Since 2019, the number of people attempting to flee Lebanon via irregular boat crossings has drastically increased. Driven by compounding political, economic and security crises, Lebanese citizens are now increasingly joining Syrian and Palestinian refugees attempting the sea crossing to Europe. 

As the Lebanese Armed Forces’ (LAF) consolidates its control over Lebanon’s borders, and with a new, reform-oriented government in place, now is the time to think more broadly about how security resources are allocated. While the international community has primarily focused its attention on reinforcing the LAF’s capabilities, there has been significantly less discussion about how the state may relieve the LAF of its non-military responsibilities as part of a wider shift towards improved security sector cooperation and long-term sectoral resilience.

One area for reform is Lebanon’s management of irregular maritime migration – attempts to cross to Europe in boats without the requisite travel documentation. With a new  reform-focused government in place, the country has an opportunity to craft a more sustainable national framework to address sea crossings as a humanitarian challenge – not solely as a security issue – managing this through a whole-of-government approach that includes the police, social ministries, and civil society organisations. Addressing the root causes of social problems that lead many to migrate must be seen as a priority, rather than further militarising migration governance.

The rising tide of desperation

Irregular maritime migration from Lebanon has surged in recent years – while only 200 individuals landed in Cyprus in 2019, by 2023 this figure had jumped to over 5,000. In the first half of 2024 alone, nearly 3,300 people attempted to leave Lebanon by boat. While there has been a ‘low but steady’ return of Syrian refugees following the collapse of the Assad regime, many factors still prevent a mass return to Syria. Sea crossings are continuing, and this includes many desperate Lebanese citizens, driven by overlapping crises in the country to seek a better life elsewhere, with a sense of hopelessness unlikely to change in the near term. In interviews conducted for the research this blog draws from, many see irregular boat migration as their only option, with land routes also presenting logistical and security risks.

A military stretched thin

In tandem with its role managing increasing security threats across the country, the LAF leads on managing irregular maritime migration from Lebanon. The armed forces are already stretched as they respond to threats on land: the LAF has frequently been deployed on the eastern border with Syria; in February, a further 1,500 troops were deployed along the southern border with Israel to reinforce the approximately 4,000 already stationed there. This is only about half the troops Lebanon agreed to deploy in the south as part of the US brokered ceasefire deal.

Alongside discussions about increasing military resources, Lebanon’s political transition offers an opportunity to strategically allocate security resources and ensure that the military is not overburdened with duties better suited to either the police or social ministries. With a new government in place and Joseph Aoun, the former LAF commander, as President, the country has a unique opportunity to shift its approach to both national and human security, and reviewing maritime migration governance falls under this pivot.

A security-first approach isn’t working

The prevailing ‘security-first’ approach to governing maritime migration frames boat crossings as a national security threat to Europe, rather than as an entrenched humanitarian issue. Treating migration as something to be militarily deterred misses the deeper political and economic forces that drive people to leave the country. Without a holistic political and socio-economic solution, people will continue to flee in the desperate search for a better life.

International donors have directed a large number of resources to bolster the capacity of the LAF to control borders. In May 2024, the EU earmarked €200 million to strengthen the LAF’s border management efforts,  including its capacity to oversee the maritime border and manage attempted boat crossings to Cyprus or Italy. Interviews for this research, however, revealed that the over-prioritisation of the army in foreign-funded security interventions comes at the expense of the wider Lebanese security sector. Other domestic agencies (namely the Internal Security Forces and the General Security Office) play a key role in internal safety and security but are less able to meet their mandates in a manner that complements the LAF’s activity because of asymmetrical resourcing, training and equipment challenges.

The dominance of security-first approaches has not only ignored the underlying drivers of migration, particularly economic factors; it has also obscured critical human rights concerns. With new internationally funded radars and boats, interceptions at sea may have increased, yet there is little oversight over what happens to migrants. Meanwhile, reports suggest that migrants can be detained or face deportations. Humanitarian actors working directly with affected Syrian and Lebanese communities also remain largely excluded from decision-making. To ensure a rights-based approach, internationally funded border security programmes should engage with these humanitarian actors in the consultation, design, implementation and monitoring of programmes.

A call for balance

The new government in Lebanon, led by President Aoun, is in a unique position to re-evaluate Lebanon’s security strategy. As the former commander of the LAF, he will have seen first-hand how the underfunding of Lebanon’s police and other civilian security bodies undermines their capacity to support the army. By developing a more balanced approach to migration that integrates human rights, legal protections, and a focus on the socio-economic drivers of migration, resources can be more effectively used.

Lebanon’s reform process needs a national security strategy that empowers law enforcement agencies to fulfil their mandates – an approach that would enhance border management while relieving the LAF of non-military responsibilities. This would free up military resources to focus on critical priorities such as establishing a monopoly of violence and a deterrent against Israel in the south of Lebanon, and working toward the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1701.  The President has already called for a comprehensive defence and security policy: as he moves forward with this, ensuring that maritime migration governance is included in a broader security recalibration is vital. If Lebanon can achieve this, it will not only improve maritime migration management but also build a more effective, balanced, and sustainable security sector for the years ahead.