Lebanon is experiencing turbulent days. In yesterday’s government session, for the frist time officially, the issue of weapons monopoly and the necessity to restrict arms exclusively to the state was raised. During several hours of deliberations, Lebanon’s army was assigned the task of presenting an operational plan by the end of 2025 to establish sole control over all weapons.
Tense Session at Baabda palace
By midday Tuesday, talks suggested a middle ground might be reached.However, tensions were clear throughout the meeting. Ministerial sources stressed that Nawaf Salam and ministers from the Lebanese Forces party defied prior agreements by exerting heavy pressure that turned the session into a scheme with potential to plunge Lebanon into major crisis. The president also came under intense pressure but chose not to suspend or postpone discussions on this contentious issue.
the sources noted that while tensions ran high during the session, no violent clashes occurred.They added that Prime Minister Salam seemed compelled to act in line with Washington and Riyadh’s expectations, focusing solely on examining Thomas Barrack’s memorandum presented during this meeting.
Nawaf Salam Insists on Implementing U.S.-Backed plan
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam announced that disarming non-state groups and consolidating all arms under government control must be completed by year-end 2025.
He added that Lebanon’s military has been tasked with drafting a comprehensive plan for exclusive state monopoly over weapons by August 31st at latest-prior to implementing it before year-end.
Hezbollah Reacts Strongly
A statement from Hezbollah declared: The Nawaf Salam government has made a grave error in deciding to disarm Lebanon’s resistance forces against Israeli aggression. This weakens Lebanon’s ability and position in facing ongoing Israeli-American violations-and grants Israel gains it failed to achieve through past invasions thwarted notably during “Operation Grapes of Wrath.” That conflict concluded with an agreement compelling Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon territory along with cessation of its assaults.
The statement accused this decision of flagrantly violating both Lebanon’s constitution and its ministerial declaration which pledges commitment-per taif Accord-to fully liberate all occupied lands from Israeli occupation while extending governmental sovereignty across Lebanese territories via armed forces’ deployment recognized internationally at border zones.
Hezbollah emphasized: “Preserving Lebanese power necessarily includes maintaining resistance weaponry.” Strengthening national defense involves equipping and preparing armed forces capable of expelling Israeli enemies from Lebanese land as part of essential state safeguards.
The group blamed Thomas Barrack’s U.S.-led mandates behind this decision as outlined within cabinet justification papers-highlighting how Prime Minister Salam announced continuation debates on Barrack’s American memorandum scheduled for Thursday before assigning military authorities an operational mandate aimed at confiscating arms before year’s end. Hezbollah warned such steps serve “Israeli interests expressly” leaving Lebanon defenseless toward external threats.”
The statement also pointedly contradicted President Joseph Aoun’s inaugural pledge about pursuing “an integrated defense policy within a national security strategy” designed diplomatically, economically, militarily-to enable governmental eradication of Israeli occupation fully. The party branded Wednesday’s decree as submission-driven undermining foundational sovereignty principles in explicit contrast with those commitments.”
“The walkout by Hezbollah and Amal movement ministers reflects strong opposition representing both resistant sectors inside Lebanese society alongside wide popular dissent against subjugation under American tutelage plus continuing Israeli occupation,” according to Hezbollah statements-which vowed dismissing thes resolutions utterly as if nonexistent.”
“At same time,” they said,” we remain ready for dialog aimed towards ending Israel aggression against Lebanon; restoring lands; freeing prisoners; rebuilding war devastation – yet strictly not under occupation shadows.”
They stressed adherence first required implementation obligations from Israel side while prioritizing government’s efforts toward complete liberation consistent precisely with ministerial vows present since declaration signings.
The message concluded reminding citizens: “This is merely one stormy summer-we remain patient confident victory awaits us.”
amal Movement Protests Government Concessions Toward Tel Aviv
In response, Amal Movement issued a formal critique emphasizing: As November 27th 2024 ceasefire date between Israel-Lebanon hostilities was scrupulously respected-contrarywise enemy did not honor agreement even momentarily continuing airstrikes drone assassinations occupying parts including Five Hills area preventing displaced villagers’ return after destruction.
Amal urged govt instead channel efforts toward solidifying ceasefire foremost curbing relentless killing machine accountable for hundreds casualties among Lebanese population.
Hence said movement condemned state’s stance underlying lack concrete steps stabilizing truce contrasting presidential swear-in speeches plus ministerial statements-the upcoming Thursday session deemed critical chance correcting course restoring unity among factions across country landscape ulitmately challenged now by dire external impositions linked directly back washington-riyadh consensus enforcement attempts regarding disarmament matters.This call entailed demand reassertion comprehensive commitments devoid surrender policies compromising sovereignty either militarily politically or socially anywhere nationwide spaces until border corrections happen finally enabling return normalcy lost decades ago amid occupied regions still extant forcibly remained inaccessible presently demographically altered physically ravaged warrant special status official reconstruction aid upfront rather than endless political amplifier.”””
Zionists Celebrate Thanks To Lebanese PM
Israeli media expressed jubilation over Nawaf Salam government’s move targeting resistance weaponry.channel 14 TV described it as dramatic milestone clearing path towards normalized beirut-Tel Aviv relations expected next stage.
Maariv daily reported rapid changes unfolding inside lebanese politics cautioning any future regional cooperation would hinge heavily upon rigorous security oversight coupled above all dismantling Hezbollah arsenal.
Lebanon Moves Toward A Dangerous Precipice
It is undeniable these actions pressed aggressively inside lebanese ruling circles-including backing US allies backed domestic pro-western parties demanding strict timetable power disarmament imposed upon resistance, carry severe risks threatening fragility delicate balance nationwide stability.
Prominent Hizbollah deputy secretary general Sheikh Naim Qassem recently stated outright rejection refusing comply imposed timetable perceived sheer intimidation based specifically themes US-Israeli pressures.His tone sharpened stating erosion eight-month post-ceasefire calm could occur rapidly within one hour illustrating absolute zero concession willingness.
Meanwhile western-aligned factions lobbying determined deadline imposing scenario coalescing framework officials evaluate early next week July meeting scheduled appraisal documents introduced US envoy Thomas Barrack attention seeking either delays adjustment diplomatic maneuver final ratification stage possibly allowing concessions downscale original clauses taken out seriously militarily feasible timeframe considered illusory speculative expert opinion accords profound complexities inherent lebanese strategic reality noted repeatedly years past testing-and-trials many times split thought process reform approaches realized quite differently constantly debated polity arena herewith risks multiplying surging internal disputes susceptible unravel quickly shattering precarious peace every conflicting center competing influence spanning equally contest negotiations mentioned incessantly numerous rounds govern coalition negotiation attempts successive leadership upheavals result frustration expiration chance windows legitimacy confidence damage easily finalized resulting possible civil strife looming ultimately jeopardizes fragile fabric system deeply rooted present challenging economic collapse syrian case refugees unresolved remediate basic infrastructure accordingly worse hitting everyday life average citizen already subjected societal cleavages where lines drawn participation exclusion political inequality worsening poverty extremity corruption endemic problems situation nationally regionally multiply exponentially suffocating prospects recovery necesarios seek inclusive equitable multiparty dialogue urgently difuse remaining pools antagonistic engagements incapable ignoring territorial status quo left contested disputed still predominantly unresolved sanctuaries retained without acknowledgment continuously fostering resentments social cleavages terrorism recruiting cycles.]Critical question remains whether path chosen ushers indeed lasting stability envisioned behind elaborate rhetoric invoking ‘sovereignty,’ ‘monopoly on weapons,’ ‘economic recovery plans’ yet beneath surface embodies harsh conditionalities consistently advancing unilateral demands compromising sovereign prerogatives burden placed overwhelmingly unevenly shaping outcomes dictated externally identifying unequal partnerships asymmetrical cooperation likely advance unsustainable architecture forging dependency gradually eroding self-reliant capacities establishing dominations disguised institutional normative devices turn key leverage controlling decisions fixing disproportionate dominance vested foreign actors appearing benevolent meanwhile masking intrusion consequences strategic nature involving myriad forms coercions complicity embedded legal political cultural layers undermining historically coherent unified collective aspirations guaranteeing full self-determination providing alternatives rooted realism acknowledging intricate realities lived communities experience affected inclusive negotiable scenarios differ starkly simplistic prescriptive blueprints once gloss sufficient addressing acute bottom-line grievances linked directly survival dignity coexistence peaceful democratic plural society embedded centuries history diversified make-up different sectarian ethnic identities resilient another peril called neglect would deteriorate profoundly fueling spiral confrontation disorder uncertainty greater scale dangerous trends sure threat threaten small nation earldom fragile born struggles cyclical stateshood legacy entangled global geopolitical contests whenever pushed corner crises repeated patterns nevertheless indigenous heritage enduring pride resilience lives hope future generations surviving highest stakes can’t afford false start reckless gamble failing responsibilities committed leaders acting wisely collectively guided best interest entire people preserving territorial integrity independence democratic choices free majority willing cooperate forge renewed social contract tolerant embracing differences strengthening institutions safeguarding human rights irrespective race creed gender language ethnicity priority considering advancement imperative addressing hardships caused long-standing conflicts disasters exacerbated pandemic economic failures thereby setting benchmarks accountability transparency progress serving peoples aspirations instead destructive divisive sectarianism paralysis fear beyond external manipulations living therein never again forsaking liberties hard-won shared legacies collectively protect peacefully coexist overcome challenges ahead achievable only united led mature leadership embracing pragmatism values mutual respect understanding empathy solidarity cement working forming joint futures together stronger prosperous resilient sovereign free independent civilized equal member international community recognized honoured granted due clearly sustained foundation mutual respect diplomatic consultations necessary prior any drastic radical step soon effective ensuring minimal disruption maximum benefit taking carefully balanced approach reflecting country multifaceted nature requirements compared satisfying each distinct element striving compromise avoiding deeper fissures unnecessary escalation guaranteed irreversible setbacks multiplicative damages affecting ordinary citizens directly toll unique difficulties place confronted persistently impoverished exhausted exploited vulnerable marginalized suffering compounded multi-dimensional complex humanitarian emergency unpredictable.’”
