𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵 𝗗𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻 𝗟𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗼𝗻’𝘀 𝗛𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆

Financial & technological optimism vs. national sovereignty concerns

Lebanon just signed a national agreement to 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝟱𝟬,𝟬𝟬𝟬 𝗟𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗔𝗜, 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘂𝗱, 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗮𝗺𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗘𝗥𝗣/𝗚𝗥𝗣 𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝘀 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗳𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀, at no cost to participants, in partnership with local universities and a global tech provider, Oracle. Officially, this MoU is a capacity‑building framework, not a procurement or data access contract: no government data is shared, and no infrastructure outsourcing is part of the agreement, at least for now.

That’s according to the official text.

The political interpretations around it, however, especially concerns about digital sovereignty, reflect deeper anxieties about how future systems are built and governed. Those anxieties are real, and we should engage with them constructively, not reduce them to slogans or election-oriented polarizing news.

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗜 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝘁; with both optimism and critical clarity:

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲

• A large‑scale, nationwide skills pipeline in technologies that define economic competitiveness in the next decade.

• Collaboration with leading Lebanese universities & international entities to ensure broad access and relevance in the market.

• A stated focus on empowering Lebanese talent, public and private, to move Lebanon from a consumer of technology to a producer/innovator.

• Alignment with international technical standards that make these skills portable and valuable globally, allowing us to better “export” our services while keeping talent here, at home.

Those who know me know I’m all for advancement, but I check my blindspots often. And there are national concerns that have to be addressed, objectively, with no sectarian or political influence.

𝟭. 𝗪𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀?

The MoU states training is free for participants, but public disclosures haven’t clarified who pays whom, and under what financial terms.

𝟮. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗻?

A large pool of certified talent aligned with a specific technology stack will shape Lebanon’s digital architecture & ecosystem, and the downstream implications of that are worth understanding upfront. Training 50,000 humans ain’t cheap.

𝟯. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗹𝘆 𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻𝘁𝘆?

Minister Kamal Shehadeh has been clear that 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗲𝘅𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰‐𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗠𝗼𝗨. But that doesn’t yet answer how future systems (ERP/GRP, cloud services, government platforms) will be governed if they get built with these skills. Who governs our data? Where is it stored? Who has access?

𝟰. 𝗪𝗵𝗼 𝗱𝗼 𝘄𝗲 𝗼𝘄𝗲, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼 𝘄𝗲 𝗼𝘄𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺?

Let’s be real, no one here is Caritas.

Every partnership creates dependencies. Responsible leadership means mapping those dependencies before they harden into defaults, and avoiding compromising our national sovereignty and pride.

Knowing how our community may think, I want to clarify that these questions are not political. They are structural questions about agency, ownership, and governance; the very things that determine whether a digital future is Lebanese‑led, or simply Lebanese‑served.

We need to celebrate ambition, and we need to scrutinize the way forward.

If we focus on building talent without also shaping the rules of engagement around technology, then skills become a pipeline into someone else’s platform, not into sovereign capability.

I want to see breakthrough moments like this succeed. But success shouldn’t be measured by headlines alone. It should be measured by agency retained, systems we own, and institutions that can govern change, without compromising our sovereignty.

The real work starts now. Not in signing, but in how we govern, finance, and institutionalize what comes next.