From this we understand that things are going towards the solution, as the Americans realized that the economic blockade of Lebanon will not harm Hezbollah, more than it harms its allies and threatens its interests and influence in the Lebanese state, knowing that Washington understands more than its enthusiastic Lebanese allies, that disarming Hezbollah is not possible. And it was recognized by him after the July 2006 war in which we are living, given that this weapon will not have an impact if Israel does not carry out any breach or aggression against Lebanon, and all it aspires to undermine its local and regional role. In this sense, the United States is seeking to remove concessions from the Lebanese state on the issue of maritime borders, to ensure greater oil wealth for Israel, through the expansion of its interlocking blocks of Lebanese blocks. Regionally, it was disturbed by the role of Hezbollah as well as its allies, especially the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which was fed up with it, after turning the field equations in both Syria and Iraq. The latter was not able to digest its role on its borders in Yemen, after the strikes of the Drones planes, which fell on Aramco and other facilities, and caused great losses, but rather changed the course of the war on Yemen.
The words of Patriarch Bechara El-Raie did not come from neutralizing Lebanon, whether in terms of content or timing, as well as the symphony of March 14 forces.
Lebanon, which we have known since its foundation, and its political function in a region rife with tensions and crises, has changed the rule that it will “not prosper and will not die” until it is “dying and will not die.” And the failure of the decision-making powers in the world to kill Lebanon to death is not a goal for the eyes of the Lebanese, but rather to preserve its interests in it and in the ocean, and for fear of the consequences of the collapse of this small country, which Henry Kissinger once described as a “geographical surplus” and a “historical error”, and that In his attempt in the 1970s, when he was Secretary of State of the United States, to divide Lebanon into sectarian cantons, he identified sectarian and sectarianism on the map, in a meeting with the President of the Lebanese Republic, Suleiman Franjieh. At the time, Kissinger was looking for an alternative place for Palestinian refugees, on the basis of distributing its areas to neighboring countries, and Syria would be satisfied, and Israel would fulfill its ambitions. However, Lebanon is weak, and with the support of international and regional powers, it has not surrendered and America has not been able to eliminate it.
The words of Patriarch Bechara Al-Raie about neutralizing Lebanon did not come from a vacuum, whether in terms of content or timing, as well as the symphony of the March 14 forces, which did not delay meeting Mr. Sayyid Bkirki and playing the old new proposition. This proposition, which the shepherd will carry to the Vatican, has emerged as compensation for the failure of the policy of extreme pressure exercised by Washington on Lebanon.
And whoever listens to his exaltation betrays that the Patriarch speaks of a Scandinavian country in a quiet region, far from international conflicts and confronting alliances, and that he did not cost himself the question of the international or regional party that can guarantee this neutrality! Perhaps the patriarch’s attention was drawn to what the neutral state must adhere to, in the sense that it must refrain from participating in any war or conflict between other countries, and be at the same distance from all the warring parties, and ignore the right of the neutral state to recognize other countries as neutral. The rights of neutral countries included the non-use or occupation of their lands by any warring party, and the continuation of diplomatic relations with other countries, neutral and rival. This is in addition to the freedom of the citizens of the neutral country to continue their actions, and respect their intention to remain as a neutral country, or not. The question here is: to what extent does this apply to Lebanon?
The Patriarch and the forces that adopted his speech missed, in terms of neutralizing Lebanon, that it is an issue that has become clear from the past, and cannot be pursued in light of the conflict witnessed by the region with multiple parties: Iran and the resistance forces on the one hand, and Saudi Arabia and the forces of normalization on the other hand, Turkey, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood on the third. There is no doubt that America and Russia are strongly present in the entire regional scene.
* Lebanese academic