September 5 session … There is no place for cohabitation between the logic of the state and the state

The conclusion that any observer can be deduced from the government session yesterday, September, is that it resembles the fifth session of August in terms of distant goals to perpetuate the principle of national sovereignty. The difference between the two sessions is a time distance in which government decisions interacted between preserving internal stability on the one hand, and responding to the international community, especially the American, in what has to do with the extension of the state’s authority over the entire Lebanese soil. Between full sovereignty, political, financial, economic and administrative reforms. Without the sovereignty of full specifications, reforms remain ink on paper, and therefore corruption remains disorganized in every corner of the corners and joints of political life and in public administrations.

It is true that the people of power in Lebanon know its people. But knowledge alone is not sufficient in the event of the case of Lebanon, which is divided into itself and the one who is ruined if the Lebanese remain unable to the priorities of the rescue. And between the theory and the other meanings. For supporters of the decision to limit weapons in the hands of the legitimate forces other than that country, which the rejecting group sees the surrender of its weapons to the state. And between these and those not common denominators.
And between the authority’s keenness on civil peace and between responding to the external desire to see Lebanon, edited by any worker who may hinder his reform care and prosperity, the ideas of the Lebanese remain dispersed. No one wants the army to collide with any of the Lebanese components. But at the same time, none of these Lebanese wants to be hostile to the international community with the exception of this group, which refuses to surrender its weapon on the pretext that Lebanon will become without this weapon exposed to Israeli attacks. This category believes that the Al -Aqda government will not stop its attacks on Lebanon even if the state can extend its sovereignty over the entire Lebanese territories with its legitimate legitimate forces.
What some people see in any decision of the government in the interest of the civil peace, the abroad sees a deficit. What the outside sees as a feet is considered a conspiracy. Among all these theories, the internal situation remains on its fragility, and the Lebanese scene remains open to all possibilities, and among them, Washington may raise its hand from Lebanon and give it to Israel the green light to resume its wide and open attacks, which was prevalent before November 27 of last year.
The situation in Lebanon, as described by diplomatic, disturbing and dangerous circles. Among the reasons for this anxiety is the lack of understanding of the outside of Lebanese privacy, and the sensitivity of this privacy in the internal balances based on sectarian and sectarian pluralism from within the complex composition, which is difficult for the outside to understand the differentiation.
In the end, and to decide any controversy that will not lead to the resulting result, after the government put its finger on the bleeding wound in the session of last August 5. This result is for “Hizbullah” to understand it from the principle of impossibility of cohabitation between two logic: the logic of the state with the final decision on the issue of war and peace, and therefore it will not accept that anyone shares it in this decision, and in other decisions, which are related to the exclusive weapon, that is, to extend its authority over the entire Lebanese territories.
As for the second logic, it was represented by the departure of the Shiite ministers from the session first, and from the Republican Palace in a later step, and Minister Fadi Makki put his resignation in the behavior of the presidents of the Republic, which means that “Hizbullah” and the “Amal” movement continues to refuse to enter into any discussion outside the context of what was previously announced by President Nabih Berri about their willingness to discuss the issue from another angle, and it is confined to a “Hadi” dialogue. National Security.
And between these two logic that will not meet any common denominator that is going on the people of power between the points in the decision made by the government in relation to the mechanism of implementing the army plan.
The government decision taken in all its future aspects of detailed margins establishes a new stage that would enhance the authority of the state towards itself and towards all citizens, including the environment of the “Shiite duo”, and towards the international community, which monitors and is waiting for what will happen on the Lebanese scene, including its complications.