangerous stock of chemicals sat in the port for six years under precarious conditions.

In any case, the investigation will be a complex because both the legislative and the administrative structures in Lebanon are vague and confusing. Unless solid evidence of an attack emerges, the end result would probably attribute the incident to a combination of mistakes committed by several actors (e.g., customs, security agencies, port authority, etc.), reflecting an ineffective bureaucracy, negligence, incompetence, and corruption. In this case, reversing decades of impunity for Lebanese civil servants and politicians would be a major breakthrough.

It is worthwhile noting that however serious the investigation is, it will always be looked at by the public with a lot of skepticism given the lack of trust in the entire political establishment. This incident will further deepen the gap between the population and the establishment. In this context, the attempts to establish an international investigation committee of sort, if successful, will help containing the growing anger of a devastated population.

With Lebanon already facing existential political and economic crises, what could the long-term impact of the explosion be?

Yacoubian: As the magnitude of the August 4 Beirut explosions sets in—a rising death toll now at 154, more than 5,000 injured, hundreds of thousands now homeless, and billions of dollars in damage—the explosions’ aftermath could be even more significant. Coming amid a new COVID surge and the Lebanese economy’s meltdown, the fallout from the catastrophic blasts will exacerbate an already dire situation characterized by growing hunger and impoverishment. The blasts damaged at least three hospitals, raising questions about the Lebanese health sector’s ability to cope with a spike in COVID cases.

Many Lebanese are accusing their government of gross negligence. Government officials reportedly ignored repeated warnings of the dangers inherent in poorly securing volatile chemicals at the strategic port. Not surprisingly, anger is growing among ordinary Lebanese who view the explosions through the prism of years of government corruption and incompetence. Many point to the blasts as the most dramatic and destructive legacy of decades of cronyism embedded in Lebanon’s sectarian system of government. Some indicators suggest the explosions could catalyze rejuvenated popular demands for change. Protests demanding the Lebanese system’s overthrow have resumed across the city. When the Lebanese justice minister visited a hard-hit neighborhood, she was met with demands for her resignation.

How has the international community responded?

Yacoubian: In his visit to Beirut Thursday, French President Macron echoed the demands for change, pledging France’s support for Lebanon but only if accompanied by deep reforms. The U.S. Embassy in Beirut announced that United States would provide $17 million in emergency assistance including food and medical supplies. Numerous other countries including Britain, Canada, Turkey, and Qatar are providing humanitarian assistance. Israel has also offered aid to Lebanon.

Abouaoun: So far, there is a great momentum to help Lebanon. In addition to the visit of the French president and his pledge to provide massive aid to Lebanon—contingent on serious reforms—most countries have declared that they will be sending humanitarian aid or teams. Some countries, like Tunisia, went even further to offer hosting some of the wounded for treatment.

However, this international effort could be temporary and reversible. First, many countries—where taxpayers weigh in on national decisions—are wary of Lebanon’s widespread corruption and will—and should—give assistance only to non-state actors in civil society, the private sector, or faith-based groups. Others might channel it though the intergovernmental organizations like U.N. agencies. Second, any significant economic and financial assistance will remain conditioned on a recalibration of Lebanon’s foreign policy and by the implementation of structural reforms. Short of this, Lebanon will only receive ephemeral humanitarian aid.