Why did the decision to limit arms preceded contacts with Hezbollah?

If Tom Barak and Morgan Ortigos to Beirut tomorrow, Monday, began with them from Tel Aviv, the equivalent of the steps made by Lebanon that he should have taken from the first day of the formation of the government, then entering into the banned with an inevitable reality despite the attempts made by the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, with “Hezbollah” through his delegates, Mohamed Obaid and Andre Rahal, to persuade the leadership. Party in “Haret Hreik” should not deal with what was decided in the hearing of the fifth of August in a negative way.

The atmosphere in which a delegate returned to the President of the Republic suggests that nothing reassures that “Hizbullah” is able at the present time to overcome what is drawn for him in Tehran, in addition to what he built from “glories” for forty -four years will not be waived with this easy and simplicity overnight. The “Ben” position, which was transferred by Ubaid and Rahhal to President Aoun, does not encourage much to go with optimism, long distances, especially since what accompanied “Hummerouja” collected weapons from the Palestinian camps has re -researched this file to its first square.
These communications come ten days before the supposed date for the cabinet session and hold the army plan that includes its vision and the mechanism to limit the weapons, in an attempt to bridge the rift and coordinate to reach a way out of the political, governmental and national crisis before the next government session in early September.
According to the available information, despite the severe secrecy of what happened between Rahal and the head of the “Al -Wafa Resistance” bloc, MP Muhammad Raad, the presidential delegate was informed of Hizbullah’s adherence to his position rejecting the recent decisions of the government and the necessity of correcting the error before any discussion or dialogue with regard to the next stage, and that there is no discussion of the fate of weapons before achieving the Israeli withdrawal and stopping attacks and assaults Restore the prisoners, return the southern displaced and obtain guarantees for reconstruction.
Accordingly, it can be said that there are no indications until the time of the possibility of reaching any settlement or intermediate formula for the solution, as “Hizbulb” is determined to close the door to presidential initiatives.
In principle, it is difficult to say that the government decision did not come in its normal position. This was supported by the majority of the Lebanese. No one wants to be on the security scene except the legal weapon, and that any other weapon, whether it is Lebanese or Palestinian or other identity, is no longer a place in the Lebanese Arabs in its purely sovereign concept.
But what cannot be accepted by a political point of view that this decision comes without preceding it, that is, in the sense that a decision of this national importance was to be motivated to communicate with the political leadership of “Hizbullah”, which is the first and last concerned with this file, given that the “party” is the only party that has a weapon outside the framework of Lebanese legitimacy.
If these contacts were made before this decision was made, which was described as historical, the partisan reactions may be lower and less cramping. And since all this unjustified rejection, as all those who support this decision see it.
As most veteran politicians say, decision -making, whatever its type and whatever its importance, is one of the basics in the regularity of institutional work. But what is more important than decision -making is first to look at the issue in all its aspects so that the implementation comes free of any impurity, and secondly those who make bold decisions to expect in advance reactions to them, especially since the past experiences have proven that any decision taken without his injustice is a lesson and a scrutiny that remains ink on paper, or as it was said in the past for “Baabda” about the distance of Lebanon itself from the incidents and events of the region “They walked and drank from Mito,” although all political forces have agreed to this declaration in one of the dialogue tables, which were held in Baabda headed by President Michel Suleiman.