On 9 April 1933, a few weeks after Adolf Hitler’s nomination as Reich Chancellor, a group of communist activists tore down the German flag of the German general consulate in Beirut and wrote explicit slogans on its walls: “Down with Hitler, the tyrant, the executer of the German workers! The German workers and their heroic Communist Party shall live!”⁸

For a broader, left‐leaning spectrum, including not only the Syrian–Lebanese Communist Party but other non‐party‐affiliated workers, students, and intellectuals as well, opposition against fascism gradually shifted to the center of ideological and strategic debates.⁹

[…]

The threat of fascist coups in Europe, the formation of Popular Fronts in France and Spain, and [Fascist] preparations for an attack against Abyssinia in 1935 ever more highlighted the need to revise the [Communist] party’s isolationist strategy. In close contact with the Comintern and the French [Communist Party], the communist movement in Lebanon and Syria set up a Committee for the Popular Struggle in Defense of Ethiopia explicitly meant to raise public awareness and to create broader alliances against fascism in the Arab world itself.¹⁴

In addition to the publication of the clandestine newspaper Nidal al‐Shaʻb (People’s Struggle) and the takeover of the renowned monthly cultural magazine Al‐Duhur (Ages), the organization of strikes and manifestations extended the popular basis of its activities—and further shifted its political priorities to questions of Arab independence, national unity, and the struggle for Palestine.¹⁵

Internationally, the Seventh Congress of the Comintern, held in July–August 1935 in Moscow, marked a turning point for Communist strategies vis‐à‐vis Italian Fascism and German [Fascism], confirming the gradual revision of past tactics whose devastating consequences had become all too visible in the ultimate defeat of political opposition in [the Third Reich].

The proceedings of the conference and the speeches by representatives of the national communist parties highlighted these changes, drawing particular attention to the need to unite mainstream nationalist forces in an attempt to thwart further fascist successes. Summarizing recent developments in Syria and Lebanon, Yusuf Khattar al‐Hilu, the delegate of the Syrian Communist Party, outlined the menaces posed by several imperialist powers striving to extend their influence into the Arab world:

Italian Fascist propaganda has greatly increased in recent times. Each year Mussolini’s agents organize free trips to Italy for young Arabs. The station Radio Bari broadcasts Arabic‐language programs three times a week about “Italian–Arab friendship” and “fascist well‐being” in Italy. It is the same with German fascism. Hitler has purchased the largest bourgeois newspapers in Syria which every day are full of photographs and articles about Hitlerism, which they represent as the “saviour of the German people.” Nazi agents try to use the national hatred the Arab people have for French imperialism to obtain their fascist goals.¹⁶

The resulting strategy to confront [Fascism] echoed the dilemma of the communist movement under French mandate rule. The congress’s decision to form broad popular fronts in Europe and national fronts in the colonies further emphasized the national struggle of the colonized populations, shifting attention from local “reactionary” powers and social and political rights to imperialism and European fascist régimes. The [Fascist] invasion of Abyssinia in October 1935 gave credibility to these needs.

As in the case of Libya, Italy’s latest aggression illustrated the immediate dangers posed by European fascism. The struggle against fascism as a threat to independence increasingly served to mobilize popular support and helped link the [Communist Party] to mainstream nationalist currents. While larger sectors of the local population continued to voice fascination for the [German Reich], Italy’s brutal policies in Libya and its attack against Abyssinia had fostered the image of fascism as an imperialist power.

Notwithstanding significant efforts to ameliorate its standing in the Middle East, suspicion of [Fascist] ambitions was shared—as in Egypt, Palestine, and Iraq—by many in Lebanon and Syria.¹⁷

[…]

The [Fascist] advance against France in summer 1940 left the Levantine public in a state of shock. On 22 June 1940 the German–French armistice agreement was signed. Three days later, on 25 June, a similar agreement was concluded in Rome between Italy and France.

The agreed‐on conventions were intended to regulate France’s relations to the Axis and to set preliminary rules for cooperation and the administration of territories affected by the French defeat. Both armistice conventions called for the demobilization and disarmament of French forces not required for an immediate preservation of public order and territorial defence.²⁹

Despite the immediate influence of the Axis and the rule of Vichy forces in the mandates, opposition to rapprochements to the Axis and its agents had not completely ceased. Local communist circles were among the most outspoken objectors of the Axis’s growing influence. The publication of the clandestine newspaper Nidal al‐Shaʻb in the name of the party was part of their activities.³⁰

As a handwritten pamphlet consisting of a few pages, the paper provided one of the rare opportunities to voice uncensored criticism of the local government and its Axis partners. Demands for an amelioration of the economic and social conditions were linked to calls for neutrality of the mandates in the international conflict. Despite its explicit criticism of the Axis as an immediate threat and the most aggressive expression of imperialist rule, such a position did not imply concession to the Allied powers.

On the eve of the Iraqi–British conflict, in March 1941, the paper strongly criticized not only Axis ambitions in Africa and the Arab Middle East but British intentions as well, with its slogan “No British, no Germans, no Italians, but bread, freedom and independence!”³¹ Under current conditions, neither European power could count on sympathies among the local population. As imperialist states driven by shared interests in the region, they were no allies in the struggle for independence, political rights, and economic prosperity.

[…]

News of the Soviet army’s encirclement of Berlin had reached the Levantine public in the early evening of 24 April 1945. Soon after, large crowds took to the streets. People gathered spontaneously in Beirut and other Lebanese and Syrian cities. From a local perspective, the war against [the Western Axis] had effectively come to an end.

(Emphasis added.)

Quoting Harvey Henry Smith’s Area Handbook for Lebanon, page 299:

Upon the surrender of the Vichy […] troops in [West Asia] in July 1941, volunteers from the Troupes Spéciales du Levant were enlisted in the [Allies] and saw action in north Africa, Italy, and Southern France.

In June 1943 the [Allies] reconstituted units of the Troupes Spéciales du Levant, which then operated as part of the British forces in the Middle East. In 1945, as a result of continuing pressure by Lebanese leaders for control of their own forces, [Paris] turned over to them the Lebanese units of the Troupes Spéciales du Levant. These units totaled about 3,000 men and became the nucleus of the present Lebanese Army.

In 1942, these troops participated in the Battle of Bir Hakeim against the Wehrmacht.