[ad_1]
The positions of the head of the “Strong Lebanon” bloc, deputy Gebran Bassil, as he announced yesterday at his press conference, seem more to build bridges with the outside than with internal messages, and include two points that bring news and question the changes behind they. Above all because the other points, as detailed by Bassil, are not normal, but rather an emphasis on the two critical points: the first is “rotation in government”, and the second is “the file of demarcation of borders neutralization of Lebanon “.
Bassil’s positions attracted the attention of several parties, and found in what he said are the first signs of “differentiation” from Hezbollah. They attributed Bassil’s position to his exposure to the pressure and exaggeration of US sanctions, especially after they were imposed on two of the party’s allies, Ministers Ali Hassan Khalil and Youssef Fenianos.
And the “jump” that appeared may be due to Bassil launching positions on the issue of rotating government portfolios, border demarcation, or the positions of Palestinian resistance factions, at a time when Hezbollah considers that it is preparing a political coup against him, especially on the issue of the government that the United States has sought since the uprising. October 17 to get him out of her and isolate him internally. The party does not separate the issue of “stealing” the Ministry of Finance from the Shiite community from the course of the coup that Washington wants, and this raised the question: How does Bassil announce her position in which she affirmed “We are with the The custom is that everyone accepts it, and the constitution is clear not to dedicate a ministry to a sect. But if the objective is to consecrate the third signature, then this is threefold, and we reject it outright ”.
Bassil learned of the Maronite Patriarch Bechara Al-Rai’s position on Lebanon’s neutrality, after the patriarch’s fierce campaign against Hezbollah. It is true that he broadcast the talk about him because “he needs dialogue and internal understanding”, but he registered a progressive position in which he expressed “the intolerance of the Lebanese to the consequences of the problems of others who have reached their limit”, and not He was slow to address the party’s involvement in Syria, so he estimated that the party is thinking of “going back from there, and that the Lebanese should embrace and support this decision.
The neutrality mentioned by Bassil placed him within the framework of the “political aspect of an initiative”, which also has an economic aspect related to “border demarcation”, separating “the rights of Lebanon and its sovereignty and the interest of the country”. He considered that “it is in the interest of the country to urgently close this file without auctions”, in a position that was interpreted as a message to President Nabih Berri. This required a response from a member of the Development and Liberation Bloc, MP Qassem Hashem, who tweeted that “the demarcation of borders does not stop at borders of interest, but is one of the national principles and constants and adherence to every grain of soil occupied. ” Bassil’s words come in the glory of linking the two parties, Hezbollah and the Amal movement, the issue of sanctions to the pressure exerted by the United States on Lebanon to obtain concessions in the border demarcation file, and after a period of meetings he had with the US ambassador in Beirut, Dorothy Shea, during which he promised to play a positive role, despite his knowledge. The consequences of the demarcation according to what Washington wants and what Israel aspires, as well as the sensitivity of the resistance towards this expedient.
Regardless of the other points mentioned by Bassil regarding the French initiative, and its correction in the direction of the Future Movement and the Lebanese Forces, what was mentioned above remains the most that the team learned from the March 8 conference. From here, the sources of this team set out to speak first on the issue of the government and whether the sanctions that Washington is imposing will prompt the Free Patriotic Movement to translate Basil’s words into action. Will it accept the latter and cover a government in which the Shiite duo does not participate, given the insistence on not giving them the Ministry of Finance? Will the President of the Republic, General Michel Aoun, sign the decree to form the de facto government and throw the ball into the hands of the two, as a way of personally avoiding the responsibility of dropping the French initiative?
[ad_2]
