Israeli bargaining at the expense of Lebanon

Imad Merm wrote in “Al -Gomhoria”: Netanyahu was satisfied with expressing his appreciation for the government’s decision to disarm “Hezbollah”, but he linked any practical steps from the Israeli side by starting practical steps taken by the Lebanese authorities to disarm.

Not only that, but Netanyahu indicated that “the Israeli forces will gradually reduce their presence in southern Lebanon if the authorities succeed in the weapon.” It is noteworthy here, that Netanyahu deliberately used the term “gradual reduction” and not a complete withdrawal, in a clear indication that he wants to extort the Lebanese state until the maximum possible limits, as if what is required of Lebanon is to fill all the “tax” due to it under a Barak paper under the “fine,” while the Israeli is given the privilege of paying the comfortable installment. What is worth noting is that Al -Aqdo will pay from the bag of Lebanon in all cases, as the five points that he occupied at the border edge are new, and he must withdraw from it within a period of 60 days from the date of reaching the agreement to stop hostilities on November 27, 2024, according to what the same agreement notes, provided that this is met by the “Hizbul” The Lebanese, and this is what the “party” adhered to, while Tel Aviv was withdrawing.
And circles in the “Shiite duo” pointed out that from the moment the government agreed to the American paper and decided to withdraw the “Hezbollah” weapon, she lost any ability to initiate or maneuver, and lost its diplomatic defensive lines, so that it was later found that whenever she tried to get the fire ball out of its stadium she returned to it again, as happened when Netanyahu responded to its response to the offering The American to demand more, without finding himself forced to take any practical action on the ground to facilitate the matter of this government. The circles indicate that what was afraid of it occurred, which is that as soon as the state presented the American and the Israeli the first unacceptable waiver, they moved to its demand for the second and then after and after it and so on, while it was required to adhere to the ceiling of insistence on implementing the agreement to stop hostilities before involvement in any other obligations, provided that the fate of the weapon is discussed within a dialogue on the “national security strategy” from which the strategy emerges from Defense. ”