Barak paper fell practically and the campaign continues on Mitri

Gasbi Al -Mukhtar wrote in “Major General”: Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Mitri alluded that the paper of the American delegate, Tom Barrak, to implement the ceasefire agreement – and from the Lebanese side only – has fallen, even if he later denied his speech about the fall of the paper, but he stressed that Barak did not carry anything new to Lebanon and that the Lebanese government has become in a solution, but not in a solution from its ministerial statement and the decision to limit the arms in the hands of the state, ” The two things, ”in an indirect indication that Barak only conveyed the Israeli dictates and what Lebanon should implement before any talk with the Israeli entity about what is required to be implemented on its part. And with President Nawaf Salam asserting that Lebanon is committed to the goals and principles of the American paper in terms of the deployment of the Lebanese army in the entire south and the withdrawal of weapons and what the procedures for arranging the relationship with Syria require, in exchange for the withdrawal of the H.

Accordingly, it remains that the Council of Ministers will discuss practically at its session next Friday, a general plan for the Lebanese army to withdraw weapons and to complete its deployment in the south, but without executive effects on the ground until a comprehensive and comprehensive political consensus occurs on the plan, and the American pressure obtaining an uniform entity to implement steps and not a single step in exchange for the many steps of Lebanon that has been implemented so far.
An official Masayer expected the brigade to hold the session on time, noting that there is no thinking about its postponement until now, and the communications exist, but it is excluded that it leads to a result in light of the declared positions, but the army’s plan studied is different from voting on and approving it, and if the approach within the session is voting on the plan and its approval, then the duo ministers will likely withdraw from it. Therefore, the army commander is expected to present the plan that does not include dates and timetables for implementation and is discussed with him, and the research may be completed in a later session, especially with the existence of a view that says that the plan becomes effective if Israel and Syria agreed to implement the American paper, and if an answer does not come from them, the implementation of the plan is suspended until the reasons that help implement. As for implementation in the event of a positive answer, he has another discussion on the type of weapon heavy and average or comprehensive all kinds of weapons, the fate of the weapon and where it is placed? She wrote “Call of the homeland”; The reversions of the “whirlwind” raised by Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Mitri continued, and President Nawaf Salam led her in its cradle by responding to Mitri, but despite the lack of legal value of what Mitri made and considering his words as a matter of “political gossip”, political circles called for the research of Mitri’s “jurisprudence” at the cabinet table so that the approach of the “confusion” that overlooks the time that appears from it For another.
She added: “If a metric performance since the formation of the government is identical to the positions of the“ Shiite duo ”and his incomprehensible goals in an incomprehensible manner consistent with the ministerial statement, and causes embarrassment to President Salam, at home as in front of external supporters, he led him to keep him away from the forefront, then the moment he declared the fall of the“ Barak paper ”simply does not consider with political jurisprudence, showed him as if he was not a deputy prime minister, but a deputy prime minister, but a deputy prime minister, but a deputy prime minister, “Hizbullah” Sheikh Naim Qasim.
Jean Fajali wrote in the call of the homeland, “Usually, the Speaker of Parliament, Nabih Berri, is not released from his chest components except for a few few, and when these“ components ”are issued, they have been shameful in scrutiny and scrutiny before they go out to the light. Berri on the 17th of May … “. He replies in the article,” Berri says with disappointment: “O local May 17.” The article was consumed by saying: “That the fate reaches a day when President Nabih Berri shall be merciful to the 17th of May agreement, as this is not possible to imagine.” However, it seems that it was possible that President Berri had mercy on May 17, who “committed his overthrow”, but was one of the “arms” that overthrew the agreement as the decision was in the hands of the late Syrian President Hafez al -Assad. The May 17 agreement became a law, after the House of Representatives approved it on 14/6/1983, which authorized the government to conclude the agreement held between the government of the Lebanese Republic and the government of the State of Israel on May 17, 1983. It was approved less than a month after reaching it, and he needed to sign the President of the Republic at the time, Amin Gemayel, to become influential, but the beautiful president did not sign him.
The approval session was held under the chairmanship of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Kamel Al -Asaad, on Monday, June 13, 1983, and the government was represented by President Shafiq Al -Wazzan, and a number of ministers, including three Shiite ministers, and the number of representatives present reached seventy -two deputies (the number of members of the House of Representatives was 99 deputies, the deceased seven deputies and the absentees nineteen deputies)
Today, forty -two years later, President Nabih Berri is “regained” for the “May 17 Agreement”, as if in his decision he apologizes to the Speaker of Parliament Kamel Al -Asaad, who was approved by the agreement during his reign as Speaker of the House of Representatives. How much was the fully so far -sided, and how long he had brought him down! Was the Lebanese had to wait forty -two years to hear the apology who contributed to dropping the agreement?