An equation under fire … disarmament or the return of war

Saad Elias – Al -Quds Al -Arabi

Tensioning and escalating factors are gathered in the Lebanese interior in light of fears that Israel will return to expanding its targets to the southern suburb of Beirut twice in less than a week, citing the launch of unknown missiles from the north of the Litani River, which means that Israel has included the densely populated suburb, which constitutes the stronghold of Hezbollah within its targets, which enhances fears of aggressive intentions in light of the continuation of the series of assassinations of the assassinations series of cadres of cadres “The Party”, starting from the south of Litani to Hermel, Saida, and passing through the suburb and what it symbolized, embraced the Secretary -General of Hezbollah, Mr. Hassan Nasrallah and his successor, Mr. Hashem Safi Al -Din, and witnessed their martyrdom in its depths.

On the occurrence of this Israeli escalation, and the Prime Minister of the entity Benjamin Netanyahu waving that his country “will strike everywhere in Lebanon against any threat”, the visit of the American delegate, Morgan Ortigos, carries the messages to the Lebanese state, who is no longer limited to implementing Resolution 1701 in its full feedback and dismantling the military “Hezbollah” military intention south of the Litani River, but demands to set a schedule of disarmament of the “party” and urges senior Lebanese officials to form 3 negotiating committees with Israel are bypassing the military character to the political with the aim of finding a solution to occupy the five points, discussing the fate of the Lebanese prisoners and resolving the disputed points on the blue line. Moreover, the disarmament of the “party” and the acceptance of negotiation with Israel is an essential condition for the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation army from the five points and to talk about the reconstruction of villages and towns destroyed in an unprecedented way even in the July 2006 war.
What is remarkable in the context of the pressure on Lebanon is the announcement of the committee to supervise the implementation of the ceasefire decision to suspend its work, which increased Lebanon’s official concern and confusion, which moved the consultations between the three presidents Joseph Aoun, Nabih Berri and Nawaf Salam to reach a unified Lebanese position on Ortigos’s messages that put them in front of two options, the best of which passed: The Israeli war in an American green light. The proactive coordination between the three presidents has resulted in the confirmation of a position through which Lebanon does not go to risk a crisis with the American side, which would arrange serious repercussions on the country.
The three presidents read these messages and the pressure they hide on Lebanon, and they saw an attempt to push Beirut towards negotiations with the power of fire and force them to accept what they have no ability to bear it, especially the issue of normalization.

French mediation

Here, the conversation began after the visit of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to the Elysee Palace about French mediation led by French President Emmanuel Macron with US President Donald Trump and with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to cool the situation and reduce escalation and prevent him from slipping into greater dangers, with the awareness of the Lebanese official level that the French endeavor did not succeed in neutralizing the southern suburb from the Israeli raid and in the language of escalation, knowing that the president Aoun received a French advice to avoid the absolute rejection of the formation of negotiating committees and reach a way out that combines security and technical on the one hand and the politician and diplomat on the other hand. However, nothing suggests the acceptance of Lebanon until now with such option, which made some warn against the bet on Macron and to take its advice, especially in the issue of weapons and linking it to a national security strategy after the experiences that followed the explosion of the Beirut port on August 4, 2020, especially since France has always encouraged the policy of open doors and exchange services with Tehran in Lebanon, while there is no room for procrastination in light of changes in the region and the world. From pledges, agreements, and return to the game and procrastination.
From here, there are those who call the Lebanese state to resolve its position on the proposal of Ortigos, especially that what was stated in the department’s speech and the ministerial statement about the state’s monopoly on the weapon is very clear in addition to the approval of the government of President Najib Mikati, which included ministers of the Shiite duo on the ceasefire agreement, which also stipulated frankly to dismantle the military structure of Hezbollah and extend the authority of the state starting from South Litani. There is no escape therefore from resolving the hesitation and dispeling fears from a clash between the Lebanese army and “Hezbollah”, and the government’s initiative to “the party” through its ministers and deputies to the seriousness of the situation and the need to adhere to the delivery of weapons and not to be satisfied with the demand of the United States and France and the international community to deter Israel from the glory of its raids and violations, which amounted to about 200 breaches, killing about 115 people, wounding about 300 Residential units. What was threatened by Sayyid Nasrallah from fighting the war with the Israeli enemy without controls or roofs that Israel has been submitted to, benefiting from an American cover that gives it freedom of movement.

Lebanese -Syrian agreement

The besiege of Hezbollah is no longer limited to the southern border, but rather to the eastern border with Syria under the new administration led by President Ahmed Al -Shara, and what the Hermel and Palace region witnessed and the monsters of Al -Sayed Ali from clashes with the Syrian security would have continued had it not been for the intervention of the Lebanese army. The Lebanese and Syrian defense to demarcate the land borders between the two countries and activate the coordination mechanisms between the two sides to deal with security and military challenges, especially in what may occur on the borders between them. It is known that the fall of the Bashar al -Assad regime cut off the path of supply from Iran to Hezbollah and the party lost a major ally that allowed it to establish a military arsenal inside the Syrian territories and tunnels that were used to smuggle weapons and prohibitions, in addition to that it allowed him to exploit the issue of the Shebaa Farms to continue the resistance under the pretext of liberation without Assad to establish a Lebanese farmer of Shebaa and solve the problem around it and whether it was a Lebanese or a Syrian.
Despite the feeling of Hezbollah that it has become between the jaws of the pliers in the south and the east, and despite the great losses that it was exposed to and the loss of the military deterrence force that he has always spoken, it did not stop raising the slogans that he had raised before and during the “Gaza’s support front” and talking about Nasr to raise the morale of his foster environment, and this is what the current Secretary of the party is repeated in each Media, waving in its last looks and commenting on targeting the southern suburb that “the state must address the aggression, and we cannot accept an equation for Israel to praise Lebanon and to put an hour it wants.”

Hezbollah equation

The words of Sheikh Qasim have raised a question mark on the ability of Hezbollah more patience in adopting the diplomatic option in the face of attacks? Is his ability to return to confrontation in light of the imbalance of power with Israel and the results of the last destroyed war and the Israeli occupation and survival in the five hills?
The reality is that the last statement of Hezbollah, which condemned the American -Israeli aggression against Syria, Yemen, Gaza and Lebanon, considered that “the equation today is clear: either confrontation or surrender to enemy plans that only aim to subjugate the region and its impact and dominate its peoples and capabilities.” This means first, that the “party” is not in the possibility of handing over its weapon not only because of the resistance of Israel, but also to ward off any potential danger from Syria, and it means secondly that the “party” in the event that it is decided to get out of patience to the confrontation, it will put Lebanon again in the war and put itself and its environment in the event of the great danger. In parallel, and in an attempt to translate what was stated in the ministerial statement and sent a positive message to both the United States and Saudi Arabia, the statement of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, in which he said, “The page of Hezbollah’s weapon was involved after the ministerial statement and the slogan of the people of resistance army that has become from the past,” stressing that “the ministerial statement clearly stipulates the restriction of weapons in the hands of the state and everyone is committed to that, and no one works in a direction opposite to limit the arms in the hands of the state.”

The “party” annoyance with peace

Salam’s stance and silence on the statements of Foreign Minister Youssef Raji, the accused of the “party” environment, in identification with the Israeli narratives, sparked the disturbance of Hezbollah, which may be preparing for a new descending with Israel, which is similar to adventure. The response to the prime minister came in the words of the head of the “Wafa Resistance” bloc, MP Muhammad Raad, from within the Iranian embassy, ​​saying: “Whoever markes him and his concern is to assume that the resistance has become from the past, and that its triangular equivalent has ended to an irreversible, from the site of advice, to warn the temporary authority, the governments are usually become from the past, but the equations that the martyrs draw with their blood. And with their sacrifices, so that they will be postponed to the post -date. ” Raad was not satisfied, but added in response to peace, “Whoever claims in our country that he exclusively has the decision of war and peace, or exclusive possession of the state or others for this decision, as it contradicts reality and truth, because the Zionist enemy in our days is only who is waging the war.”
Before that, Hezbollah expressed his dissatisfaction with the prime minister’s tour in the south, especially since he did not mention the “resistance” and did not participate in the great funeral ceremony of the martyrs of the “party”, and Salam heard hurtful words from one of the young men who said to him, “Had it not been for the resistance and its sacrifices, I would not be here.”
Expressing his annoyance, Hezbollah ministers biased with the ministers of the “Amal Movement” alongside the President of the Republic at the Cabinet table in the battle to appoint the governor of Lebanon Bank, Karim Saeed, who was objected to the prime minister to appoint him.
The Shiite duo considers that the performance of the first presidency indicates its insight and wisdom and its desire to deal with an objective weapon, unlike the performance of the third presidency, which if its relationship was somewhat shaken about the appointment of this, so how will this relationship be when taking a fateful decision related to the weapon of Hezbollah and completing the extension of the state’s authority.

The state is in front of the exam

It remains that with the second visit of Morgan Ortagus and the firm messages of Beirut, it is no longer a field of luxury, and the Lebanese state has become in front of the exam to prove the ability and desire and not be satisfied with managing the crisis or staying a prisoner of frequency. The circumstances have changed and Israel is no longer sufficient for Resolution 1701, and it is originally not applied by armed with American guarantees about freedom of movement. And if the American administration has turned a blind eye to the Iranian influence in Lebanon and other Arab capitals, it is currently determined to dismantle the Iranian arms voluntarily or forcibly, and the American messages have become the pillars of the Lebanese rule responsible On the American interpretation of the issue of weapons, which may lead to a contrast between Beirut and Washington and to the launch of Tel Aviv’s hand in Lebanon, where there will be no ability for the state or to “Hezbollah” to confront any return of the war and to expose the incubating environment to the horrors of displacement again.