A statement to the Deputy Prime Minister ignites a campaign .. and peace responds: committed to the goals of the American paper

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said yesterday, “We did not adhere to the American paper, but rather the goals of the paper, and we are still committed to the goals, after the Lebanese amendments that we made on the paper.”

Salam’s words came after a confusion that raised the last statement of Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Mitri, and stated that “the Park Park fell.”

In this context, “Al -Nahar” wrote: It was soon turned out that Mitri said in a television interview: The American delegate, Tom Barak, returned to Lebanon without an Israeli answer, and that the government will not retract the decision to limit weapons because it was mentioned in the ministerial statement, in isolation from the American paper, and this is what will be discussed on Friday.

Mitri later explained via X, saying: The interviewer used the phrase “Barak’s paper” and I did not use it, as I was satisfied with saying that Barak did not come from Israel with any new.

Mitri was subjected to a frequent and focused attack campaign that led him to comment in a second tweet, so he wrote: “There are those who do not hear what I said or do not read what I wrote and attacks you and there are also those who do not hear and read and do not understand and attack you, and there are the third of those who hear and read and understand and make up for your discussion attack on you.

Al -Diyar wrote: “It has become known that Barak’s recent visit left a great disappointment among Lebanese officials and inside the government, so Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Mitri described yesterday the American paper after the Israeli rejection that it was“ without value ”, and said that“ the Lebanese government has become a solution from it. ”

He called his words a quick comment from Prime Minister Nawaf Salam by saying: “We did not adhere to the American paper, but rather its goals, and we are still committed to the goals after the amendments that we made on the paper.”
And the call of the homeland wrote: Since his name was hesitated to join the first government of the era, a large campaign was launched in refusal to appoint him to this position, not a decrease from him, but rather because it was clear that he would not be of the challenges of the new stage of the history of Lebanon, which began to be drawn with the election of General Joseph Aoun as President of the Republic and the choice of Judge Nawaf Salam as head of the government. He behaves as if nothing has changed in the region, specifically in Lebanon, as if international and Arab demands have not reached his ears yet, so metric positions appear in more than one occasion closer to the Shiite duo than him to the covenant and the government to which he belongs, and his convictions are more consistent with the axis of reluctance and are not committed to the speech of the department and the ministerial statement.
His last political sites, he recorded it in his recent television interview, when he said: “The paper of Tom Barak, and Lebanon fell into a solution from it.” He fell, his government, the burden of statements that certainly do not express it, especially since this position violates the course of the cabinet sessions in 5 and 7, and the acknowledgment of the 11 goals of the American paper.
Like wildfire, his statement spread through social media, where politicians, media and activists circulated it, and they became angry again on him, so that some have reached the point of his demand to resign from the government as he went out of its principles, considering that if he does not want to step down, he must be dismissed or confidence in him.
And on the basis of “not every time to receive the jar”, its clarification did not help this time. On his personal account, through the “X” platform, who is full of clarification, negation and denial publications, the Deputy Prime Minister wrote, “The interviewer used the phrase” Brak’s paper “and I did not use it. I was satisfied with saying that Barak did not come from Israel with any new.”
But whoever listens to Mitri’s television talk, he notes that he has gone and toured for more than five minutes to explain his position, and when he was asked whether the “Barak Park fell” answered support, but rather repeated more than once that it was “without value”, as it was previously determined that the government session next Friday will not start from the American paper, but will witness a discussion between Lebanese on how to implement the ministerial statement on Weapon.
And Mitri said yesterday that “the American initiative did not eat it and that the Lebanese government has become a solution from it, but it is not in a solution from its ministerial statement and the decision to limit arms in the hands of the state,” considering that there is a difference between the two things.
The words of the American delegate, Tom Barak, described the journalists as “a little polite and wicked.”
He revealed that he discussed with President Berri, “The importance of the upcoming cabinet session will prevail in dialogue and discussion, as there is what we disagree about and there is what we agree on, and it is desirable to start with what is agreed upon.”
Regarding fears of the cabinet session on Friday and the developments of the coming days, he said, “My fear is not great, but I realize the difficulty of the discussion so that we do not disagree more.”
He stressed that with “dialogue within the constitutional institutions, and with every bilateral, triple or quadruple dialogue between people.”
He described the current stage as “an openness stage between us to see with each other how to build a country with one army that extends its power on all Lebanese lands.”
He saw through the declared positions that “the army, the government, and Hezbollah agree that there is no confrontation between the army and the people, and the Lebanon conflict – Lebanese or sedition does not happen because no one wants sedition.”
And he stressed that there is no reason for the government to retreat from its decision to limit the weapon, he said, “It will discuss the army’s plan, and I do not want to anticipate things, but of course we have cost the army because it knows more of us how the cabinet’s decision is implemented and explains how and the time period, and we will discuss the issue, and if we are convinced that he is more knowledgeable than him, this does not mean a retreat from the government’s decision.”

In a government context, also, the Minister of Finance, Yassin Jaber, issued a statement through his media office saying that “some media and social media have been circulating for a while ago, a fragmented news, sometimes fabricated and misleading about the position of the Minister of Finance on the current political developments.”
The office added that “despite the repeated negation of what is attributed to him in error and distortion, and despite Minister Jaber repeatedly confirming his position in support of the state to restore its sovereignty over every inch of its lands that are still occupied by Israel, and preserving the dignity of the southerners and other affected people from its ongoing attacks, compensation for them, and rejecting any position that justifies these attacks or supports these means, these means are still He is insisting on the fabrication of news and continuing to mislead it according to its whims.
The statement indicated that “this can only be explained that the only goal is to mislead and confuse, and they are attempts that do not change anything in fixed facts or in convictions.”