New work rules for the army in the south

Paula Murad wrote in “Al -Diyar”: It is supposed to stop long at the statement issued by the Lebanese army after the escalation of the Israeli operations of southern Lebanon last Thursday. Its coordination with the political leadership that Lebanon will not be able to fulfill its obligations to the exclusive weapon as long as Israel does not carry out the part of the ceasefire agreement and rejects the equation of the step in exchange for the step that the Americans had put forward. And if the American envoy Tom Brak fully understands the Lebanese position and expressed this more than once, unlike the envoy Morgan Ortagas, which always avoids holding any responsibility for Israel and is focused on finding justifications and arguments for its beings and attacks, then it seems that the highest voice in the American administration is for the extremists supporting the Tel Aviv who consider it to be wrong to ask for any step that you meet Lebanese positive steps before the entire Hizbullah weapon is confined.

Lebanese officials have become certain that the American initiatives in this regard have reached a dead end, so Ortigos see its duties to security and military as if they were sending a message that the word for the field and the strongest and dominant party is currently, any Tel Aviv.
Despite some of the differences between the presidents of the Republic, Joseph Aoun and the government, Nawaf Salam, in the approach of this file, specifically in terms of the latter, to implement the government’s decision to exclusively weapons, as this removes the justifications that Israel provides to continue its attacks, it seems as if they were the army’s leadership to be in the forefront in this file. Informed sources told Al -Diyar that “the decisive language that was mentioned in the last statement related to the situation in the south, clearly shows a new Lebanese pattern and policy in dealing with Israeli attacks,” considering that “this does not mean that Al -Ala will be deterred, but rather, on the contrary, it may intensify and expand its military campaigns, but what Lebanon confirms in this position is that it is not humiliating and is not. Other options to deal with the current reality. ”
In this context, retired Brigadier General Hassan Johnny stresses that what was stated in the army statement is never indicated to the existence of “a will for the leadership of the military establishment to obstruct the implementation of its plan to limit the weapon, as it is committed to the government, the era and the Lebanese to apply this plan, which was guaranteed to some extent a specific condition for its success related to the completion of the withdrawal of the HN army. Johnny believes in an interview with “Al -Diyar” that “the army statement is consistent with the content of the plan that he raised to the cabinet and does not contradict it, but he also confirms that these Israeli attacks and violations and the continuation of the occupation will lead in one way or another to hindrance It is possible to respond to these attacks by military force, as it is not normal to follow up on exclusive arms measures as long as these attacks exist. Johnny considers that “after the army leadership offered its plan to the cabinet, the atmosphere in the country was cooled and rejected references from Hizbullah and the Amal Movement emerged,” noting that “the responsibility of the army is currently great and it becomes greater over time, as it tries to fill the gap that formed between the government’s decision to limit weapons and refuse Hizbullah cooperation” ..