[ad_1]
World_Lebanon
Today, Friday, the Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar wrote an article on this topic, stating: Although Lebanon is one of the countries in the Syrian neighborhood most affected by the Syrian exodus to their land, there are those who decided that their attendance at the conference organized by Russia on Syrian soil to bring them back to their country, it was timid. Does this decision have in its background a commitment to Washington, fear of sanctions and a request from a friendly and lost Arab?
This conference, which the United States of America convened to boycott, and its ambassador to the United Nations deemed it inappropriate for Russia to monitor it. Invitations were sent to 108 countries to attend, but the focus was on neighboring countries with the largest number of displaced people.
The importance of this conference lies in being an activation of the previous Russian initiative and the establishment of an implementation mechanism for the return of displaced persons and a start for reconstruction in Syria. In view of this importance, a high-level Russian delegation was formed and toured the countries to encourage and push them to attend in the interests of them and Syria. Despite attempts to move the conference venue to another capital, they insisted on keeping it in Damascus, to refute all allegations that the Syrian state rejected their return and that Syria is the natural place to hold the conference..
Lebanon is one of the invited countries, which the Russian delegation visited to deliver the invitation, where it met with officials who all, without exception, highlighted the importance and necessity of this return. But the surprise was that some people decided to reduce Lebanon’s representation at the conference, despite the fact that the Russian delegation had previously expected in their meetings that representation would be at the ministerial level. Is there any justification for this decision, given that Lebanon is one of the neighboring countries most affected by the issue of displacement and the failure of such a conference will have catastrophic repercussions?
For years, cries for help from political forces to help Lebanon prevent the explosion of a Syrian refugee mine. However, these forces, and the moment of truth is barely coming, until it becomes clear that their statements do not match their intentions. And if the entire Lebanese state had a duty regarding this issue, until the President of the Republic and the Free Patriotic Movement led it, and were proactive in taking up their affairs..
This is a problem that raises many questions about who is responsible for making that decision. What if you were in your environment for fear of US sanctions? Or is it an attempt to win lost Arab affection and an attempt to keep Lebanon in the ranks of countries that refrain from opening up to Syria and improving relations with it without American approval?
Political forces compete with responsibility for the decision. While some claim that it should be taken in partnership between the presidents of the republic and the government, sources close to them claim that such a decision requires a government, and the government has not yet been formed.
Of course, this pretext falls under the logic that says that whoever has made a decision on the size of the indirect negotiations with the Israeli enemy on the demarcation of the maritime borders in the absence of the government, can do so with respect to the conference on internally displaced persons. .
In this context, high-level political circles are surprised that “the two ministers of Foreign Affairs and Displaced Persons Affairs were not included in the delegation, just as Major General Abbas Ibrahim was excluded as the person who handles this file in coordination with the authorities. Syrian Come to an agreement about it. Circles said that Lebanon has more interest in this conference than the Syrian state, and its failure will do us great harm, considering that the first forms of failure are the size and type of attendance. Sources said that at least one presidential envoy could have been sent to send a positive signal and emphasize the seriousness of those involved in their attempts to resolve this issue. Sources asked: Whose interest is this decision? And conform to any side? There are many countries that will be represented by a ministerial delegation, and the Syrian opponents will be present, so can we be more royal than the king? The circles recalled much about the danger of the survival of the displaced and the related settlement projects. Will this push the President of the Republic to reconsider this decision and correct the mistake?
