The government retracted its decisions

In the government session that was held yesterday, the scene looked more complicated than expected. While the declared goal was to approve the army’s illegal disarmament plan, the government ended up with outputs that reflects a clear decline in front of the “Shiite duo”, not only by giving up the implementation process, but also through an indirect retreat from 5 and 7 August decisions, which previously formed a basic station in the approach of this file.
In the form, the “Shiite duo” did not grant the complete legitimacy of the government, as the charter was withdrawn from it through the withdrawal of the five Shiite ministers, and they did not enter into a direct discussion of the army’s plan so that the recognition of its previous decisions was not devoted. However, the observers recorded that the government’s speech was a step back, as it avoided using the phrase “approval of the plan”, saying only that it “welcomed the plan presented by the army commander.” This linguistic manipulation showed the size of the political embarrassment in which the executive authority occurred. He set the condition of the possibilities, as the army confirmed that it is unable to implement great steps in the face of the “party” unless its capabilities are strengthened. In the event that the government goes with this option, Lebanon will be in front of a different army, capable of confronting any external one, which changes the entire equation. It is noteworthy that these conditions were limited to only southern Litani, which reflects a deep awareness of the difficulty of expanding the task of disarmament even if Israel withdrew. Besides, the army gave itself the authority to reproduce in the field move, which means that the implementation will not be bound by a specific time limit, but rather to the assessment of military leadership and field conditions. This drafting leaves the door open to a continuous postponement of any practical step. The most indicative that the government has renounced the army’s plan to its previous decisions on 5 and 7 August, but at the same time it announced that the implementation of these decisions was suspended due to the lack of response of Israel. Thus, the scene seemed as if the government retreated without saying that explicitly, while the army presented an approach that made disarmament a secondary detail linked to complex solutions that have not yet insisted on its signs. In this, the session came out with a result of the political decline, as the government did not gain a chain of transmission, and did not provide an implemented plan, while the army seemed a key player in recycling the corners and relieving the merits.
As for the result, it is that the arms file is still pending, while Lebanon faces a more confused reality than ever.