Between September 2004 and September 2025 … nothing changed in Lebanon

Between September 2004, specifically in the second of it, and between September 2025, specifically in the fifth of it, twenty -one years of the life of a homeland still suffers from what he had previously lived from the scourge of wars, weapons, the dominant and the commandments, and what is expected to happen today after the cabinet session, whether the army plan approved in relation to the issue of “exclusive weapons”, or was it sufficient to take the knowledge after listening to what the commander of the army Temple of data.
In the September 2, 2004 session, the martyr President Rafik Hariri was the head of the Lebanese government, in which the decision to renew the state of President Amil Lahoud was made after the pressures that Syria exerted on the Lebanese government and its president and the House of Representatives. This extension was among the main reasons, which prompted the UN Security Council to issue Resolution 1559 on the same day of the extension session of the Hodness, in which: He reaffirms its demand for full respect for Lebanon’s sovereignty, regional safety, unity and political independence under the authority of the government of Lebanon alone without dispute all over Lebanon. He demands all the remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon. The control of the government of Lebanon on all Lebanese territory. It announces its support for a free and fair electoral process in the upcoming presidential elections takes place in accordance with the rules of the Lebanese constitution established without foreign interference or influence. He demands all the parties concerned to cooperate in full cooperation and in the face The Secretary -General is to provide the Security Council within thirty days with a report on the implementation of the parties to this decision, and it is decided that the issue remains in its actual consideration. And that the thing is mentioned, what was mentioned in this decision and the principles approved by the government in the American paper are many aspects. The important thing is that what was later imposed in Resolution 1559 was only translated with the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon after the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri while the disarmament item was not implemented “Hezbollah” and the Palestinian armed organizations. As for today’s session, there is a deep internal crisis accompanied by continuous security tension in the south, and international pressure to reactivate the institutions of the Lebanese state. If we want to make a quick comparison between yesterday and today, the following notes can be made: -In the year 2004 the government was under direct Syrian pressure, then it chose to walk contrary to the spiritual spirit of Resolution 1559 through the extension. For President Lahoud. This led to strengthening Syrian influence in Lebanon. In the year 2025, the government declared its willingness to approach a basic clause of the same decision (exclusive weapon), after the direct Syrian influence was absent to replace its place, but Iranian influence through “Hezbollah”. Permission that the dates in Lebanon have symbolism exceeding the limits of time. After twenty -one years, the scene is repeated, but in the opposite direction. The government today is looking into the army’s plan to devote the principle of exclusive weapons, in an attempt to revive the essence of Resolution 1559 after two decades of its ignorance. The paradox is that the two sessions are separated by a full stage of Lebanon’s history: the first represented the refraction of the state in front of the tutelage of the outside, and the second may constitute the beginning of the state’s restoration of its decision, even if slowly and gradually in the event that it is done with this delicate stage with much wisdom and political realism. Himself: A regional and international attraction, but the difference is that his government today is trying to put itself as a party to the equation, not just a spectator. Will September 2025 be the beginning of the path of restoration of sovereignty, or a new episode in the series of disruption? All indications that the next stage will not be easy. If the government decides to proceed with the army plan, it will inevitably face an internal challenge represented in the position of “Hizbullah” and its allies, who may resort to disruption or even the field escalation of obstruction. On the other hand, any serious step in this direction may open the door for broad international support for Lebanon, especially by strengthening the army and providing conditional economic aid to the extent of the state’s ability to extend its sovereignty. The scenario is closest to the reality is to enter the stage of long negotiations between home and abroad, interspersed with taking a response between the Lebanese forces, with the major capitals seeking to impose a gradual schedule for implementing Resolution 1559. Tell the results of the September 2004 session and the subsequent political and security earthquakes, they realize that the September 2025 session may also be a historical turn, either towards restoring the state, or towards a new crisis that reproduces the impasse itself with different names.