If the Caravans stop coming to the Souk no amount of reshuffling and restructuring of the Souk will revive it.
So far most of the discussions I have seen involve the internal dynamics of the souk and the morality of its components.
The crisis in Lebanon has its roots in extreme reliance on the GCC together with a crisis of relations with it.
The repercussions of the political crisis with the GCC cannot be resolved internally.
This is the ransom we have to pay.
In particular the last graph of the collapse of deposits by non residents. Note the previous fluctuations, do they correlate with other “moments”? 
This of course needs to be supplemented by data about the fluctuations of investments and tourism as well as remittances from the GCC.
Not to forget that the GCC itself was going through a rough patch affecting such inflows to Lebanon.
Lebanon became a hostage and was cut off from its main economic partner largely for political reasons. The cost, including the opportunity cost, is difficult to estimate but it constitutes the ransom that the Lebanese economy had to bear.
Add to that the economic fallout from the war in Syria such as impact on exports, refugees and cost of Hizballah’s involvement probably financed by the Lebanese economy too.
This is not to absolve Lebanese politicians of corruption, or bankers of mismanagement but to add that political factors cannot be ignored when they prevent the coming of the caravans to the souk.
A flourishing souk at the intersection of caravan routes can prosper in spite of all the greed, corruption, opportunism and inefficiencies of its merchants. While a souk bypassed by the caravans will collapse even if it is run efficiently by the most honest merchants.
A major task of a country’s diplomacy is to maintain the flow of business and keep the caravans coming to the souk. Lebanese diplomacy did the opposite: it alienated the country from its main economic partners and made it a pariah to be sanctioned.
The other low point coincides with the 2016 crisis of relations with the GCC when Lebanon refused to condemn attack on Saudi embassy in Tehran.
Post Taif Lebanon, also known as Pax Syriana till 2005, had several major departures from the per-civil war system and broke all the rules based on the ideas best represented by Michel Chiha’s writings.
Very few of the new generation are familiar with Michel Chiha and it is worth visiting the website michelchiha.org to understand the system better. In my view he reflected the ideas of a whole generation and influenced policy long after his death in 1954.
The principles that post-Taif Lebanon were: a balanced budget or preferably in surplus, sound money with no restrictions or exchange controls, security and sovereignty depends on maintaining western protection and regional alliances; most importantly Freedom, liberty & openness.
*principles that were broken post-Taif.
The Chiha system of pre war Lebanon caused the prosperity of the 1950s & 60s by attracting the elites and intellectuals of the region fleeing wars and despotism.
The free and open society in Lebanon was a haven for people from southern Turkey post 1938; Palestine post 48; Syria post 49 & 63; Egypt 52 & 56; Iraq 1958 not forgetting Armenians, Greeks & Jews. That mixture created Beirut’s golden age.
And the Souk prospered with all the caravans stopping there. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for all the IMFs of the world to fix the Lebanese economy without taking these political factors in consideration.
