[ad_1]
The head of the “Lebanese Phalanxes” Party, resigned deputy Sami Gemayel, pointed out that the “Phalange Party” “supports the opposition to the peaceful change of sovereignty”, noting that “the current system has shown that it cannot build a better Lebanon and that arrived in Lebanon “. To the place where you arrived, and which is subject to the will of Hezbollah, the sponsor of this system, which establishes the rules of the game and facilitates your affairs and covers you with all the crimes that occurred in the previous period, and in return the system covers Hezbollah’s weapons and gives it the necessary cover.
He explained in an interview on Al-Hurra TV, that “the agreement that was agreed in 2016 is based on: the system covers weapons and weapons, it covers corruption and quotas”, highlighting that “2016 is the limit between the division stage of the system. the issue of “Hezbollah” and reconcile this system with each other in exchange for covering “Hezbollah”, which is the dividing line through which the party was able to tear down all the barriers that were placed in order to seize state institutions, has put his hand on the presidency Then, the government and parliament through the electoral law that imposed on the entire political class that accepted the law, despite being aware in advance that it would give the majority to Hezbollah, and through of this law and with the obtaining of the majority, controlled all the decisions, forming governments, designation of the head of government and presidential elections.
Gemayel emphasized that “the agreement and the electoral law allowed” Hezbollah “to impose its hands on the constitutional institutions.” Regarding the upcoming confrontation with the system and with Hezbollah behind it, he stated: “We believe that the Lebanese have understood that this system will not bring something positive for their future and the future of their children, and they are looking for an alternative,” and He noted that “the confrontation must take place at the hands of the rebellious youth of Lebanon.” In reality, with a changing framework and the demand for an independent, sovereign rule of law, with new competences and faces, and managed with a new concept and approach to political work, based on taking responsibility for 2020 projects and technologies.
He considered that “the old and traditional confrontation between March 8 and 14 proved its failure because its leaders concluded the arrangement and took Lebanon to another place. The only thing that matters to them is the logic of authority”, affirming that “this The confrontation was not an ideological confrontation but an interest. When the interests converge, they forget Martyrs, confrontation, principles, sovereignty and independence, and concluded an arrangement as if nothing had happened and there was no longer a problem of weapons. He affirmed: “This logic of compromise it does not build a country. We need a new boss and people who have the will to build a new country different from the one we were in. “
He noted that “no revolution lasts for years. The revolution is a reaction limited in time and can last a month or two months, but it does not last a year,” explaining that “the revolution of October 17, 2019 produced a different public opinion, who is accountable and wants changes. ” The street and then he left and stayed at home “, indicating that” if we do not see people on the street, this does not mean that public opinion no longer exists, as it is looking for different frameworks for the confrontation that began on October 17 ” .
Gemayel revealed: “We are in the process of presenting an alternative option that embodies ambition, and we have to organize our affairs in another way, because it is time to produce an organized inclusive political framework to confront the system and beyond, whether with the media, on the street or through elections, and that is what we seek to communicate with groups, personalities and changing public opinion “. The objector who aspires to build a different country. “Regarding the assertion of the Party of Lebanese Forces and the Progressive Socialist Party that they are on the side of the revolution, he stated that” it cannot be with the revolution and the system at the same time Therefore, it cannot betray the revolution and the opposition, and after the revolution it becomes part of it. “
On his relationship with former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, he mentioned that “the personal relationship is good, but our problem is political”, highlighting that “there is no personal problem with anyone”, noting that “matters depend on the political situation and of the interest of Lebanon “. And he focused on “I give my opinion on the positions of politicians, I evaluate the positions and take the position based on them, because my personal relationship is good with everyone.” Regarding the relationship with the head of the “Free Patriotic Movement”, Gebran Bassil, he said: “I have sent him a letter congratulating him on his final recovery”, asking “that the political position be clear and non-negotiable, without the personal relationship affect it, not negatively. ” It is not positive. “
In response to a question about when Sami Gemayel will reconcile with “Hezbollah”, he explained that “when he is convinced that he has to place himself under the roof of the state and the constitution and on an equal footing with the rest of the Lebanese, that” Hezbollah “He considers that the constitution and the law do not concern him as long as he is above them and lives In a different country from the rest of the Lebanese, this cannot continue. We cannot see two different scenes in one country. In Baalbek-Hermel, we saw weapons, militias and armed convoys, and in Bikfaya, we see shops closed by a decision of the Minister of the Interior.
Gemayel also stated: “We live in a division in Lebanon, where we see two different lives that cannot coexist in the same country. There is an atmosphere of militia, security chaos and uncontrolled battles, and in the second part there is a rule of law. and arrests. Or the logic of the state adopts the logic of the state and this is what it is. ” I fear, or that the logic of the state that exists in other parts of Lebanon will be dominated by the logic of the non-state, explaining that “the logic of the non-state exists in the Lebanese regions of all sects, and the logic of the state it is present in other Lebanese regions where there are people of all sects ”, stating that“ the problem is not a Muslim Christian problem, but a problem of the logic of a state versus the logic of a non-state. They do not coexist with each other and we cannot continue as we live today. “
He stated that “as long as Hezbollah wants to continue with this logic, for me there is no room for it to reach any result with it, because it considers that it depends on the logic of the winner and the loser and not on the logic of equality. Emphasizing that “this logic will generate a reaction and, in return, the reaction can lead this country to suicide. We warn of this.” He explained that “my problem with” Hezbollah “is not because it is Shiite, but because it carries weapons. If the person who carries weapons were Druze, Sunni or Christian, I would have the same problem.”
Regarding the French initiative and how the parties are dealing with it, he explained that “there is a president who is a friend of Lebanon who sees Lebanon collapse and sees nothing that can save it. He came to prevent Lebanon from falling. That is how I see the initiative. “. The reason for this is his knowledge that the country will collapse if he does not intervene, and he tried to give the political system one last chance to save the country, but unfortunately this political system does not care about the country or the people, but about itself. same. He emphasized that “the last thing Macron could have imagined was that this political system would not take advantage of the opportunity it presented to initiate the rescue of its people, because if they had responded to Macron and formed a totally independent government and proceeded with the reformist logic, we could have been able to attract investment, aid, money pumping and money income projects. To Lebanon and support the economy, because the disaster is that our economy collapsed after the Lebanese banks emptied the foreign currency, which caused the collapse of the Lebanese pound, which caused the collapse of purchasing power, so wages they became useless and this led to the impoverishment of the Lebanese and the collapse of the economy.
[ad_2]
