سذاجة التوقعات اللبنانية لحماسة روسية سورية

مارس 9, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– يتوقع الكثير من متعاطي الشأن العام والسياسيين والإعلاميين اللبنانيين حماسة روسية وسورية في تلبية الطلبات اللبنانية، خصوصاً الآتية من رئاسة الجمهورية والفريق المساند للمقاومة، باعتبارهما حليفين، ويمكن رغم شلّ قدرة الدولة اللبنانية عن التعاطي مع الدولتين الروسية والسورية بلغة المصالح التي تحكم علاقات الدول، أن يتخيل هؤلاء أن تبقى الحماسة الروسية والسورية على قاعدة وهم وجود مصالح لكل من موسكو ودمشق عنوانها استعمال لبنان منصة لتعويم الدور والحضور، لأن التخيل اللبناني السائد لا يزال ينظر بعين الوهم نحو قوة واشنطن وقدرتها واعتبارها محور العالم وربما الكون، والنظر لمن يواجهونها وينتصرون عليها خلال السنوات التي مضت، كمجرد باحثين عن اعتراف أميركي بهم وبدورهم، متجاهلين وعاجزين عن الاقتناع بأن العالم قد تغير وأن المعادلات الجديدة التي تحكم العالم والمنطقة ليست كما يفترضون، وأن عليهم أن يستفيقوا من حلم ليلة صيف يعيشونه في استقبال الموفدين الأميركيين والاستماع إلى توجيهاتهم.

– كثير من هؤلاء يظن أن المبادرة الروسية لحل قضية النازحين تجمّدت بسبب الضغوط الأميركية والأوروبية، لربط العودة بالحل السياسي، لأن العودة ترتبط بإعادة الإعمار، والمال اللازم لها يملكه ويملك قراره الأميركيون والأوروبيون. وهذا يعني ضمنا تخيل سذاجة روسية سورية بطرح المبادرة، فالروس يعلمون قبل طرح مبادرتهم أن هناك مصالح عليا أميركية أوروبية بالسعي لتعطيل عودة النازحين وربطها بموافقتهم وشروطهم بعدما فقدوا أوراق الضغط العسكرية التي بنوا عليها آمالهم في رسم مستقبل سورية قبل ثماني سنوات، وهذا كان واضحاً بقوة قبل المبادرة، فهل فكر هؤلاء بطريقة أخرى لماذا طرحت المبادرة ووفقاً لأي حسابات ولماذا تجمّدت؟

– يؤكد الروس كما يؤكد السوريون أنهم يعتقدون بتباين يكبر تدريجياً بين المصالح الأميركية المحكومة بالحسابات الإسرائيلية أساساً، وحسابات كل من حلفاء واشنطن في لبنان والأردن وتركيا، الواقعين تحت ضغط ملف النازحين، وبنسبة كبيرة أيضاً أوروبا التي تعاني من ترددات السياسات الأميركية في المنطقة بسبب النازحين وملف الإرهاب الذي يهدد أمنها، والسياسات الأميركية لإذكاء التوترات بما في ذلك تعاملها مع العقوبات على إيران، وبنسبة معينة أيضاً دول الخليج ومصر التي تستشعر تقدم الحضور التركي على حسابها في سورية وعبر سورية في المنطقة، وتتحرّك موسكو ومعها بدرجة اقل دمشق على إيقاع ملاقاة هذه التغيرات تدريجاً وبمبادرات محسوبة ومدروسة، كان اولها السعي لاستقطاب تركيا خارج خطة الحرب الأميركية وقد حققت نتائج باهرة، بمعادلة العصا والجزرة، وليست روسيا ولا سورية جمعيات تخديم مجاني للملتحقين بالسياسات الأميركية لنيل إعجابهم بأنها ذات مبادرات خيرة.

– قوبلت المبادرة الروسية بتردد أوروبي وتركي وأردني، وهي الدول المعنية بملف النازحين، لحاجة كل من هذه الدول لاستخدام هذا الملف في حسابات خاصة، وبقي لبنان، وانتظرت موسكو ودعت دمشق للانتظار معها لسماع موقف لبناني رسمي كدولة ذات سيادة يقلقها هذا الملف بالاستعداد للسير قدماً وبقوة في ترجمة هذه المبادرة لجعل عودة النازحين من لبنان إلى سورية نموذجاً يحتذى في الملف برمته. وجوهر المبادرة هنا ليست بنودها، بل بقيام لجنة عليا روسية لبنانية سورية، فقوبلت بالتذاكي اللبناني، تحت شعار لجنة هنا ولجنة هناك، مراعاة للشروط الأميركية والخليجية في العلاقة بالدولة السورية، فتجمّد التعاون السوري، وتجمّد الروس عن السير بالمبادرة. وهذا سينسحب سورياً على ملفات كثيرة، فبقاء الموقف الأردني مثلاً تحت سقف أميركي وخليجي في التعامل مع الدولة السورية، لن يسهل الطلبات الأردنية بالقضايا الاقتصادية في العلاقة مع الدولة السورية، ويجب التذكير للذين نسوا أن الدولة السورية قابلت وهي في ذروة الاستهداف، وقبل أن تحقق ما حققت من انتصارات، الطلبات الرسمية الألمانية والفرنسية والإيطالية بتعاون مخابراتي بالرفض متمسكة بأولوية التعامل من دولة إلى دولة، وبعدها ينطلق التنسيق الفرعي أمنياً كان أم اقتصادياً، ولن تقابل الدولة السورية طلبات لبنانية أو اردنية بغير هذا الموقف، سواء بما يخص النازحين أو غير النازحين.

– يتصرّف كثير من اللبنانيين أن بمستطاع الدولة اللبنانية أن تضع فيتو على السلاح الروسي باستجابة مهينة ومذلة للتعليمات الأميركية، وهو ما لم تفعله دول أعضاء في الناتو مثل تركيا، ومن ثم أن تنتظر من الدولة الروسية تقديم الخدمات المجانية للبنان، بينما ما يفعله اللبنانيون، أو بعضهم السياسي، هو تعطيل سيادة الدولة وقرارها المستقل، وبيعه لأميركا وانتظار الإيجابيات من غير الأميركي، وخصوصاً من الذين يضعهم الأميركي على لائحة الأعداء كحال الدولتين الروسية والسورية. وهذه قمة السذاجة في العلاقات الدولية، وما لم يكن لبنان جاهزاً للتصرف بمنطق مصالحه وبقوة قرار مستقل في مقاربتها وتلمس موسكو ودمشق ذلك في مفردات حسية واضحة، لن يحصل لبنان على غير المجاملات التي تمتلئ بها مفردات الدبلوماسية والعلاقات الدولية.

Related Videos

Advertisements

سؤال برسم النواب الذين يريدون استرداد قرار الحرب

فبراير 14, 2019

ناصر قنديل

– سمعنا على مدى يومين عدداً من النواب يتحدثون عن معادلة قديمة جديدة في الحياة السياسية اللبنانية، عنوانها استرداد الدولة ما يسمّونه قرار الحرب، وباعتبار أنّ المقصود هو سلاح المقاومة، وليس في مفردات المقاومة الذهاب لسلم مع كيان الاحتلال كي نستعمل المصطلح الكامل الذي يقوله أصحابه وهو قرار الحرب والسلم، وبالعودة لقرار الحرب الذي يعتبر النواب ومعهم من خلفهم من قوى سياسية يفترض أنها تحسب كلامها ومعادلاتها وخطابها، من المهمّ بداية لفت النظر إلى أنّ أغلب المتحدّثين عنه، يربطون به قيام الدولة، وصولاً للفوز بخطط مكافحة الفساد، وهم يتساءلون باستغراب: «كيف يمكن لدولة لا تملك قرار الحرب والسلم فوق أرضها أن تتمكّن من الفوز في معركة مكافحة الفساد؟» مستنتجين أنها معركة سيادة الدولة التي ينفصل بعضها عن بعض. وما يعنيه الكلام بصورة مباشرة تشريعاً لفساد طالما لم تستردّ الدولة بنظرهم قرار الحرب.

– بالعودة إلى المعادلة نفسها، آملين بصدق أن نقرأ أو نسمع نقاشاً لما سنقوله، من أصحاب المعادلة ومسوّقيها، السؤال البسيط هو كيف يمكن إمساك الدولة بقرار الحرب، كي لا نقع في استعمال مصطلح مفخّخ يهدف لتظهير المقاومة كمغتصِب قرار الدولة بالحرب، والذي يستتبعه أصحاب المعادلة بالدعوة لسقف أدنى هو وضع سلاح المقاومة تحت إشراف الدولة، وسقفه الأعلى نزع هذا السلاح من يد المقاومة. وبالمنطق المصلحي البراغماتي وبعيداً عن مناقشة ما إذا كانت الدولة قادرة على القيام بدورها من جهة، وبالدور الذي تقوم به المقاومة من جهة أخرى، رغم التفاوت البنيوي بين الدولة والمقاومة والذي ينعكس حكماً على أهلية قيام أيّ منهما بدور الآخر، سنسير بمنطق أصحاب المعادلة تسهيلاً للنقاش وتبسيطاً لعرض الوقائع والمعادلات المنطقية عندما تكون الخلفية وطنية صادقة، وليست مجرد كيد سياسي، أو تحقيق رغبات خارجية يشكل مجرد تبنّيها طعناً بوطنية أصحابها وادّعائهم منطلقات سيادية لمعادلاتهم.

– مصلحياً، لا مصلحة للدولة ومكوّناتها التي تمثلها القوى السياسية، خصوصاً الممثلة في المجلس النيابي والحكومة، منح جيش الاحتلال الذي يتربّص بلبنان وحدوده البرية والمائية وينتهك أجواءه، ومن ورائه قيادته السياسية، أيّ مكسب من النقاش اللبناني والقرار اللبناني المتصل بإدارة الدفاع عن لبنان، طالما خلفيات المشاركين بالنقاش والقرار وطنية خالصة، وإذا كان المطلوب وقوف المقاومة عملياً وراء الجيش اللبناني كقوة دفاعية احتياطية في مواجهة أي عدوان، لا تقدّمها عليه. وهذا هو المفهوم العملي لما يسمّونه إمساك الدولة بقرار الحرب. فالمنطقي ليس البدء بالخطوة الأولى من عند المقاومة بمطالبتها بإعلان خضوعها لقرار الدولة في الحرب، وهو إعلان لن يفعل سوى إشعار كيان الاحتلال بتحقيق ربح مجاني، يتمثل بإشعار المقاومة بأنها محاصرة في داخل بلدها، ودفع الضغوط على لبنان والمقاومة للمزيد من التصعيد أملاً بتحقيق المزيد من القيود على المقاومة، بينما عندما تكون الخطوة الأولى عملياً وليس إعلامياً من طرف الدولة، فيصير مفعولها عكسياً على معنويات كيان الاحتلال وثقته بجدوى الضغوط، ومثله كلّ مَن يساند هذا الكيان، خصوصاً ما يمثله الموقف الأميركي ومن ورائه بعض الغرب والعرب.

– عملياً وواقعياً، يسهل على أيّ طرف تحرّكه الحسابات الوطنية فقط، أن يبدأ بالسؤال عن حقيقة وجود احتلال لأرض لبنانية ووجود تهديدات ونيات عدوانية إسرائيلية. وعندما يكون الجواب إيجابياً، يصير السؤال البديهي طالما أنّ الدولة هي المعنية بتحرير الأرض المحتلة وردّ الاعتداءات ووقف الانتهاكات للسيادة اللبنانية براً وبحراً وجواً، كيف يمكن للدولة فعل ذلك، والسير بالخطوات العملية التي تترجم تمكين الدولة من تحقيق هذا الهدف؟ وإذا تساهلنا مع أصحاب معادلة إمساك الدولة بقرار الحرب وقبلنا تأجيل البحث باستراتيجية وطنية للتحرير، وقد فشلت كلّ الرهانات على إنجازه دبلوماسياً منذ العام 2000، كما فشلت بعد القرار 1701 الذي نص على تكليف الأمم المتحدة بإنهاء قضية الأراضي اللبنانية المحتلة، ونكتفي مؤقتاً، بالتساؤل: ماذا يجب أن تفعل الدولة لمنع الانتهاكات وردّ العدوان، طالما أنّ الجهد الدبلوماسي اللبناني الضروري والمفيد ليس كافياً بدليل مواصلة كيان الاحتلال بناء الجدار الإسمنتي على الأراضي اللبنانية ولتهديد ثروة لبنان النفطية في المياه الإقليمية للبنان وانتهاك مستدام ومتمادٍ لأجوائه؟

– الجواب البسيط هو أن تقوم الدولة بامتلاك الأسلحة التي تمكّن جيشها من التصدّي للانتهاكات وردّ العدوان، وجعل جيشها قادراً على تولي المهمة، وعندما يقف مساندو خيار المقاومة لمنع ذلك، مواجهتهم باعتبار أنهم يحولون دون إمساك الدولة بحقها السيادي وهو قرار الحرب، والذي يحصل فعلياً أنّ أهل المقاومة وقادتها هم الذين يطالبون الدولة بفعل ذلك، ويعرضون استعدادهم للمساهمة في تمكين الدولة من الحصول على الأسلحة التي يحتاجها الجيش اللبناني لتتمكّن من وقف الانتهاكات للأجواء اللبنانية والاعتداءات على المياه والأراضي اللبنانية، وهي ببساطة عملية أيضاً معلومة جداً، شبكة دفاع جوي وصواريخ أرض أرض متقدّمة، وصواريخ أرض بحر فعّالة، وشبكة رادارات متقدّمة لرصد تحرّكات جيش الاحتلال براً وبحراً وجواً، ويعلم دعاة إمساك قرار الحرب، أنّ المترتّب طبيعياً على تمكين الجيش من القيام بهذه المهمة، سيجعل المقاومة تلقائياً قوة احتياطية تساند الجيش اللبناني عند الحاجة، وتقف وراءه في مواجهة قرار الحرب «الإسرائيلي» عندما يصير تدخّل المقاومة ضرورة، ويجب وفقاً لنظرية هؤلاء اعتبار هذا إنجازاً كبيراً في سعيهم إذا كانت خلفياتهم وطنية فقط.

– السؤال الطبيعي هو لماذا تقشعر أبدان هؤلاء كلما جرى الحديث عن امتلاك لبنان شبكة دفاع جوي؟ ولماذا يصيبهم الذعر إذا سمعوا بمصادر دولية مستعدّة لتزويد الجيش اللبناني بما يحتاجه في مواجهة «إسرائيل»؟ وهم يعلمون أنهم عندما يقولون إنّ الجيش اللبناني وحده يتولى مسؤولية الدفاع عن لبنان، يتحدثون عن إلقاء عبء مواقفهم السياسية الغامضة، على الجيش الذي يفترض بهم عندما يتحدثون عن مسؤوليته الدفاعية أن يوفروا له وسائل هذا الدفاع، وروسيا متاحة، وربما فرنسا، والمال الخليجي يفترض أن يتحمّس لتسديد متوجبات شراء هذا السلاح طالما أنّ التنافس مع إيران يحرّك الأوروبي والخليجي، واللبنانيون سمعوا عن هبة الثلاثة مليارات دولار من السعودية للبنان لتسليح الجيش، وعن صفقة مع فرنسا لهذا الغرض، قبل سحب العرض والصفقة، فلمَ لا يذهب هؤلاء إلى السعودية وفرنسا ليفقأوا حصرمة في عيوننا، بجهوزيتهم السيادية ودعم حلفائهم لها، ولبنان بالمناسبة بدون قوى مقاومة في الحكم كان أشدّ شجاعة في فعل ذلك قبل نصف قرن عندما قصد فرنسا لشراء شبكة صواريخ كروتال للدفاع الجوي، من دون أن تقيم حكوماته المتهمة بالتبعية والمطعون بوطنيتها، قياساً بحكومات اليوم، أيّ حساب لغضب واشنطن وغير واشنطن، فلماذا لا يفعل السياديون ذلك؟

– ببساطة هذه خارطة طريق سهلة وواضحة للإمساك بقرار الحرب، وهي خارطة طريق تشجعها المقاومة، ولا تحتاج سجالاً داخلياً، ولا تمنح كيان الاحتلال أيّ مكسب معنوي أو مادي، بل بالعكس يكفي حدوث ذلك ليكتشف حماة كيان الاحتلال أنّ المزيد من الضغوط على لبنان ستخلق نتائج عكسية على كيان الاحتلال وتُعقّد قدرته على العدوان، فهل من وطني سيادي لا يفرحه ذلك ويتفادى السجال الاستفزازي الداخلي الذي يُفرح العدو، إنْ كانت حساباته وطنية، ولا نقول فقط هذه المرة؟

Related Videos

Related Articles

Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on Hezbollah Martyr’s Day

 

Local Editor

The speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered during the commemoration of Martyr’s Day hosted by the party in Beirut and other areas 10-11-2018

I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Satan. In the name of Allah the Most Gracious the Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and prayers and peace be upon our Master and Prophet, the Seal of the Prophets, Abi al-Qassim Mohammad bin Abdullah and his good and pure household and his good and chosen companions and all the prophets and messengers.

Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you all. I welcome you all and thank you for your attendance in numerous areas. I extend my greetings especially to our dear and beloved families and the families of the martyrs who are with us today to commemorate Martyr’s Day, Hezbollah’s Martyr’s Day, which is in fact their martyr. In this address, I would like to speak, first, about the occasion and then a little about the situation in the region, especially concerning the “Israeli” issue. It is more relevant on Martyr’s Day. The last point will tackle the local situation, specifically the issue of the government and its formation.

On November 11, 1982, which is now known to everyone, the prince of the self-sacrificing martyrs and the one who launched the era of self-sacrificing martyrdom operations, Ahmad Kassir, carried out his qualitative and historic operation. He targeted the headquarters of the “Israeli” military governor in Tyre. This headquarters managed and led the occupation forces in that area. The operation killed more than 120 “Israeli” officers and soldiers, including senior generals in the army and the “Israeli” security services. All that was said at the time was that “Israel” declared a three-day mourning period and that the building was completely destroyed. This self-sacrificing martyrdom operation shook the [“Israeli”] entity and charted a decisive course for the resistance, the resistance of our people. It included a group of parties, forces and resistance factions. Soon it produced a great victory and a great liberation. It started from Beirut to the suburbs to Mount Lebanon, to parts of western Bekaa and Rashaya. In 1985, the liberation reached Saida, Tyre, Nabatiyeh and the rest of western Bekaa and Rashaya, all the way to the occupied border strip. The path of the resistance was decisive and powerful. It accomplished within a few years, in less than three years, a great liberation. This was in fact the first victory. This was made by the blood of the martyrs. 11/11 was the great and powerful stone of foundation on this crucial course. We chose this day to commemorate Hezbollah’s martyr? Today, we honor all our martyred brothers and sisters, adults and children, the martyred leaders, the self-sacrificing martyrs, Mujahedeen and all those martyred along various fronts that we are fighting on. Convoys of martyrs continue to flow, score victories and contribute to victories on every front we go to.

These martyrs gave us a life of dignity, but through martyrdom received something far greater. On the Day of Resurrection, God Almighty has prepared for these martyrs blessings, graces and an eternal and immortal bliss that no eye has seen, no ear has heard, and no heart of man has imagined. But the martyrs have an important quality. Brothers and sisters as you well know there will be a reckoning on the Day of Resurrection. The Day of the great Resurrection is when all the people are raised back to life, brought together in the Gathering Place [Sahraa’ al-Mahshar] and judged. This day will come after decades, centuries, millennia. God knows.  This is from the unseen [al-Ghaib] which God has kept for Himself.

Only God knows how long it takes between the death of Man and the approaching of the Hour. From the time that I die to the approaching of the Hour, God knows how long it will last, decades, centuries or millennia. When a person dies where does he go? Death is not dying. Death is the separation of the soul from the body. The body decays in the dust. Where does the soul go? The heavenly religions answered this question. Philosophers and thinkers answered this question. There are multiple answers even within one religion and one doctrine. But allow me to say in the presence of the families of the martyrs that what is certain and unquestionable is that when we read the Quran – the immortal book of Islam – we will find that martyrs do not die. When their souls separate from their bodies during martyrdom, the martyrs move to life to what is called the world of Isthmus [Al-Barzakh].

They are alive. God Almighty says in clear verses that do not need a lot of interpretation: {And never think of those who have been killed in the cause of Allah as dead. Rather, they are alive}. We are not talking about the Day of Judgment now. All the people are alive. All people will return to life. Life on the Day of Resurrection does not belong to the martyrs. We are talking about their lives after their martyrdom until the approaching of the Hour. {They are alive with their Lord, receiving provision, rejoicing in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His bounty, and they receive good tidings about those [to be martyred] after them who have not yet joined them – that there will be no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve. They receive good tidings of favor from Allah and bounty and [of the fact] that Allah does not allow the reward of believers to be lost.}

There is a clear assumption in these verses, which is that these living martyrs are in that new world. They live by the grace of Allah and the mercy of Allah. Here the presumption is that they receive good tidings about those who are yet to join them in martyrdom; their friends, brothers and loved ones who are still living in this world. The martyrs who moved to that new world receive good tidings about those who are still in this world and will join them because they are continuing their path. In our culture, the families of the martyrs rest assured about the fate of their sons  and loved ones. Who are they with? You know in Lebanon, there are many expatriates and young people who travel abroad for work. For example, they head to Africa and stay with families who are usually from their town. They are usually relatives or the likes. The father knows where his son is staying, with his uncle, with his relatives, with his loyal friends. So he rests assured. He does not worry. But who do our martyred sons and brothers stay with? With their Lord, receiving provision. God knows what this moral, spiritual and materialistic provision is. God knows best because He kept it limitless. Receiving provision. He did not specify what kind of provision these martyrs would receive. Hence, they headed to that world and gave us this world. They left us victories, freedom, liberation, power and glory. They also left us their wills. Today, the liberation of land and prisoners, the dignity, the honor, the pride and security our country enjoys is thanks to the sacrifices of all the martyrs, the martyrs of Hezbollah, the martyrs of the Amal movement, the martyrs of the national and Palestinian resistance factions, the martyrs of the Lebanese army and the security forces and the martyred men, women and children of our people who have been killed in many of the enemy’s massacres. This pure blood gave us what we are enjoying now. They left in us their wills. The families of the martyrs preserved these wills through their patience and compassion, taking pride in their martyrs, staying steadfast on the path of the martyrs and offering more martyrs. The vast majority of the families of our martyrs gave the rest of their children to the resistance, to this path and all the arenas that we were and continue to operate in. Many of these young men are brothers or sons of martyrs. They hail from the families of martyrs. We have more than 135 families who have provided more than one martyr to our resistance. Some of these families provided more than three martyrs. On this occasion, it is our moral and brotherly duty to mention a dear and great father who passed away a few days ago, Hajj Abdul Hussain Hodroj, the father of three martyrs. This family is the first family in our march to offer three martyrs. It gave three martyrs in the 1980s consecutively.

This family and the rest of the martyrs’ families has always been an example and a model of patience and taking pride in their martyrs. On this occasion, I offer my condolences to every family member of the late Hajj Abdul Hussain Hodroj and tell them: your father has followed his sons who are waiting for him. The martyrs are our guarantee. They are a guarantee in the life of this world and our guarantee in the Hereafter. Their brothers and fellow fighters who remained on this path until we got to where we are now preserved the wills of the martyrs.

From here on I will discuss the [aforementioned] points.

The first point: With the blessing of this blood and the golden equation of the army, the people and the resistance, today we protect our country, our honor and the riches of our country. To be clear, it is primarily because of the missile capabilities that the resistance possesses today. The US and the West forbid the Lebanese army from possessing such capabilities. It is forbidden by several countries to have capabilities that can create balance, deterrence or fear within the enemy.

Today, the central force in Lebanon is this missile capability available to the resistance. Because of the equation and the missile capability, the enemy does not dare attack Lebanon. Since the end of the war in 2006 until today, the “Israelis” do not dare attack Lebanon, which was the scene of “Israeli” air raids. Several years ago, the enemy launched a raid along the border in the vicinity of Jinta. [Hezbollah] responded to the operation and the enemy was made to understand that any aggression will inevitably be followed by a response.

This formula is protecting the security and airspace [of Lebanon] as well as the villages and towns that were being bombed since 1948. Therefore, we find that the “Israeli” enemy, especially lately, is trying to focus a lot on the subject of missile power and capabilities available to the resistance. This is being done through intimidation, diplomatic pressure, using the Americans and even some European countries and by threats, claiming that if this is not addressed, [“Israel”] will address it.

I brought a text published a few days ago. Netanyahu is proudly addressing the “Israeli” people and is not ashamed about the Arabs and the Arab countries he went to, not even from the Arab countries that he is supposed to go to. He does not really recognize them and does not recognize the Arabs. What is the logic behind what he was saying? A few days ago, he said in front of the members of the Likud faction – unfortunately we have to quote his words: “Power is the most important [component] of foreign policy. ‘Occupation’ is baloney. There were huge countries that have occupied and transferred populations and no one talks about them. Power changes everything and it changes our policies vis-a-vis Arab states.” Netanyahu forcefully imposed himself on weak, frightened, and cowardly Arab governments. What is his problem with Lebanon and with the resistance? His problem is that there is power here. He cannot live with power. He cannot bear the presence of a power that sets limits for his ambitions, his projects and threats and all that he sees behind the borders. Therefore, he wants to take away this power while seeking more elements of power.

Netanyahu and the “Israeli” enemy that has nuclear weapons, the strongest air force in the region and a large army cannot bear the amount of missiles present in Lebanon. Why? Because they hinder and prevent the “Israeli” enemy from acting as it pleases.

Today on Martyr’s Day, I want to reaffirm that we are holding onto Lebanon’s strength, which lies in the golden equation: the army, the people and the resistance. We are holding on to the weapons of the resistance and all the resistance’s missiles. Neither intimidation nor threats, not even sanctions, which they bet on a lot, will change this. If we have to sell our homes to protect the resistance’s missile capabilities, we will do that. But threats and intimidation will not do anything.

I ask Lebanon that it must put up with this level of diplomatic pressure because giving in – if we assume it happens – means that Lebanon will be open to “Israeli” aggression at any time, any moment. It might not be a war but rather repeated attacks the way it used to be between the wars, starting in 1948 onto 2006. As for us, I am not saying anything new if I told the “Israelis” who are talking about a change in the rules of engagement or a change in the equation towards Lebanon: we will inevitably respond to any attack on Lebanon, any airstrike on Lebanon, any bombing on Lebanon. It will not be accepted that the enemy return to violate Lebanon as it did in the past decades. This is the first point.

The second point: In the context of the conflict with the enemy, over the past few weeks we have witnessed an onslaught of open normalization of ties and public visits by Zionist officials to some Gulf States. We condemn any form of normalizing of ties with the “Israeli” enemy regardless of the origin, government, state, leader, party or popular class. We condemn it and call upon all honorable people in the world to condemn it. The dangers of normalizing of ties with the enemy are clear. Normalizing of ties with the enemy means, at the very least, recognizing the enemy and recognizing the legitimacy of its violations against Palestine and the Islamic and Christian holy sites. It means being silent, justifying and overlooking the oppression and all the crimes it committed against the Palestinian people and the people of the region. It means fixating the “Israeli” entity, its remainder and its occupation. That is why everyone should condemn it. This goes above and beyond national interests. Nowadays, in order not to upset a certain state because of local issues, I remain quiet; you remain quiet, he remains quiet. Normalization of ties [with “Israel”] in the Arab and Islamic world will be a normal and ordinary matter. This should be rejected.

The humane, religious, moral, national, and legal duty is to speak out and condemn every form and step of normalization of ties [with “Israel”] in the Arab and Islamic world. This battle must be revived again and fought again. The battle of normalization of ties does not need missiles or weapons or money. This is the responsibility of the elites, scholars, young people on social networking sites, the media and anyone with the ability to express a stance. We will be asked about this on the Day of Resurrection. In this context, I would also like to say, especially to the Palestinian people, not to be saddened by these normalization steps. Why? Good might come from it. Let us look at the other side of the issue. What has been happening in secret is now happening in public. This is not a new thing.

What is happening now in public puts an end to the official Arab hypocrisy and lifts all the masks of deceit – of deceitful people and hypocrites who have portrayed for decades to the Palestinian people as well as the Arab and Islamic nation that their position is different. When masks fall and real faces are revealed, the lines are redrawn. Who is here and who is there? The camps will be clearly defined. This is one of the components of victory in the battle.

Deceitful people, hypocrites and liars who sell illusions and waste time here and there are the ones delaying victory and the growth of true awareness on which the resistance and revolutionary movements are based. Our true hope and your true hope is in our people and in some countries that are still resilient in their position.

Yes, we find hope when we look at the people of Gaza, who are taking part in the marches of return every week, especially on Fridays, and who are martyred and wounded every day. You find hope when millions of people in Gaza refuse to submit, give up, be silent and fall. Hope is in the West Bank, which is expressing its stance, too. Its mujahedeen, including young men and women come out to fire a shot, throw a bomb or launch a stabbing operation. A few days ago, the head of the Shabak spoke about thwarting an operation.

The operations that succeed are the act of resistance. The operations that are thwarted express the will of the resistance. When he says that this year alone, the “Israeli” security services have foiled 480 operations in the West Bank, this means that there are 480 acts of resistance and wills of resistance fighters that have been foiled. The reason they were foiled is another discussion. This reflects the real spirit in the West Bank. The smart money is on these people.

In the face of waves of normalization, we must take pride in our people in Syria’s occupied Arab Golan Heights. They have been under occupation since 1967 but they always refused normalization. They refuse to submit and turn the Golan into an “Israeli” territory. The “Israeli” enemy itself admitted to the great achievement the people in the Golan achieved a few days ago. The “Israelis” planned, prepared and exerted all efforts for the success of the municipal and local elections in the towns of the Golan. But the residents of the Golan foiled them. What does this express? If the residents of the Golan did not have Arab genuineness, commitment to the cause and a sincere sense of national belonging, they would have told you: all those Arabs are welcoming Netanyahu. The “Israeli” minister of culture prays at the Sheikh Zayed Mosque in the Emirates. So, why would I want to be beaten, imprisoned, arrested and confront the “Israeli” enemy? Let us normalize ties like most of the Arabs. Our people in Palestine, in the Golan and along the Arab and Islamic world are not like that.

In the face of normalization, we have many bright models from Tunisia to many Arab countries to Lebanon. Yesterday, the media reported about a boy aged 8-9 years participating in an international chess competition in Spain. This means it required preparation, hard work and exhaustion from him, his parents and the official relevant parties in Lebanon. The Lebanese official mission’s stance there is appreciated. Unfortunately, I have to say this in Lebanese fashion for Muslims in the Arab world to hear. We must say that the Lebanese Christian boy, Mark Abu Deeb, committed to not playing with the “Israeli” player. In the end, if it comes down to the “Israeli” player and I in the competition, I will not play with him. I will forfeit because he is an enemy. That is hope. Hope is in this youth, young men and people. It is not in the rulers who have long been downtrodden. The good thing that is happening is that the leaves of mulberries and the masks of hypocrisy and deceit are falling before the Arab people.

In Iran, Iranian athletes during international competitions express this stance. When a young man who has been working hard for years reach the finals or the semi-finals to compete with an “Israeli”, he forfeits to express this stance. Hope is here. This battle should be fought. On Martyr’s Day, we call again on the dear people in our Arab and Islamic nation to fight this war, return to it and not to consider it a marginal fight. It is a vital, basic and real battle to the “Israelis”. In Bahrain, despite the repression and cruelty, some demonstrations were held at night and others during the day yesterday in most Bahraini towns. The demonstrations were denouncing Netanyahu or any “Israeli” official’s visit to Bahrain. Those are our people. These are the people of our nation who we can bet on with all seriousness.

Trump and the US officials speak frankly. One of the objectives of the sanctions on Iran is to change its position on the Palestinian cause and to stop its support for resistance movements in the region. This is a declared objectives and one of the demands. But the Islamic Republic has not done as some Arab regimes do and say: I am under American and economic pressure. And then give up its principles, its beliefs, its commitment, and its faith.

Syria, which is still in the midst of a global war, is still steadfast. Day after day, truths are being revealed. When I see Netanyahu in any Arab capital or watch any “Israeli” official in any Arab capital, Syria and Damascus immediately come to my mind. If the Syrian leadership, the Syrian army, the Syrian people and Syria’s allies did not hold up in this great battle and this state and regime fell, it is clear that within a few weeks or a few months we would have seen Netanyahu in Damascus because most of this opposition is open and loyal “Israel”. We would have also seen the “Israeli” Minister of Culture in the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus the way she was at the Sheikh Zayed Mosque. But Syria did not change its position despite all the Arab injustice it has suffered over the difficult and harsh years.

The third point: A month ago, the world was occupied with the horrific crime committed at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul against the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The whole world was surprised by the details of the crime, which included kidnapping, killing, cutting up [the body], dissolving it in acid, and disposing of what was left into the sewer. The world has the right to be surprised, shocked and to condemn. Of course many are trying to see how this matter can be divided. In the Arab world, no one was surprised and shocked. No one condemned it. On the contrary, they showed solidarity. In the Arab world, cutting with a saw or a sword and dissolving in acid is a normal thing. People have the right to be surprised and astonished and to condemn. But it is strange how this world was not shocked by the scenes of the heinous and daily massacres in Yemen and its conscience was not moved by the Yemeni children. The United Nations itself says that hundreds of children now – 400 or 500 – hundreds of children are at risk of dying every hour in Yemen.

The United Nations and not us is talking about 14 million threatened with famine, and the number may have risen. There are hundreds of thousands of Yemenis threatened with cholera and threatened with death. The world was silent. Now, the world is beginning to speak. Now, the Americans are beginning to speak. The Europeans are beginning to speak. Of course, there is still Islamic and Arab silence, except for some countries. In general, there is silence and no one dares to speak. How big the sword, money, gold and submission are in the Arab world! Do you want to know why we got to this situation in the Arab world? This Arab stance towards what is happening in Yemen explains it to you. We are now faced with a new situation. I do not want to condemn only but also to say that we are faced with a new situation. The Khashoggi incident might have created some kind of transformation. However, it is good to hear American and European statements today as well as the United Nations calling for a halt to the fighting and an end to the war. This is worth pausing a little on it. It can be serious. This is probable. And it can be a trick and wasting time.

It might be a serious move. But this possibility is not caused by the killing of Khashoggi. It is not because now the world grew a conscience. The world has been seeing the children, the massacres, the bombings and the daily killing for four years. Why did the world now say that this war should stop? This needs a little bit of contemplating. It is simply because the Yemenis resisted in this battle. This is a great lesson. They were steadfast in this battle and the Saudi-Emirati-US coalition failed in this war. If this possibility was serious, then its purpose is to save the Saudis and the Emiratis more than it is to save the Yemenis. This coalition has failed in occupying the north and failed in managing the south. It is failing in Yemen in the north and in the south. They lost in the north because of the steadfastness and the military failure. In the south, it was because of the popular movement and the administrative and political failure. Today, America wants to save its allies in the region. Trump and the American camp are not heart broken because of the [Yemeni] children. But we care about the results. We care that the war and the fighting to stop. Interestingly, he says that it will stop within a month. But why within a month? Why not immediately? Why not directly? This is another point our brothers in Yemen are paying attention to it very well or they should pay attention to very well. It is as if the Americans are telling the Saudi/Emirati-led coalition: you have a month. Get your affairs in order. See what you can do with the formula and what you can achieve. After a month, the world will tell you to stop. Therefore, it is strange and interesting that at the time when American and Western calls to stop the war are issued, we witness an increase in the months-long escalation in Yemen; the existing escalation now along the west coast and in Hodeida. This is if it was a serious probability. If the was a deceit to deceive the Yemenis and take them away from their weapons, fronts and their positions. They should not be fooled because usually when fighters feel that the battle is coming to an end, their mettle diminishes and weakens. It is over. They might be negligent and slow down. This is an existing experience.

On Martyr’s Day and while we take pride in the martyrs of our brothers and our people in Yemen, I tell our brothers there: Be patient and steadfast. Hold on to your weapons, fronts and positions. Today, you are closer to victory than ever before. The victory of the Yemenis lies in remaining in their land and preventing this barbaric aggression from fulfilling any of its objectives. They are steadfast and are creating a military miracle. There is military legend taking place daily along the western coast and the various Yemeni battlefronts.

I conclude with a final point with regard to the regional situation. We condemned the verdict issued against Sheikh Ali Salman, may God protect him and some of his brethren. What is worth noting, brothers and sisters, is that the court in Bahrain declared His Eminence innocent over the charge of spying for Qatar. There was no communication in the whole recording. At the time, Qatar was attempting to mediate and coordinate with the Saudis to find a solution at the beginning of the Yemen crisis. At that time, the Qataris were active in all arenas. So, the court ruled on is innocence and the public prosecution appealed. What was the verdict? A life sentence! Mashalla, from innocence to life imprisonment. It is understandable if it was from innocence to four years or five years or ten years. There might be legal grounds. But to life imprisonment, this confirms every day that the judiciary in Bahrain and in the likes of Bahrain is a real repressive authority. Sheikh Salman’s prison term was supposed to end soon and he would have gone to his family and people. But this regime insists on detaining him and detaining scholars, leaders, figures and thousands of Bahraini youth. It does so to force the people to surrender. It will neither give up its national stance, its demand for reform or its rights, whatever the sacrifice. It has forcefully proven this.

We move to the Lebanese concern. At the beginning, we spoke a lot in Fosha [Classical Arabic]. Now, we will speak in colloquial Arabic [Ammiya]. Probably in colloquial Arabic the Lebanese would understand each other better. First of all, I would like to apologize to the non-Lebanese viewers because they will be watching me mention names of sects. This is because the composition of our country, unfortunately, is a sectarian one. We live under this sectarian system and we have to speak this language because this is the reality we have in the country.

Regarding the subject of the government, I will talk with clarity, transparency and openness, but of course respecting everybody.

I am going to divide this subject into three sections. The first section includes the facts. The second section is based on facts and includes some remarks. And the third section is our position at the current stage.

Regarding the facts, why? Five months ago until today, we have not spoken about the subject of the government. We have not stated what we have done, facilitated, assisted,  demand? We have not spoken about anything. We worked on everything away from the media. We used to always stress on rushing to form a government. We emphasized that it should be a national unity government and that the results of the elections should be taken into consideration.

 

Of course, the atmosphere of the whole country implies that Hezbollah is disrupting and delaying. Through the facts and remarks as well as the position towards the current complication – the old new complication – we determine our position.

After the assigning the Prime Minister-designate to form a government, discussions were made. We were always part of these discussions. A large part of these discussions took place with our brothers in the Amal movement and us. Another part was with us separately or with the Amal movement separately.

The number of the representatives in the government was discussed. There were voices that demanded the government of 32 to allow the two oppressed and disadvantaged Lebanese components, which are the Alawite Muslims and the minorities from the Christians, to be represented. If the government were made of 32 representatives, we would be lifting a historical injustice from these two components. Lebanon does not need more than eight or ten, or twelve ministers to represent all its parties. 14 ministers are enough. Why raise it 24 or 30 for everyone to be represented? In the same context, let the 30 be 32 for everyone to be represented.

His Excellency the President of the Republic was in agreement. His Excellency the House Speaker was in agreement. The main, basic forces in the country were in agreement. The PM-designate did not agree. He said this embarrasses him a lot, and that he cannot take responsibility, and so on. We will continue to hear this language. What I can bear, what I am capable of and what I’m not. Following extensive discussions, it turns out that lifting the historical injustice from the Alawite component and the minorities component from the Christians was an objective that can be done, yet not in this government but in the coming government. But this is a noble goal and a national goal that should be fought for as long as the system in Lebanon is a sectarian one. When the system ceases to be sectarian, everyone will have a chance to be represented in the government because they enter it due to their qualifications or political affiliation and not their sectarian affiliations.

We overcame this subject. If we wanted to obstruct and complicate, we could have said since the first day: We are not going to participate and we do not accept. We want 32 ministers. We want a Alawite and Christian minorities. Focus on this. Is anyone preventing us from doing so? Like now, is anyone preventing us from doing so?  No one is preventing us. But we have overcome that. This is the first thing.

The second thing: Here I am talking about facilitations. They brought up the subject of ministerial quotas.

Allow me to mention names. The Lebanese Forces have 15 deputies. Since day one, they demanded five ministers. The Progressive Socialist Party has nine deputies. Since day one, they demanded three ministers and wanted all the Druze representation. The Future Movement wanted all the Sunni representation and has only 20 deputies. They wanted all the Sunni representation and have no problem exchanging a Sunni with a Christian with the President of the Republic. The Amal movement and Hezbollah have 30 deputies. They accepted six ministers. Who has been facilitating the process since day one and who has been complicating it? Who? If I am saying something untrue, let some one say it is incorrect. We accepted six. I would like to apologize to Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri. We learn lessons from him. It seems that humility in this country is wrong. Today, I am one of the people who is saying that humility in this country is wrong. Since day one, we should have demanded ten ministers according to the criteria of the Lebanese forces, the Socialist Party and the Future Movement. We should have demanded ten ministers because we have 30 deputies. We have Shiite, Sunni and Christian ministers. In both blocs, we have Christians and Sunnis. We could have demanded 10 ministers and brought is down to eight but not to six ministers. But we, Hezbollah and the Amal movement, did not behave in this manner. We considered the situation in the country, the economic and financial situation and the difficulties. Let us stick together. Let us address it and solve it. So we accepted six. As Amal and Hezbollah, this is not our size. This is not our size parliament. This is not our electoral size. This is not our political size. This is not the size of our preferential votes. Now, I would like to count. We can count again. When we count, we can start from the beginning. There will no longer be any complications. We will start discussions from the beginning.

The third point regarding the facts: You know that we are always committed to our allies. The Nationalist Party had the right to be represented in previous governments. They did not accept it to be represented. Take it from your share. So we took it from our share. One day, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, at the last minute, agreed to reduce one minister from the Shiite quota and increase one minister for the Sunni quota so that one of our allies Minister Faisal Karami can be represented.

Well, closing on these allies? This is their natural right.

We now come naturally to demand representation for our allies. We do not abandon our allies. Of course when there is a right, when there is one criterion that must be followed, we stick to the criteria.

Among our allies, we also mention our ally and friend Emir (Prince) Talal Arslan. He is part of the Strong Lebanon bloc. The Strong Lebanon bloc vowed to address this issue. It will get him his right. We have always been supportive. The Nationalist Party has three deputies. They said no since the criteria is four or five deputies. So those who have three deputies do not take a minister. We abide by the criteria. When there are no more criteria, we will talk about the Nationalist Party. We have Christian allies and Christina friends that we allied with during the parliamentary elections in Zhale and Jbeil. It was also said that there are two criteria to the new government. The first is that it is a national unity government. The second is that the results of the elections should be taken into consideration. Let the results of the elections be taken into consideration. There are our Sunni brothers, the Sunni deputies. We told them that if these criteria apply to everyone and the results of the elections were taken into consideration, where is the problem? We will take it.

The fourth point, which is the representation of the independent Sunni deputies, is detailed as follows.  They are the March 8 deputies, the March 8 Sunnis or as the Future Movement call them Hezbollah’s Sunnis. I and everyone in Hezbollah are proud to have them as brothers. We are proud that the Sunnis belong to us and we to them. We take pride in this. We lift our heads high and take pride in every Sunni sister or brother form March 8. We respect everybody. Since 2005, the stance of the Sunnis of March 8 was nationalist, firm and resilient. Their stance prevented turning the political conflict in Lebanon into a sectarian war. At that time, others at home and abroad wanted a sectarian war in Lebanon. The greatest achievement the Sunnis of March 8, including their political and civil stances, their politicians, scholars, sheikhs, parties, forces, blocs, youths did was prevented turning the conflict in Lebanon to a Sunni-Shiite conflict and to a sectarian conflict. This is what the US, “Israel” and Saudi as well as some at home wanted. Even the March 14 was hoping for a Sunni-Shiite conflict in Lebanon. March 8 Sunnis were always alongside the resistance, the Palestinian cause and the sanctities of this nation. March 8 Sunnis are not a charge. They are not something shameful. They are not insult. This is a real masquerade.

These deputies wanted to be represented. They met with each other, made calls, formed a consultation meeting and spoke to us. They said, brother, we demand to be represented. We represent a large segment of the Sunni sect. That is true. You want us to talk about numbers, we can. We can talk about anything. They demanded two ministers. We told them that you are six deputies. It is true that your size is big and real, but two ministers is hard. They said, okay brother, one minister. We told them to demand and we will help them. O, Lebanese, senior officials, leaders, ministers, patriarchs, sheikhs, muftis, bishops and everyone listen. Since day one of talking about the formation of the government, we spoke to the relevant people. We spoke to the PM-designate regarding the independent Sunni deputies, the independent Sunnis, the March 8 Sunnis. Call them whatever you want. We demanded that they be represented with a minister in the government. Since day one. Whenever, we spoke with each other or sent messages to each other, we always emphasized on this demand as being a real and serious demand. Frankly speaking, we told the concerned parties that we are not demanding this for the sake of demanding. So that later we will tell our brothers, the six deputies, that we demanded, sought and spoke, but we could not do anything. This is not our position. We are serious. If you are talking about a national unity government, then they are a great segment of the Lebanese people. They are a great segment of the Sunni sect. At the very least, their right is to be represented by one minister. But it was never given importance. We cannot, we can. Some might have gotten confused and thought that Hezbollah is talking for the sake of talking. Now, I am talking about Hezbollah. In the end, we take the names, go to Baabda, issue a decree and the government will be formed. They will object for two or three days. Everything will then work out. This is how it used to be done. I believe this is humiliating. This is humiliating. It is disrespecting people. It is not acknowledging people. Not acknowledging what they represent and who they represent. This is humiliating and is unacceptable anywhere. I will come back to this a little later. After five months of negotiations wit the Lebanese Forces and the Progressive Socialist Party, the complication was solved. The Christian-Druze complication was solved. This is great, regardless of the results. They called us. The PM-designate called us and said I want the names of your ministers, the three ministers. Even when he called and asked for the names, I did not know the portfolios. Am I not a leader in Hezbollah? I swear I did not know what portfolios will be given to the ministers of Amal and Hezbollah. There is the Ministry of Health where they made a big deal out of it. What are the other two ministries? Our brothers in the Amal movement, apart from the Finance Ministry, what are they taking? We do not know. Those philosophers who say we are ruling the country, controlling it and running it. We still do not know what are portfolios are.  I am responsible. To the martyrs’ families and Hezbollah: before anyone, I am responsible because I was trying to be a decent person more than I should. We told him, we won’t give you the names until you solve the issue of the independent Sunni minister. He said there is no Sunni minister. Brother, how is there no Sunni minister? He said there is none. There are no names. Do whatever you want, but you will not get the names. We don not give complements. We do not talk for the sake of talking. We do not deceive. We have been clear since day one. Brother, there was confusion during the first month and the second month. A month before they solved the Christian-Druze complication, we clearly demanded that the brothers, the independent Sunni deputies, be represented by a minister. If this is not addressed, we will not move on.

Practically, the formation has stopped. The PM-designate went to Paris. The situation in Lebanon is as chaotic as it was in 2005. There is still sectarian incitement between the Sunnis and the Shiites. We can still hear all the nonsense we used to hear in 2005.

These are the facts.

The second part which is basing on these facts: all what has been said about an fabricated complication, an unexpected complication, an emergency complication, some even said that Hezbollah let its rabbits loose are not true. I will not say more than this. It is not true. The deputies have been talking about this for more than five months. We have been talking about this and demanding with them. Others and us. But now, we are talking about ourselves. It is not true. Some media outlets called it a Christian-Druze-Sunni complication. The PM-designate and the other side do not recognize the existence of a Sunni complication because they do not recognize the other side in the first place. Otherwise, this subject would have present since day one. All those who sent me letters saying it is new, an emergency or fabricated, I tell them it is not new, an emergency or fabricated. It has been there since day one. I tell you there is something – because we too are decent people. Some considered that we committed a tactical mistake. I do not think we committed a tactical mistake. The tactical mistake, however, is that you have been talking in closed meetings and you did not mention this in the media. We simply were talking behind closed door with the PM-designate and telling him: Your Excellency, you initiate. Send for the deputies and sit with them. Agree with them. Whatever you agree with them will work. Just, you start the initiative. We did not resort to the media in order not to portray that Hezbollah is imposing this on the PM-designate. And so that it would not be turned into a battle of defiance or a battle of defeat. It is not a tactical mistake because we want the government to be formed and every person takes his right. This is the reason. Otherwise, we could have gone to the media, what is stopping us? We are not afraid to talk to the media. We are not afraid of America, “Israel”, Saudi Arabia or the dollar and the Arabic sword. We wanted to solve the issue wisely and in the best way and for the PM-designate to accommodate everyone and be a national leader. We told him that we were serious and we will not abandon our allies. This is one point.

The second point is based on the facts that I spoke about. Some said that Hezbollah’s goal from this matter and siding with the Sunni deputies is to prevent the President of the Republic and the Free Patriotic Movement from having 11 ministers in the government. This is nonsense. Now, I tell you. Let the president and the Free Patriotic Movement take 11, 12 or 15 ministers. We do not have a problem. They are our strategic and tactical allies. When we supported the demand of the Sunni deputies in ministerial representation, we did not say to take it from the president’s share. We did not say from the 11 ministers. We are demanding from the PM-designate to give from his share and not the share of the president. If later he agrees with the president that they take it from the president’s share, then that is his business. We never asked for it in an internal meeting. I will tell you more than this. Since day one, we told the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) with utmost seriousness that we are not asking of the movement or the president anything regarding this subject. This matter is with the PM-designate.

How can someone reach the realization that Hezbollah does not want the president and the Free Patriotic Movement to get 11 ministers? Their desire is to have 11 or 12.

Our relation with His Excellency the President is excellent and flawless. We disagree. We have always disagreed on details with regards to Lebanese politics.

But our alliance and our relationship is above all this. They are trying to employ this problem to cause a conflict between Mr. President and Hezbollah or between the FPM and Hezbollah.

The third point: since day one, it appeared that we will not give the names. Therefore, the formation process stopped. ‘Iran this, Iran that.’ This is an Iranian-American conflict. I thought this was Hezbollah’s government, and I am disrupting Hezbollah’s government. All of you are saying this is the government of Hezbollah. Iran is disrupting the government of Hezbollah!

There is a level of absurdity in the country. Before the sanctions, Hezbollah is rushing to form a government because of the sanctions. Now, when we showed solidarity with our Sunni brothers, Hezbollah is disrupting the government formation because of the sanctions. Brother, stick to one opinion. This one or that one.

Also Syria. Now, it appears that President Bashar al-Assad is also interfering. He ignored the situations east of the Euphrates, in Idlib, the reconstruction of Syria and the political solution to work on the Lebanese government.

I would like to assure you that neither Iran nor Syria has any relation with the subject. This is it. There are independent Sunni deputies. March 8 represent a very large segment of the Lebanese and the honorable Sunnis in Lebanon. They have the right to demand a minister. We stand by them.

Do not talk include Iran or an American-Iranian-Syrian conflict or any of this nonsense. I will set formalities aside and mention names. I would like to address Mr. Walid Jumblatt and to the brothers in the Progressive Socialist Party because of the following:

The first point: Iran wants to punish you for delaying the formation of the government. Where did you get this? What is your evidence? During the five months you and the Lebanese Forces were arguing and arguing. As Iran demanded the formation of the government and is punishing Lebanon for delaying it!

Syrian President Assad is interfering! The Syrians did not talk to us and did not ask us for anything. So far, they have not spoken to us or asked us for anything even though we talk to each other on a daily basis. There is communication between us every day.

So this is your reading. Your antennas have caught this. Fix your antennas, Walid. They are not fixed.

Of course, I maintain respect. Look. You have been delaying the formation of the government for four months. Four months debating – three ministers, two ministers, three ministers – until you found the solution.

As a friend, I would have accepted you talking about the delay in the past four months, but now no. Now, you do not have the right to about us delaying or obstructing the formation of the government or about the regional and economic situations. You can start counting from the day we refused to give the names of our minister. You obstructed for four months.

But now you have to calm down a bit and wait and see where this subject will go.

I will also address the Lebanese Forces. You are the complication. You were the complication. As if the Lebanese Forces had nothing to do with the battle that was fought in Lebanon through the media outlets, politics, social media, universities and insults. And they say that the complication is the Sunni complication. You have debated for five months. It is your right. I am not saying if you were wrong or right. You have the right to demand your rights. But for five months you disrupted the country. Did we say anything? Did anyone from Hezbollah say that the Lebanese Forces disrupting the country, the Socialist Party disrupting, the country or the Future Movement disrupting the country? W e did not open our mouth. We waited and waited. Just because we showed solidarity with our brothers, you opened fire and say Hezbollah, Iran and Syria are disrupting! Is this fair? What country is this? You do not have the right.

The Lebanese Forces must wait five months. If Walid must wait four months, they should count five months. After five months, you will have the right to speak. Five months from now, every word you say on this subject is an attack on a Lebanese segment.

One of the remarks that was raised and said is that Hezbollah is hardening its position because it wants to kick out the prime minister. This is not true. We have been cooperating with him since day one. I mentioned to you the subject of the 32 ministers, the Alawite, the Assyrian, the Nationalist Party, our Christian friends, etc. we do not want to overthrow him. On the contrary, we want him to form the government. Let him come and form a government he heads. We have no problem with this issue, but to give everyone the right.

This is the last part and we will conclude.

Our position is as follows:

We agree that what is raised is to form a national unity government and taking the results of the elections into account. The criteria are the one we disagree on. Let someone tell me what the criterion was the government going to be formed on and issue decrees. We submitted the names a few days ago.

Is the criterion for every four deputies one minister or is it for every five deputies one minister? What is the criterion? The Lebanese forces were asking for five ministers and they took four ministers. They have 15 deputies. Amal and us have 30 deputies and we took six ministers. We have the right to eight ministers if this is the criterion.

The Future Movement has 20 deputies. It takes all 20. The PM-designate with five ministers take 20. We are 30. Where is the unified criterion? There is no unified criterion. He is telling us that there should be a unified criterion and there isn’t one!

You are debating with me whether those six deputies belong to a bloc or not. They represent a huge segment. What was presented is that the results of the elections will be taken into account. The six deputies should be represented by the results of the elections – their results. I would like to add something here today. These six deputies no longer represent their voters. They represent the Sunnis of March 8. They represent all these people from the south to the north, who participated in the elections and supported the lists. Some of the lists passed and others did not. But they did not change their affiliations or their political line.

Today, the six deputies are not only six MPs representing those who specifically elected them. They represent this political line. The language we hear – that we do not accept a minister from March 8 in the government – is rejected. It is a language of isolation and exclusion. We refused isolation and exclusion.

We refused and there is no need to speak in public. In secret and in the inner sessions, we were not with anyone to be excluded or eliminated. We were even honest with our most bitter opponents when we were talking about a national unity government.

There is no national logic, no moral logic, no legal logic, no political logic, no logic of national interest, when someone in Lebanon says that the March 8 Sunnis are not allowed to be represented in this formation. On what basis are they not allowed? If they are not allowed, then let us talk from the starting point openly. Let us talk from the beginning and again because there is no more national unity government, no election results and no criteria.

If the subject became according to discretion that is each one will go back to his political force, representation and presence and impose condition, let us, then, go back to the starting point. Let us start from the beginning.

These MPs are asking for their rights and their representation. We have to stand by their side and support what they represent and who they represent. We stood by them and we will stand by them. Let every Lebanese hear. We will remain with them a year, two years and 1000 years until the end.

We are not the kind to give up on our allies. We do not abandon our allies when there is logic and right. When an ally asks for something that is not rightfully his, we discuss with them. But when an ally, who is a friend and a brother, asks you for something that is rightfully his, we do not abandon him. This is not us. And you must know us by now through all this long experience. As we seek to help you, you should also help us.

We are not a party to the negotiations there about this complexity. The solution to the problem is with by the Prime Minister-designate. Solve it with him.

Yesterday, I met with the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement. Of course Mr. President assigned him to do so. Can you do anything? I told him: we are not asking from the President anything. And we are not asking anything from you. Mr. President is the father of all and he assigned him. You are trying to find solutions to this subject. Excellent. We support that and anyone who is seeking to address this subject. We are not asking you anything. We are not part of the negotiations. Let me go back to the subject of the quota and the 11 ministers. No one should talk to Hezbollah and negotiate with it. The decision is with the brothers, the six independent Sunni deputies. Negotiate with them. Talk to them. Discuss with them. Be fair to them. Whatever they accept, we are on board. We do not accept or reject. It is not our business. They are asking for their rights. They are our allies and we stand with them. Hezbollah stands with them.

The issue for us, first and foremost, is moral. But the narrative that we gathered the Sunnis so we can use them to fight. To Walid Bek and others, if we wanted to disrupt the government in Lebanon, we do not need to hide behind our Sunni brothers. We have courage, ability, presence, clarity and transparency. I say it on television. If we wanted to disrupt the government and do not agree on the formation of the government, we do not hide behind anyone. But we want the government. Because we wanted a government, we were modest. We are still humble and lenient even if it was on our expense and the expense of our allies. We spoke in the closed rooms to help solve it and not challenge.

Now, we do not want to challenge anyone. We do not want to get into political tension with anyone. We do not want to get into a media debate with anyone. We do not want to bring together sheikhs and scholars to write a statement and say malicious hands. And we do not want to use any rhetoric. We have been like this since 2005. I would like to tell the PM-designate: If you really wanted to form a government and help this country, you should assume your responsibilities. This way causing sectarian incitement and sectarianism will not lead to a result. Don’t you know us? Since 2005, this rhetoric has not done anything. It only causes tension in the country and the street. But does it change our stance? Does it affect our will, convictions and commitments? Never. Say what you wish. You can disrupt, destroy and sabotage. Then later they tell you it is because of the economic and financial situations. Weren’t there economic and financial situations five months ago? Why did you negotiate for five months? This portfolio, this number, this minister, etc. And we used to tell you about the country and the economic and financial situations.

When we were done with that issue and we were demanding the rights of these deputies, suddenly the economic and financial situation cannot take it any longer. Aren’t you loyal to Lebanon? We are not loyal. We are mercenaries and agents. You are the loyal ones to Lebanon. Go ahead, you have to solve the matter. Give them one minister. Respect them and agree with them. Form a government. And see how you will save the economic and financial situation. Whether the government will save the economic and financial situation or not, we will talk about that later, God willing, when the government is formed. Are we heading to a salvation government or are there going to be new looting projects in the country? We will get to that and talk about it.

Now, I will summarize regarding the government. We do not need to repeat and explain. To us, it is their right and we stand by their side. We are not using them to fight. Never. If someone asked whether the fate of the country depends on the decision of one of the six deputies, I tell them yes. It is their right. We as Hezbollah when the six MPs call us or send a delegation and tell us ‘you may give the names of your ministers to the PM-designate’, then we will.

With all affection and love, I have a lot of things in my heart I want to talk about. I will not talk about the today. God willing, we will not have to speak about them. We do not want conflict, tension or escalation. We do not want to bring things back to the start, to zero. This is all with regard to the subject. It is not regional, international or local. No one is hiding behind anyone. It is their right. Negotiate with them. Speak to them. And respect them. Whatever decision they make, we will commit to it.

On Martyr’s Day, we are committed to this matter. This is our course, our thought, our history and our loyalty. We pledge to our righteous and pure martyrs that, God willing, we will continue their path and achieve their goals whatever the sacrifices. Peace and Allah’s mercy and blessings be upon you.

Source: Hezbollah Media Relations, Translated by website team

البعد الإقليمي في تعقيد ولادة الحكومة

ناصر قنديل

– يستصعب اللبنانيون على اختلاف مشاربهم تصديق أن تكون اسباب تعقيد الحكومة محلية، ليس فقط لأنهم لا يثقون بلبنانية الخلفيات المحرّكة للقوى السياسية، ولا لأنهم أحياناً يرغبون بالتفكير بأسباب تخفيفية لقادتهم في ما يخطئون فيه باعتبار الأزمات فوق طاقتهم، أو لأنهم اعتادوا في كثير من الأزمات السابقة أن الحلول لا تتم بابتكار مخارج غير مألوفة بل بقبول ما لم يكن مقبولاً، وما كان ممكنا قبوله من قبل وتجنيبهم عذاب الانتظار وعقاب التعقيد، وتأتي كلمة السر من مكان ما في الخارج فتحل العقد بسحر ساحر، بل أيضاً لأنهم لا يتخيّلون أن أحداً من السياسيين لا يدرك حجم المخاطر المحيطة بالبلد اقتصادياً وسياسياً، والكلام صار علنياً عن درجة الخطر، أو أنهم يدركون ذلك ويمعنون في اللعب على حافة الهاوية والهاوية لم تعد بعيدة، لكنها إذا ما انزلقت القدم إليها ستكون سحيقة جداً.

– في حوار بين صديقين لدودين ينتمي كل منهما لفريق سياسي، حول الأسباب الإقليمية للتعقيد الحكومي، قال أحدهما للآخر، صحيح أنه ليست لدينا الوقائع التي تتيح تفسير التعقيد بأسباب إقليمية، لكن توقيت تصعيد حزب الله ووقوفه خلف عقدة لا تستحق منع قيام حكومة، بلغة عالية السقف، لا يمكن فهمه إلا كرسالة للخارج حول ربط مصير كل القرارات الخاصة بلبنان بموافقته وإلا فلا قرارات لها قيمة مهما كان حجم القوى السياسية والمواقع الدستورية المتفقة عليها، ما لم يوافق عليها حزب الله، ومن ورائه ضمناً إيران، وهذه رسالة ربما تحتاجها إيران في سياق التجاذب الدائر بينها وبين أميركا، والتي تشكل العقوبات الأميركية أحد وجوهها، لكن المنطقة كلها تشكل مسرحاً لها في المواجهة والتفاوض والرسائل التفاوضية.

– أجاب الصديق اللدود صديقه بالقول تعال لنتساءل من خلال ما نعرفه عن تاريخ المواجهة والتفاوض بين كل من سورية وإيران مع أميركا، والخبرة المتراكمة لدى كلتيهما من وحي هذا التاريخ، وهل يمكن تخيل أن تتوقع إيران وسورية أن تعطيل الحكومة في لبنان يعادل عند الأميركي معركته الاستراتيجية مع إيران حول دورها في المنطقة، ومعركته مع سورية حول مستقبل الحل السياسي ومدى الأمن الإسرائيلي. والسؤال ماذا ستخسر أميركا من تعطيل الحكومة في لبنان، بل السؤال ماذا ستكسب وهي تسميها حكومة حزب الله، وتعتبر رئيس الجمهورية وفريقه حلفاء لحزب الله، وتعرف أن الحكومة في أسوأ ظروف تشكيلها ستقدم الغطاء السياسي لسلاح حزب الله، وتفرض تحول المعركة على السلاح من معركة مع حزب ينقسم من حوله اللبنانيون بلا حكومة تجمعهم، إلى معركة واجهتها الدولة اللبنانية وحكومتها؟

– تابع الصديق اللدود لصديقه يقول ماذا لو أخذنا الفرضية المقابلة، أن واشنطن خلال الشهور الماضية قامت بالإيحاء لحلفائها بأن لا حاجة للسرعة في تشكيل الحكومة، فبالغوا بطرح الشروط وطلب الحصص المضخمة، لأن واشنطن كانت في ذروة الاندفاعة نحو صفقة القرن ووهم إيجاد الشريك الفلسطيني فيها لإعلان الحلف الخليجي الإسرائيلي بوجه إيران. وبالتوازي كان الرهان على العصا الإسرائيلية لضرب التمركز العسكري لإيران وحزب الله في سورية تمهيداً للتفاوض مع روسيا حول شروط الحل السوري بدونهما. ولا يمكن في هذا المناخ أن تهدي إيران حكومتين، واحدة في لبنان والثانية في العراق تستكملان الربط بين مفاصل الجغرافيا الممتدة من إيران إلى ساحل المتوسط، وبعدما تراجعت حظوظ الرهانين، تحلحلت العقد التي كانت، لكن ظهر مستجد يطال البحث الدولي بمستقبل السعودية وفي المضمون إضافة لقضية مقتل جمال الخاشقجي، الفشل السعودي في كل الجبهات، وها هو اشتعال حرب اليمن يتزامن مع تعطيل من نوع مختلف لحكومتي لبنان والعراق، كأن السعودية تريد الإطمئنان لوضعها عند الدول الغربية، عبر رسالة تقول إن الأميركي سيعاني في العراق والأوروبي سيعاني من موجات نزوح السوريين من لبنان ما لم يتم الحفاظ على مكانة السعودية ودورها وحجمها وأولاً وأخيراً نظام الحكم فيها.

– لم يجب المتحدث الأول برد على صديقه، بل طرح سؤالاً، فقال له، ومتى تعتقد أن الأمور ستفرج، فقال له الصديق اللدود لدينا موعدان، الأول نهاية الشهر كموعد معلن أميركياً لوقف الحرب في اليمن سيكشف مسار العلاقة الأميركية السعودية، والثاني في نهاية السنة يتصل بنهاية المهلة المقررة لانعقاد اللجنة الدستورية للحل السياسي في سورية. فعاد الصديق لسؤال صديقه، هل تعتقد أن رفض الرئيس سعد الحريري لتمثيل سنة الثامن من آذار سيتبدل؟ فأجابه، هل تعتقد أن الرئيس الحريري جادّ في كلامه أنه يرى في الأمر تحدياً مصيرياً؟ تخيّل لو أنه قام بتمثيلهم منذ البداية ودلني على نوع الخسارة التي ستلحق به؟

Related Articles

بعد كلام السيّد: المعاملة بالمثل بين رئاسة الجمهورية ورئاسة الحكومة

نوفمبر 12, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– خلال الشهور التي أعقبت تسمية الرئيس المكلف بتشكيل الحكومة سعد الحريري تعطّل تشكيل الحكومة لشهور بسبب واضح تكشفه الحلحلة التي تمّت لعقدتي تمثيل كل من حزب القوات اللبنانية والحزب التقدمي الاشتراكي، حيث تراجع الاشتراكي عن مطلب غير محق ومضخّم بنيل ثلاثة مقاعد، وتراجعت القوات عن مطلب شديد المبالغة في التضخم نحو مكسب مضخم بدرجة نسبية لكن برضا شريك التمثيل في الطائفة الذي يمثله التيار الوطني الحر وبتنازل عن منصب نائب رئيس الحكومة من قبل رئيس الجمهورية، فبقيت القوات تحتل بـ15 نائباً 4 مقاعد وزارية وصار الاشتراكي ممثلاً بوزيرين. وهذا معناه عملياً تمثيل 24 نائباً بستة مقاعد وزارية، ومعيار التمثيل يكون هنا هو وزير لكل أربعة نواب، لكن رئيس الحكومة الذي قاتل بكل قواه لرفع نسبة تمثيل حلفائه وسعى لتحصيل مطالبهم الشديدة التضخم، لم يمتنع ولا منع حلفاءه من توجيه الاتهام مراراً خلال شهور التعطيل، لرئيس الجمهورية بالسعي للنيل من صلاحيات رئيس الحكومة، كما لم يمتنع ولا منع حلفاءه من رفع متاريس طائفية في قلب هذا الاتهام جامعاً رؤساء الحكومات السابقين ومستصدراً منهم بيانات داعمة لما أسماه معركة الصلاحيات، ومن دون التردد في إقحام دار الفتوى في هذه المعركة المفتعلة.

– بالمقابل بقي رئيس الجمهورية حريصاً على تأكيد احترامه لصلاحيات رئيس الحكومة كشريك كامل في تشكيل الحكومة، وكصاحب الحق الوحيد بعرض التشكيلة الحكومية مقابل حق رئيس الجمهورية بالاعتراض وطلب إدخال التعديلات عليها. وفي ذروة دفاع رئيس الجمهورية عن محاولات مكشوفة للنيل من صلاحياته وتحويله إلى مجرد بريد رسمي لإعلان تشكيلة رئيس الحكومة لحكومته، لم يستنفر رئيس الجمهورية حلفاءه ولا زجّ بالمرجعيات الدينية في معركة محقة هي الدفاع عن صلاحيات رئيس الجمهورية، كشريك كامل في تشكيل الحكومة وفقاً للدستور الذي خرج من اتفاق الطائف، وفي ذروة اندفاع رئيس الحكومة لتحصيل ما ليس محقاً لحلفائه، تعامل رئيس الجمهورية بلغة الاحتواء بدلاً من المواجهة، وأظهر حرصه على تدوير الزوايا فتولى حلحلة عقدة الحزب الاشتراكي، بما لم يكن رئيس الحكومة راضياً عن نتيجته، وتولى التنازل عن منصب نائب رئيس الحكومة لحساب القوات اللبنانية من حصته، ورئيس الحكومة يضغط خلال كل هذه الفترة على فريق رئيس الجمهورية لتقديم التنازلات لحساب حلفائه، بما لا تخوّلهم مقاعدهم النيابية بنيله.

– خلال الأيام القليلة الماضية ظهرت صعوبة ولادة الحكومة من دون تمثيل النواب السنة الذين يمثلون ثلث ناخبي طائفتهم ويحتلون ثلث مقاعدها النيابية، ويحق لهم ثلث مقاعدها الوزارية، ويرفض رئيس الحكومة منحهم مقعداً واحداً بدلاً من حقهم بمقعدين، ويشنّ عليهم حملة ظالمة ويطلق عليهم أوصافاً لا تليق برئاسة الحكومة، ولا بزعامة وطنية، يفترض أنها تحترم إرادة الشعب الذي يمنح النواب مقاعدهم في العملية الديمقراطية ومنه تستمدّ عبر مجلس النواب كل حكومة شرعيتها الدستورية، ومعها رئيسها، ورغم ذلك حاول رئيس الجمهورية أن يمون على حلفائه عبر ضغط نفسي ومعنوي وأدبي، بإعلان تضامنه مع رئيس الحكومة ورفض التسليم بحق النواب السنة، وتوصيف تمسك حزب الله بتمثيلهم خطأ تكتيكياً يصيب الاستراتيجية الوطنية.

– لأن رئيس الجمهورية فعل كل ما فعله في السابق لتسهيل ولادة الحكومة، وحاول أن يضغط للتسهيل، ولكنه وجد موقفاً لا مجال للتراجع فيه لدى حزب الله بعد كلام السيد حسن نصرالله، وصار أمام معادلة استعصاء فهو معنيّ من الموقع ذاته بالسعي لتذليل العقدة بغض النظر عن رغبته بكيفية تذليلها، وقد بات لذلك طريق واحد يعرف الرئيس أنه ليس السعي للضغط على حزب الله للتراجع عندما يكون مقتنعاً بأنه يقوم بعمل وطني، كما كان الحال يوم جمّد حزب الله تشكيل الحكومة الأولى للرئيس سعد الحريري شهوراً بانتظار توافق الحريري مع رئيس التيار الوطني الحر جبران باسيل عام 2009، وكما كان الحال يوم تحمّل حزب الله الاتهامات بتعطيل الانتخابات الرئاسية والتسبّب بالفراغ الرئاسي ليقينه بأحقية العماد ميشال عون بالرئاسة. وهو اليوم بلسان السيد نصرالله، يعلم أن الإجحاف السياسي بحق فريق الثامن من آذار في التشكيلة الحكومة بالمقارنة مع تمثيل الرابع عشر من آذار لا يمكن تبريره إلا بالضعف وليس بالتواضع. وحزب الله ليس ضعيفاً ليقبل بتمثيل فريقه بسبعة وزراء مقابل إثني عشر وزيراً لقوى الرابع عشر من آذار، وهما بحجم نيابي واحد، فإذا كان المعيار المعتمد وفقاً لتمثيل القوات والاشتراكي هو وزير لكل أربعة نواب، فلذلك نتيجة أولى أن يكون لتيار رئيس الحكومة خمسة وزراء فقط بدلاً من ستة، والفارق كافٍ لحل مشكلة تمثيل سنة الثامن من آذار، ونتيجة ثانية هي نيل فريق الثامن من آذار وفقاً للمعيار ذاته، لكن بالمقابل يرتضي فريق الثامن من آذار بتواضع، أن يطبق عليه معيار مزدوج بحيث يكون لكل 4 نواب من 14 آذار وزير ولكل ستة نواب من 8 آذار وزير، لأنه إذا طالب بالمعيار ذاته لتمثيل قوى الرابع عشر من آذار مقابل 45 نائباً يمثلهم فستكون حصته 11 عشر وزيراً كما هي حصة الرابع عشر من آذار، بينما هو يرتضي التمثيل بـ8 وزراء فقط إذا تم تحصيل مقعد وزاري للنواب السنة في اللقاء التشاوري.

– المعاملة بالمثل مع رئيس الحكومة تستدعي من رئيس الجمهورية مطالبته بالتنازل عن مقعد من طائفته ليحل المشكلة، علماً أن هذا المقعد حق ثابت، يريد رئيس الحكومة وضع اليد عليه بغير حق، بعدما لبّى رئيس الجمهورية طلب رئيس الحكومة بمنح مقعد غير مستحق من طائفته لحساب القوات اللبنانية وفوقه صفة نائب رئيس الحكومة، تحت عنوان التعاون لتسهيل ولادة الحكومة. وعسى ألا يقبل رئيس الحكومة بالتمني ليفتح باب تشكيل الحكومة من جديد، وفقاً لمعادلة التمثيل بمعيار واحد لأنه الأمثل والأكثر استقراراً وفقاً لكلام رئيس الجمهورية المتكرر، فإما حكومة بـ 36 وزير لتتسع لـ11 وزيراً لكل من 8 و14 آذار وتكون حصة التيار الوطني الحر وتكتله بـ 7 وزراء، وفقاً لمعيار وزير لكل 4 نواب، ووزير لكل من حزب الكتائب وتكتل الرئيس نجيب ميقاتي إذا رغبا وإلا تؤول حصتهما بوزير لكل من رئيس الجمهورية ورئيس الحكومة إضافة لـ 5 وزراء محسومين لرئيس الجمهورية. وهكذا تتمثل الأقليات ويتمثل العلويون، أو حكومة بـ 30 وزيراً وفقاً لمعيار وزير لكل خمسة نواب يكون فيها 9 وزراء لكل من 8 و14 آذار و6 وزراء للتيار الوطني الحر وتكتله و6 وزراء لرئيسي الجمهورية والحكومة 5 بـ 1 ، والنصيحة بلا جميلة وبلا جمل، لكن لا تضيّعوا وقتاً بغير هذا التفكير.

– اللهم اشهد أني بلغت.

Related Videos

Related Articles

Sayyed Nasrallah Warns ‘Israel’ of “Inevitable Response” to Any Attack on Lebanon

manar-03866840015418563561

November 10, 2018

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah stressed that Hezbollah will inevitably respond to any attack against Lebanon and will not accept any underestimation by the enemy of the country’s power as it used to do in the past.

In a televised speech marking Hezbollah Martyr’s Day on Saturday, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that the “source of our strength are our missiles because the Lebanese army is not allowed to acquire advanced missiles.”

The secretary general was responding to reports that the Zionist entity warned the Lebanese government through American and European intermediaries that it was readying to attack Hezbollah in the near future to prevent it from acquiring advanced missiles.

Hezbollah has a tremendous rocket capability and the enemy will not dare to attack Lebanon because of this power, His eminence stressed, adding that any attack will be faced automatically.

His eminence saluted the families of the martyrs. “Thanks to martyrs’ sacrifices, the resistance has achieved all its victories.”

“[Israeli PM Benjamin] Netanyahu believes that the key of everything is power and not the occupation,” Sayyed Nasrallah continued. “His problem, though, is that we have the power. We will respond to any Israeli strike on Lebanon and will not accept any aggression by the enemy on our land.”

Hezbollah’s S.G. condemned all form of normalization with the Zionist entity, calling on “everyone to reject normalization and not to be silent about it, and this duty is imposed by all standards and the voice must always be raised to condemn all steps of normalization.”

Sayyed Nasrallah addressed the Palestinian people saying: “do not lose hope over the Arab states’ normalization with ‘Israel’, what before went on behind the scenes now is taking place publicly. The current normalization has put an end to Arab hypocrisy, and brought down the masks of the swindlers and hypocrites.”

“Those who are taking part in Gaza return marches and those who are sacrificing in Gaza and West Bank give us hope because they resist the pressures exerted on them,” his eminence added. “Had the Syrian people and the government not resisted the pressure, we would have seen Netanyahu in Damascus because most of the so-called opposition in Syria maintains ties with ‘Israel’.”

Sayyed Nasrallah also deplored the international community’s outcry in the aftermath of the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi while turning a blind eye to the Saudi crimes it’s committing against Yemeni on a daily basis: “While they complain about the murder, they ignore the crimes Saudi Arabia is committing in Yemen.”

Sayyed Nasrallah pointed that the US calls for an end to the war on Yemen might be a hoax, “the timing of these calls is doubted.” Addressing Yemeni people, Sayyed Nasrallah called on them to remain patient and cling to their positions “because you are closer to victory more than ever before.”

On Bahrain, Hezbollah leader said the regime ruling against opposition leader Sheikh Ali Salman which had changed from innocence to life sentence confirms the regime’s repressive nature.

Addressing US sanctions against Iran, Hezbollah leader said the party was not afraid of any sanctions and “we will continue to hold on to our weapons and missiles.” “Binding government formation with US sanctions on Iran and with the crisis in Syria is ridiculous.”

Turning to the local issue of cabinet formation, Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated Hezbollah’s backing for the participation of independent Sunni MPs in the upcoming government.

“Lebanon does not need more than eight or ten ministers to represent all its parties but they chose to make it 30. Why not form the government of 32 and allow place for the representation of Sunni MPs,” his eminence said.

“Based on some parties criteria in ministerial shares, it was our right to demand 10 ministerial shares. It seems humbleness in this country is useless,” Sayyed Nasrallah responded to some allegations that Hezbollah was obstructing the cabinet formation. “But we didn’t demand more than 6 ministers, which in fact doesn’t reflect our parliamentary, political and popular size, but because we wanted to facilitate the formation of this government.”

Sayyed Nasrallah also lashed out at Progressive Socialist Party chief Walid Jumblatt who accused Hezbollah of ‘delaying the cabinet formation’, saying Jumblatt has obstructed the government formation for four months and has no right to speak of obstruction.

We behaved modestly before some parties because we wanted for this government to be formed, His eminence indicated.

Hezbollah’s S.G. emphasized that the party has raised the demand to allocate a ministerial portfolio for Sunni MPs “since day one after the Premier’s designation. We told him that this demand was basic and necessary for the formation of the new government.”
“Independent Sunnis were the ones who prevented the transformation of the political conflict in the country to sectarian one,” he stressed, calling on the PM-designate to give everyone his right of representation.

“We will remain at our allies side no matter how much time their issue would take,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, advising the PM-designate that if he wants this cabinet to be formed, “sectarian incitement will lead nowhere.”

On Hezbollah’s relations with the Lebanese President, Sayyed Nasrallah said: “Relations between Hezbollah and [Michel] Aoun are intact and no one can drag us to a rift over the Sunni MPs issue.”

“We will stand by the side of independent Sunni allies because we reject isolation,” his eminence stressed, adding that Hezbollah will agree to any decision by the Sunni MPs regarding their participation in the government.

Source: Al-Manar Website

 

Related Videos

Related Articles

Sabra and Shatila: The Secret Papers

14309080123 4b8ec98b30 m 165ef

Sabra and Shatila, September, 1982, stands as one of the worst single atrocities in modern history. Up to 3500 Palestinians were massacred when Israel’s Falangist proxies surged through the two Beirut camps in September, 1982. Israel sought to dump the blame on to the Falangists. “Goyim kill goyim and they come to blame the Jews,” Israel’s Prime Minister, Menahim Begin, complained. In fact, Israel commanded and controlled the entire operation. The punishment meted out by the Kahan commission of inquiry was derisory. Ariel Sharon, the Israeli ‘defence minister’ was demoted but remained in government, after Begin refused to sack him. Despite his own complicity, Begin was not punished and neither were any of the politicians who had agreed that the camps had to be ‘cleaned out.’ World opinion was outraged, but not even this fearful event was sufficient for Israel to be held to account. Unrestrained, Israel remained free to kill at will.

The secret annex to the Kahan commission has recently made its way into the mainstream. (See Rashid Khalidi, ‘The Sabra and Shatila Massacres: New Evidence,’ Palestine Square, Institute of Palestine Studies, September 25, 2018).   The basic facts are well established, so the interest lies in what these documents tell us about the interplay between the Israelis and the Falangists, and why, ultimately, Sabra and Shatila had to be invaded.

Even before 1948 Israel was setting out to turn Lebanon into a satellite state by playing on the fears of the country’s Maronite Christian community.   In 1958 Lebanon endured its second civil war (second to the Druze-Maronite conflict of 1860).   This war was part of a regional drama involving anti-Nasserism, anti-communism, the overthrow of the monarchy in Iraq and a planned coup attempt in Jordan. No event in Lebanon is ever simply internal, but while the collective ‘west’ and Israel had a big stake in what happened in 1958, the war developed largely as cause and effect between internal factions. By the time the US intervened, sending the Sixth Fleet and landing marines on Beirut’s beaches, these factions had for the moment resolved their differences.

In 1968, against a background of Palestinian resistance from southern Lebanon, Israel destroyed 13 commercial aircraft sitting on the tarmac at Beirut international airport. Lebanon was being warned to control the Palestinians, or else. Of course, given its highly factionalized nature, Lebanon could not control the Palestinians.

In April, 1973, the Israelis infiltrated West Beirut from the sea and killed four leading Palestinian political and cultural (Kamal Nasser, a poet) figures and by 1975 the country was right on the edge. A drive-by shooting at a Maronite church in East Beirut on April 13 pushed it off. The dead included members of the Kata’ib, the Lebanese Falange, a party founded on the Spanish model in the 1930s. Falangist gunmen struck back, shooting up a bus full of Palestinians and the war was on.

As Israel was already involved with the Falangists, as it wanted chaos in Lebanon ending in the defeat of the Palestinians and the destruction of their institutions, the church shooting was very likely a deliberate Israeli provocation. The secret annex to the Kahan commission reveals that by 1975 Israel was holding secret meetings with Falangist leaders, aimed at political and military coordination, towards which end Israel gave the Falangists $118.5 million in military aid (the figure given in the Kahan annex, the true figure possibly being much higher) and trained hundreds of Falangist fighters, in preparation for the war which Israel wanted the Falangists to launch.

Israel maintained its relationship with the Falangists through the civil war. By 1982 there was an “alliance in principle,” as described by papers in the Kahan annex. Trained in Israel up to Israeli military standards, however this is understood, Israel was confident that the Falangist tough Bashir Gemayel, the dominant figure in the Christian umbrella group, the Lebanese Forces (LF), had evolved “from the emotional leader of a gang, full of hatred, into a relatively prudent and cautious political leader.” No doubt this was how Bashir presented himself at meetings with the Israelis, but his actions in the past, and in the future, indicate that he was merely concealing the brutality that still lay within.

In January, 1976, the LF attacked the slum Karantina port district of Beirut, killing or massacring at least 1000 Palestinian fighters and civilians. In June, the Falangists, along with other LF factions, including the Lebanese Tigers of the Chamoun family and the Guardians of the Cedars, besieged the Tal al Za’atar Palestinian camp. Their military equipment included US tanks and armored cars. The camp held out for 35 days before being overrun. Up to 3000 Palestinian civilians were slaughtered.

The Kahan papers include an interesting exchange between Ariel Sharon and Shimon Peres, Minister of Defence in 1976, who asked Sharon whether an IDF officer had warned him against sending the Falangists into Sabra and Shatila. Sharon responded that “you” (the Rabin government of 1976 of which Peres was part) had established the relationship with the Falangists and maintained it even after the massacre at Tal al Zaatar:

“You [Peres] spoke of the moral image of the government. After Tal al Zaatar, Mr Peres, you have no monopoly on morality. We did not accuse you, you have accused us. The same moral principle which was raised by the Tal al Za’atar incident [sic.] still exists. The Phalangists murdered in Shatila and the Phalangists murdered in Tal Za’atar. The link is a moral one: should we get involved with the Phalangists or not? You supported them and continued to do so after Tal Za’atar. Mr Rabin and Mr Peres, there were no IDF officers in Shatila, the same way they were absent from Tal Za’atar.” What is left unsaid is that Israel had a ‘liaison office’ at Tal al Za’ater even if IDF officers were not inside the camp.

‘High stature’

The refrain constantly repeated by Israeli intelligence and military personnel in 1982 was that no-one expected the Falangists to behave so badly. They were people of high calibre, people of quality, “men of much higher personal stature than is common among Arabs,” according to the statements made to the Kahan commission.

“I interrogated the Lebanese commanders [all Lebanese ‘commanders’ operated under direct Israeli command],” said Sharon. “I asked them, why have you done it? They looked into my eyes, as I am looking at you and their eyes did not twitch. They said ‘we did not do this, it was not us.’ I am not talking about bums, we are talking about people who are engineers and lawyers, the entire young elite, an intelligentsia, and they are looking into my eyes and saying ‘we did not do it.’

In fact, not just during the long civil war but throughout its invasion of Lebanon in 1982, Israel had abundant evidence of the Falangist capacity for brutality, not just in the massacre of Muslims caught at checkpoints or the Druze in the mountains but in the statements of Falangist leaders. On September 12, two days before he was assassinated, Bashir Gemayel told Sharon that conditions “should be created” which would result in the Palestinians leaving Lebanon.

At the same meeting it transpired that the Israelis had evidence that “as a consequence of Elie Hobeika’s activities” 1200 people had “disappeared.” Hobeika, a senior and extremely brutal Falangist figure, implicated in the CIA attempt in 1985 to assassinate the Shia spiritual leader, Shaikh Muhammad Hussain Fadlallah, was assassinated in 2002 shortly after he announced he was ready to give evidence in a Belgian court about Sharon’s role in the Sabra-Shatila massacres. His car was blown up, his head landing on the balcony of a nearby apartment.

On July 8 Bashir spoke of wanting to bulldoze the Palestinian camps in southern Lebanon. At a later meeting, asked by Sharon “What would you do about the refugee camps?,” he replied “We are planning a real zoo.”

An IDF colonel gave evidence to the Kahan commission that it was “possible to surmise from contacts with Phalange leaders” what their intentions were. If Sabra would become a zoo, Shatila’s destiny was to be a parking lot.

The IDF colonel spoke of massacres of Druze villagers by Elie Hobeika and his men. A document dated June 23 refers to “some 500 people” detained by Christians in Beirut being “terminated.” Nahum Admoni, the Mossad head, who said he knew Bashir well, having met frequently with him in 1974/5, said that “When he talked in terms of demographic change it was always in terms of killing and elimination. This was his instinctive style.” The “demographic change” refers to Bashir’s concern at the size of Lebanon’s Shia population, and its high natural birth date compared to the Christians. To resolve this problem, Bashar said, “several Deir Yassins will be necessary.”

While referring to Bashir’s brutal talk, Admoni said that “at the same time he was a political human being and as such he had an extremely cautious thinking process and thus he avoided taking part in various warlike activities.” The evidence does not bear out the last part of this statement, as Bashar had a long record even before 1982 of engaging in extremely brutal “warlike activities.”

The violence during the Israeli onslaught on Lebanon ran from the Falangists at one end of the spectrum to the extreme violence of Ariel Sharon, including massacres of civilians in Gaza and the West Bank, at the other end. The two extremes met in the middle at Sabra and Shatila and the outcome was predictably catastrophic.

‘Totally subservient’

What must be reaffirmed is that the “cleaning” or “combing” out of Sabra and Shatila was planned, coordinated and commanded by the Israeli military. It was not a Falangist operation with Israel playing some loose supervisory role. It was an Israel operation, involving the intelligence agencies and approved by the Israeli government. The Falangists were trained and armed by Israel and the LF commanders were “totally subservient” to the commander of the Israeli force sent to the camps, the 96th division. The Falangists were told when to enter the camps and when to leave. The Israelis lit up the camps at night with flares so the Falangists could see what they were doing (or who they were killing) and they stood ready to provide medical assistance to wounded men and intervene if they got into trouble.

Any notion that Menahim Begin, the Prime Minister, had no idea what was going on until a later stage has to be discarded. As Sharon remarked at a Cabinet meeting on August 12, “to say that I speak with the PM five times a day would be an understatement.”

Israel had agreed in negotiations with the Americans not to enter West Beirut. The assassination of Bashir Gemayel on September 14 precipitated the invasion of West Beirut the following day, the seizure of key positions and the encirclement of Sabra and Shatila according to a well-prepared plan. The Falangists entered the camps in the early evening of September 16, on Israeli orders, and did not withdraw until September 18, again on Israeli orders.

There were no “terrorists” in the camps, let alone the 2500 Sharon claimed had been left behind after the PLO withdrawal from Beirut in August. There were only civilians and there was no armed resistance from them. The Falangists did their work silently, mostly with knives so that the next victim would not be aware of the fate of the one before him (or her – many of the dead were women and children and even the camp animals were butchered) until it was too late.

The Falangist liaison office was established in the headquarters of the 96th Israeli division, where eavesdropping yielded unspecified “important evidence,” according to the Kahan commission annex. Professional electronic tapping of the Falangist communications network inside the camps was maintained in addition to “improvised” tapping of the conversations inside the HQ of the 96th division. According to the Kahan commission’s annex, the Falangist liaison officer reported “abnormal occurrences” in the camps to several officers only a few hours after the Falangists entered them.

Clearly, statements by intelligence and military personnel that they did not know what was going, or that they did not know until it was too late cannot be taken at face value. There was no gunfire from the camps and no resistance as would have been expected from armed “terrorists.” In this deathly silence, with no bursts of gunfire, and not the slightest sign or sound of armed combat, did the Israelis really think the Falangists were only killing armed men? Furthermore, Sharon had made it clear that he wanted to break up all the Palestinian camps and disperse their inhabitants. A cruel and brutal figure, he was perfectly capable of doing it. What could be better calculated to drive Palestinian civilians everywhere into panicked flight than an even more monstrous Deir Yassin? There may be a lot more evidence about this, textual and graphic, that has not made its way even into the secret annex.

Sharon freely insulted and demeaned the two chief US representatives in Beirut, Ambassador Morris Draper, whom he accused of impudence in demanding that Israel withdraw from West Beirut, and President Reagan’s special envoy, Philip Habib. “Did I make myself clear?,” “Don’t complain all the time” and “I’m sick of this” are samples of his aggression when in their company but as he said of the Americans on another occasion, “I hate them.”

Ghost towns

This remorseless liar claimed that there were no civilians in the camps. “I want you to know that Burj al Barajneh and its vicinity and the area of Shatila and similar places are ghost towns” he insisted, according to the Kahan annex. In August, as the aerial and land bombardment of Beirut approached its peak, he told the Cabinet that “we are not striking at the area where the Sunni Lebanese population resides.” On August 18 he lied again: “Today there is no-one living in the refugee camps. Only terrorists remain in the refugee camps. That is where their positions remain, in the refugee camps. That is where their positions, bunkers and HQs were located, and all the civilians had fled.” In fact, the camps were packed with civilians who had nowhere else to go, while in West Beirut, thousands of Sunni Muslims, Christians, and anyone who was living there, were being killed in air strikes.

At the same time Sharon had the extraordinary gall to present himself as some kind of saviour of the civilian population.   After entering West Beirut he remarked that “in reality we are not looking for anybody’s praise but if praise is due, then it’s ours as we saved Beirut from total anarchy. On September 21, a few days after the Sabra and Shatila massacres, he told the Cabinet that “We prevented a bloodbath.” In fact, the invasion had been a bloodbath from the beginning. By the end of the year about 19,000 people had been killed, almost all of them Palestinian or Lebanese civilians.

Two issues take up numerous pages in the Kahan report annex. One is the speed with which the Israeli army moved into West Beirut after the assassination of Bashir Gemayel. The reason was that the assassination “threatened to bring down the entire political structure and undermine the military plan years in preparation over long months.” Having promised full support, Bashar had ultimately refused to send the Falangists into West Beirut and with this commanding figure dead, the Israelis feared that their invasion was going to fail at the critical moment. With no-one to stop them, Sharon’s imaginary “terrorists” would be free to rebuild their infrastructure.

‘Supreme value’

The other issue is why Israel did not send its own troops into the camps. As expressed in the Kahan papers, “the expected nature of the fighting in the camps did not arouse much enthusiasm for the deployment of the IDF.” There would be difficult fighting “which could result in a lot of bloodshed in a densely populated area, where terrorists who have to be located are disguised as civilians in a hostile environment.” Such an action would involve a large number of casualties and the IDF had no wish to involve itself “in such an unpleasant but necessary military move.”

The deployment of the Falangists instead caused “great relief” to the military: the “supreme value” governing the decision was the desire not to cause IDF casualties. So, Israel’s proxies were sent in to do the dirty work instead.

After being elected president, as he was in a dodgy way in August, Bashir Gemayel had shown he realised he would have to act as one, which meant putting the Lebanese consensus before the alliance with Israel. He would have to work with the Sunnis and Shia and repair the fractured relations with other Maronite factions. He would have to take the interests of Arab states into account.   He could not simultaneously be Lebanon’s president and Israel’s president.   As a senior Falangist figure, Antun Fattal, remarked to Morris Draper on December 13, 1982: “Our economy is dependent on the Arab world and we cannot sacrifice it because of a peace treaty [as demanded by Israel].”

On December 14, Bashar’s successor, and milder brother, Amin, asked Israel to stop all contact with Lebanon, saying that he intended to announce at the UN that Lebanon was occupied by Israel. Like Bashir, he knew he had to respect the Lebanese consensus. By the end of 1982 what Israel had comprehensively demonstrated was that it simply did not understand Lebanon. All it had was brute force. The invasion certainly succeeded in changing the geo-political strategic situation, but not to Israel’s advantage. Yes, the PLO went, but only for Hizbullah to take its place. By 2000 Hizbullah had driven Israel out of the occupied south, in 2006 it frustrated Israel again and by 2018 it had missiles that will cause unprecedented damage if Israel goes to war again. The country Israel regarded as the weakest link in the Arab chain had turned out to be one of the toughest.

By Jeremy Salt
Source

%d bloggers like this: