The Advisor to the President of the Republic for Constitutional Affairs and International Law and the National Coordinator of the Centenary of the Constitution, Dr. Antoine Sfeir, representing the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, affirmed that Lebanon will remain committed to its sovereignty and independence, stressing that the Lebanese state will not give up an inch of its land or any of its rights to borders and waters.
In a speech he delivered on behalf of President Aoun during the conference “Patriarch Howek between History and Holiness: From the Drafting of the Lebanese Constitution 1926 to the Path of Holiness 2026,” Sfeir said that the talk about Patriarch Elias Howek, “the great father of Lebanon,” is long, considering that between Howek and Holiness “a relationship of existence,” and between him and history “a connection of destiny,” and with the drafting of the constitution “a path related to freedom and democracy.” And pluralism in all its meanings.”
He added that Al-Howayek saw Lebanon as “a fortress of freedom and liberties, a refuge for the persecuted and a habitat for the free,” stressing from the presidency’s website that work will continue for Lebanon to remain and return as Al-Howayek and the elders wanted it to be, “a fortress of freedom without derogation, a refuge for thinkers without ambiguity, and a home for the free in a state protected by laws.”
Sfeir touched upon Al-Howayek’s struggle for Lebanon’s freedom and human liberation, recalling his opposition to unjust policies in collecting taxes, his role in establishing the Association of Maronite Sisters of the Holy Family, and the construction of the Shrine of Our Lady of Lebanon, considering that these achievements constitute part of the national and spiritual legacy he left behind.
Sfeir stressed that Lebanon today is regaining the dream for which Al-Howayek and those with him among the first fought, and said: “From the position of our constitutional powers and our national responsibilities before history and generations, we pledge not to give up an inch of Lebanese land from the south to all of Lebanon, and we will not give up a line of borders, or a right to water.”
He stressed that Lebanon will not tolerate “any infringement on its sovereignty over its land and sea,” adding: “We are negotiating to liberate the land and the dignity of the people of the land. We are negotiating to end wars one last time, unlike all other times. We are negotiating to restore stolen rights, violated sovereignty, and wasted dignity.”
He pointed out that what is required is not politics or factions, but rather what Patriarch Howayek wanted: “that Greater Lebanon remain great with its land and the dignity of its people,” considering that Greater Lebanon is not just a geographical area or a pluralistic, parliamentary, democratic system of government, but rather “a missionary-apostolic space in the East, and a bridge of dialogue and communication between cultures and societies.”
Sfeir pointed out that this concept pushes for action to adopt Lebanon as a center for dialogue of religions, cultures, and races, considering that Lebanon experienced successive crises after independence, from the 1948 catastrophe, the setback of 1967, and the Cairo Agreement, to the interventions, guardianships, and occupations that turned it into a battlefield.
He said: “It is time for all of this to end, there is no turning back,” stressing that the decision must return to its owners, “to the nurturing and responsible Lebanese state, and to the presidency of the state that has the authority according to the constitution.”
He added: “Everything is negotiable except the sacred rights to sovereignty, dignity, and complete independence. Every issue is negotiable unless a force beyond logic confiscates the state’s decision and its institutions.”
Speaking about the centenary of the Constitution, Sfeir stressed that the occasion constitutes an important milestone for remembering the Constitution, celebrating it, and enriching the national debate through it, stressing that the Constitution is the sponsor of the work of institutions and officials, after the crises that Lebanon suffered in governance and rulers.
He considered that the abbreviation of Patriarch Howayek in national politics is that “his sect is Lebanon,” with all the meaning of the phrase, noting that in the constitutional and legal outcome, on November 10, 1919, he obtained a written pledge from the French Prime Minister and President of the Peace Conference, Georges Clemenceau, in which he recognized to the Lebanese independence, and the right of the Lebanese mountain to the plains and seaports necessary for its prosperity.
Sfeir believed that this pledge was considered a document of independence, and that Al-Howayek sought to properly implement the mandate and not turn it into a form of colonialism, respect Lebanese privacy, and develop a modern constitution that keeps pace with the requirements of Lebanon, describing the Lebanese constitution as “the only civil constitution in the entire region, and one of the most open and qualitative texts in accordance with international standards.”
He stressed that Al-Howayek wanted, with Greater Lebanon, to establish Lebanon’s identity by affirming national legitimacy, attaching to the guarantee of international legitimacy, and demarcating geographical borders, stressing that this is what is called for today through “liberating the national decision, returning to the umbrella of the state and the spirit of the national charter, implementing international resolutions, and neutralizing Lebanon from conflicts.”
Sfeir concluded, recalling what was stated in Bishop Al-Faghali’s eulogy for Patriarch Howayek: “Consider the thought of Lebanon’s past. It was in a continuous battle. It never laid head on the invaders, nor bowed its back to them. It defeated and was not subjugated, it won and was not arrogant, and it was not satisfied without independence within reach,” adding: “And we will not be satisfied without the independence of Lebanon.”
