Does Lebanon pay the price of a slowdown in disarmament of the “party”?

Newspaper

External pressures are increasing for the sake of Lebanon on the path of making a clear political decision to withdraw the Hezbollah weapon and all other factions. Until now, there is a rejection of all the conditions that Lebanon sets or the guarantees that it demands, this refusal is accompanied by the increase in the level of threats, especially since Israel considers the party in a position unable to impose conditions. According to the diplomatic atmosphere, Tel Aviv does not agree with all Lebanese proposals.

In this context, international messages are repeated in order to take practical steps by the government, on the basis that the time is narrowing and it has become imminent, and that Israel will impose its schedule and the mechanism of its work if Lebanon does not deal seriously with the file of weapons. It is clear that the pressure will increase on Lebanese officials to put them in front of the responsibility of making a decision, and what the international powers want is that this decision be taken from the Council of Ministers, i.e. the imposition of a government session to be imposed on the arms file is on its agenda, and it is made a clear decision regarding its withdrawal from all groups and parties and restricting it in the hands of the Lebanese state, but even if that happens, the main question or the biggest challenge remains the executive mechanism that will be followed, and how This will be achieved, and if this goal can be achieved as long as Hezbollah refuses to search by withdrawing weapons before obtaining the necessary guarantees, security, military and political.

In this context, there are also attempts to choose Lebanon between paying the price as a state, society and Hezbollah part of it in the event that the authority does not collect the necessary decision -making and the required measures and use seriously away from the “intentions of intentions”, and that the state is neutralized from Hezbollah to pay the price alone, by paying towards making a clear decision by the Council of Ministers to limit the arms in the hands of the state, and withdraw the weapon of all groups outside the control of institutions Official. These two options are divided into the interpretation of their repercussions. On the one hand, there are those who are difficult to hold a government session in which it takes a clear decision to withdraw the party’s weapon, and take executive measures, the first of which is the announcement of a political decision granted to the Lebanese army in order to begin the process of withdrawing weapons from all regions and sites according to a specific mechanism.

Here there are those who consider that the “Shiite duo” will boycott any such session, and will not give his legitimacy to any decision of this kind. While others consider that the party will not be able to boycott and that the government -affiliated ministers are cut off, the government does not lose its quorum unless a wide alliance is formed by the party that refuses to do so. They are based on the fact that Hezbollah will not be able to confront the government, the state, or the decisions that it will make, but rather will have to deal with realism exactly as it was dealt with with the facts in the south of the Litani River. These early days are restored to the ceasefire and the statements made by the party at the time, declaring that it will not agree to hand over any weapon, but later, he returned, agreed and handed over many stores to the army, and abandoned many of its military structure.

The post Does Lebanon pay the price of a slowdown in disarmament of the “party”? appeared first on 961 tobay Lebanon today.