Lebanon has paid the price from the moment Hezbollah established its control over the joints of the state, and the country has experienced unprecedented division.

The whole world was appalled by the news of the Beirut Port explosion, which left half of the Lebanese capital in ruins. Dozens were killed and hundreds wounded in an event that shook the world, which rushed to provide urgent humanitarian aid to those affected by the explosion.

There have been many crises on Lebanon and its people, from a severe economic crisis that Lebanon has lived through for many months, the results of which were a record depreciation of the Lebanese currency, the “lira” and a general economic weakness close to the point of bankruptcy. “God” the terrorist is an arm that supports him with all kinds of weapons and is outside the rule of law, and Lebanon is living in a phase of instability.


the terrorist “Hezbollah” affiliated with Iran, Lebanon has become a theater of proxy war between it and Israel, and the one who pays the price is Lebanon and its people. The Lebanese people have suffered greatly as a result of Hezbollah’s control of the state’s joints, not to mention the amount of weapons it stores in civilian sites in the Lebanese capital, Beirut. .

According to the preliminary investigations into the port explosion, the results indicate the explosion of thousands of tons of “ammonium nitrate” that was stored in one of the harbor’s holds. The question here is why does Hezbollah store all these quantities in a civilian place? Have the lives of the Lebanese people become so cheap? And for how long will the army and political blocs in Lebanon be silent about Hezbollah’s demand to hand over its weapons to the state?

Lebanon has paid the price from the moment Hezbollah established its control over the joints of the state, and the country has experienced an unprecedented division among its sects that has reflected on Lebanon’s role in the Arab world, as Lebanon’s political voice has become following Iran’s direction. Previously, when the oil facilities were attacked in Saudi Arabia, the official Lebanese response through the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Lebanon was a refusal to condemn or denounce this attack, and there is plenty of evidence for the Lebanese official positions rejecting any condemnation against Iran or “Hezbollah” in the Arab League, and following the policy of disassociation, such as These irresponsible attitudes, which are inconsistent with the sheer volume of Saudi support to Lebanon and its people over decades, could cost Lebanon the loss of a supportive ally like Saudi Arabia.


is happening in Lebanon at present portends a bleak future, a future that does not see the light, and that is a natural result of all the problems Lebanon is experiencing with the presence of “Hezbollah”, which has become the ruler. A few days have passed since the explosion, and France hastened to call for an international conference to reconstruct the damage left by the explosion in Beirut, and there is no doubt that Lebanon is in dire need of urgent humanitarian aid, in the form of material, medical, or food, but it remains Fearing that “Hezbollah” will single out it and exploit it, and thus we will help in its continued existence, like a malignant tumor that brought to Lebanon and its people the scourge of war and destruction.

class="wp-block-image size-full">WHAT IS HAPPENING IN LEBANON

The ball is now in the court of the Lebanese people, who are supposed to say their word by handing over Hezbollah’s weapons to the Lebanese army, so that Lebanon will not be a theater of proxy wars that have no camels or camels in them, as the Lebanese people have nothing left to lose, their economy has reached the point of bankruptcy, and the level of poverty It rose frighteningly, until the explosion of Beirut came to complete what was missing. If there is no firm popular demand for the dismantling of Hezbollah’s weapons, the state of instability and weak economy will continue, and perhaps an upcoming war, and who will pay the price except the Lebanese people?

The sovereign movement in Lebanon is at a crossroads.. This movement, which is regrouping its civil, party and media forces to confront the hegemony of Hezbollah, and behind it Iran, finds itself in front of a basic question that it must answer quickly, so as not to lose the way in its legitimate struggle.

Do the sovereigns in Lebanon want their movement to be part of the wave of Arab liberation that has been sweeping the Arab world, albeit at a sporadic pace, since 2011, and for their movement to fit in with the yearning of other Arab peoples, especially the youth segments in them, to be liberated from the oppression of their dictatorial regimes? Or do they want to put their Lebanese sovereign movement against this wave of Arab liberation? Do they want to place their movement within the context of history, or against the course of history?

If the Lebanese sovereign movement chooses to proceed with the second option it is currently adopting, i.e. submitting to the dictates of Arab dictatorial regimes that suppress its opponents and commit war crimes in the region, then it is doomed to failure.

In the rams that occur between the axis of opposition led by Iran and the Arab-Gulf axis led by Saudi Arabia , the Lebanese sovereigns tend quickly and recklessly to fall completely into the arms of the Arab regimes, especially the Gulf ones, without the slightest real reservation, as allies in their confrontation (that is, the sovereigns) of Hezbollah in Lebanon .

In this choice, the Lebanese sovereigns do not take into consideration the negative repercussions that this would entail on the sovereignty of their country, nor those that would result, especially in the long run, in their relationship with the Arab peoples, especially the rising youth segments within them, in their liberation struggle against repressive regimes that govern it.

In fact, by adopting this option of falling into the arms of the repressive Arab regimes, the sovereigns do nothing but imitate the Hezbollah they are facing, which with its Lebanese allies is falling into the arms of the axis of resistance led by Iran and other repressive Arab regimes, such as the Assad regime in Syria.

In their approach, the Lebanese sovereigns fall into major contradictions that would weaken their position and the legitimacy of their cause.

Sovereignty cannot be selective; It is not right for the Lebanese sovereigns to criticize the subordination of Hezbollah and its Lebanese allies to Iran, when they are subordinate to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others. It is also not logical for the Lebanese sovereigns to call for the neutralization of Lebanon from the policy of the axes ( which they mistakenly call “neutrality” ) as a way to confront the hegemony of the “Shiite” axis over Lebanon, while they fall into the arms of the “Sunni” axis led by Saudi Arabia.


Like sovereignty, freedom also cannot be selective. It is not logical for the Lebanese sovereigns to condemn the war crimes committed by the axis of resistance exclusively throughout the region, especially in Syria since 2011, without saying a word about the war crimes committed by Saudi Arabia in Yemen. For example, which is documented in reports not only by human rights NGOs, but also by some legal bodies of international organizations, such as the United Nations Group of Eminent International and Regional Experts (the last report was on September 14, 2021).

Especially since it is not logical to call for a democratic struggle against the political authority (or “system”) controlled by Hezbollah in Lebanon – that is, as the sovereigns say in Lebanon – and at the same time allying with repressive and undemocratic Arab regimes towards their people.

And if it is not right for sovereignty or freedom to be either selective, then it is also not possible to separate one from the other, if that is on the internal level or even on the external level. In other words, Lebanese sovereignty cannot be separated from the freedom of other Arab peoples. Sovereignty cannot be achieved in Lebanon without the freedom of the peoples that surround this country, especially if this Lebanese sovereignty is placed in opposition to the freedom of the peoples of other Arab countries.


In this context, it is useful to remind the Lebanese sovereigns of the famous saying made by the late journalist and historian Samir Kassir during the Cedar Revolution in 2005: “The Arab Spring, when it blooms in Beirut, announces the time of roses in Damascus,” through which he stressed the interrelationship between Lebanese sovereignty. And the freedom of other Arab peoples, meaning that the sovereignty of the Lebanese people is inseparable from the freedom of other Arab peoples, and it is impossible to achieve without this freedom. This observation is not only related to the relationship of the Lebanese people with the rest of the Arab peoples, but it applies to the relations of all the peoples of the Arab countries among themselves.

The counter-revolutions engineered by some Arab regimes, especially the Gulf ones, in the countries that witnessed the Arab Spring, have proven the correctness of Qasir’s vision regarding the interrelationship between the struggles of the Arab peoples, whether for the sake of sovereignty, freedom, or livelihood.

Accordingly, it is not appropriate for the Lebanese sovereign cause to call those in charge of it the Lebanese state to submit to the dictates of the Arab dictatorships in the region in the stray and incoming, especially with regard to keeping pace with the repression carried out by these autocracies against their opponents, or through the contribution of some Lebanese sovereigns in perpetuating the impunity of these regimes from Punishment through their participation in spreading silence about the war crimes that they may commit, especially in Yemen, for example.

It also does not fit with the image that the Lebanese dream of their country as an oasis of freedoms – especially freedom of opinion and expression – in the region.

Journalists Gebran Tueni and Samir Kassir, who were assassinated because they were among the pillars of the Cedar Revolution that led in 2005 to the withdrawal of Syrian forces after 28 years of presence in Lebanon, were certainly not martyred in order for Lebanon to become a state dominated by Iran through Hezbollah, but they were not martyred either in order to Anyone is prevented from speaking freely in Lebanon, even if we radically disagree with what he says or advocates. The martyrdom of these two intellectual and cultural statures has embodied and immortalized the Lebanese connection to freedom of expression, and it is imperative that the Lebanese sovereigns be up to the responsibility placed upon them by the memory of the martyrs of the Cedar Revolution in their struggle for Lebanon’s sovereignty and freedom of opinion and expression on its territory.

Accordingly, if Lebanon has to comply internally with the will of other countries every time an Arab or non-Arab regime in the region classifies an opposition party as a “terrorist organization” (that is, as happened, for example, with the Bahraini Al-Wefaq Society), as a means of suppressing and silencing it Silencing the mouths of its members, and if the Lebanese state should also prevent this party from expressing its opinion freely in Lebanon, this will harm not only freedom of expression in Lebanon, but the principle of its sovereignty first.


No country has the right to impose its will on Lebanon in order to tell it who is entitled to receive it on its territory, or not. This is a sovereign issue that cannot be underestimated in order to go along with any country, even if it is friendly.

It is also not appropriate for the Lebanese sovereign cause to throw it into the arms of some regimes that are rushing to normalize with the Israeli entity, violating the wall of the prolonged occupation and its heinous daily practices against the Palestinian people and their sovereignty.

And if Hezbollah violates Lebanese sovereignty on a daily basis, and suppresses its opponents by various judicial means, especially “non-judicial”, this does not mean that the sovereign forces should imitate it, nor accept a violation of Lebanese sovereignty by the other axis, even if the methods differed and were less averse. and violently.

Moreover, the blatant interference carried out by Hezbollah in the internal affairs of some Arab countries, especially the Gulf countries, cannot be remedied with a corresponding error, that is, by imposing dictates on Lebanon that would undermine the sovereignty of its state.

The Lebanese sovereign movement will not be able to succeed in achieving its goal except through two things: emphasizing the interrelationship between Lebanon’s sovereignty and the principle of neutralizing Lebanon from the policy of axes, and insisting on linking Lebanon’s sovereignty to the freedom of other Arab peoples , without that implying at all hostility to Arab countries or their regimes, but rather a commitment By dealing with it and with its requests, even with the least degree of equality, which preserves the sovereignty of the Lebanese state, and secures the respect of the Lebanese sovereigns for the struggles of the peoples of these countries for freedom.

These two matters, if they are respected in deed and not only in words by the Lebanese sovereigns, would remove the Lebanese sovereign cause from the Lebanese crucible and from the dependence on some regimes, and elevate it to the ranks of the just and moral humanitarian issues, that is, those issues that are characterized by a high degree of respect in the world, especially because those in charge of it have thus proven that they have a high degree of awareness and respect for the other.

An issue of the size and importance of the sovereignty of the Lebanese state deserves such a preliminary review, and such a pause of conscience.


Translate »