Of course, Mackenzie did not talk about the interests of Lebanon, but the heavy visitor increased clarity by giving him a cover for the violations of the Israeli enemy and his movements in the Lebanese arena, stressing that he looks forward to the day when the threats to Israel from its neighbors will end.
And if the McKinsey movement and its cohorts in the US State Department moved on the impact of Chinese, Iranian, and Russian progress toward Lebanon, and the Lebanese official impulse towards alternative options for suicide, waiting for an American satisfaction that would not come, the most important thing on the McKenzie list is telling new competitors that the Lebanese army is a “partner” US Army Strategist.
Frankly, he saw that “the relations between the American army and the Lebanese army go beyond the (ground) army, but it is a joint relationship that affects the Lebanese air force and the Lebanese navy, and a deep relationship that will overcome any turmoil related to politics.”
It is in form and in public, then, a visit to emphasize the US policy toward Lebanon: a comprehensive blockade and a ban on alternative options, specifically Chinese and Iranian, freeing Israel’s hand in the Lebanese arena, and trying to apply the screws on the Lebanese army and wager on it to balance (and confront later on) with Hezbollah. Here, yesterday there was information that the Americans expressed their willingness to make up for the shortfall in the food of the army in terms of meat, by financing it to buy the missing meat due to the decrease in the exchange rate of the Lebanese currency and the inability of the current budget to finance the meat. However, the American option tends to support the army independently of the government, just as there was information about the intention of the French to provide aid to French schools, and the intention of the Saudis to distribute aid to their allies, and not to the Lebanese state, in a way that promotes the disintegration of state institutions and weakens the rest of the central system, to the detriment of Formal or popular structures, calculated as categories that can be used in open conflict with Hezbollah.
But McKinsey’s declaration that the conflict with Iran does not have a military character, in diplomatic words that draws a formal framework for war away from militarization, did not come from a vacuum, but rather aims to indicate what can be considered an American “in anticipation of the escalation of Iran from Lebanon”. The western diplomatic movement active in Beirut these days has been most concerned with monitoring the Hezbollah movement and government activity on the political level with the Chinese and Iranians. The most important thing for information collectors is the party’s war readiness, the responses that Iran’s allies can make to the entire battlefield, and a series of strategic political understandings that took place in the region last month. During the past two weeks, most Western diplomatic polls and the International Emergency Force (UNIFIL) have concluded that Hezbollah has not succumbed to threats or surrendered to the propaganda campaign that is trying to hold it responsible for the crisis at home. On the contrary, he rushed towards opening the eastern lines and received response (if still limited) from the government and the political forces allied to searching for solutions to break the siege, and at home towards mobilizing the Lebanese on confrontations of another kind that changed the economic direction of the country, which Americans are interested in preserving them in Lebanon and elsewhere. Here, Iran and China signed the strategic agreements signed last month, and the meaning of the matter deepening the alliance between the two countries at the height of their conflict with the Americans.
On the military level, it can be said that, in recent days, Western diplomats have been anxiously monitoring what they feel is a military and political willingness of Hezbollah to face a military confrontation with Israel, any time the latter activates its war machine aggression or aggression against Lebanon. It is not possible to overlook the group of military signals that recently took place, starting with the Houthi air attack on the leadership of the Saudi Military Intelligence and the Ministry of Defense in the heart of Saudi Arabia, the missile military maneuvers carried out by the resistance factions in Gaza, and Benjamin Netanyahu’s need to reduce his rush to annex the Jordan Valley for fear of non-confrontations Calculated results.
Western diplomats are monitoring a “war readiness by Hezbollah” for a military confrontation with Israel.
It is not a secret that the American concern is escalating from the expansion of hostile military moves by American forces in Iraq and Syria, and from the strategic military agreements that Syria signed with Iran in Damascus two days ago. At the same time, US President Donald Trump – above his failure to manage the Corona crisis and contain the popular protests that stormed after the US police killed George Floyd – does not need his soldiers to return to their families of American voters corpses in bags, from the arenas he promised to withdraw from. In his last election session, a few months before the next election.
Another issue that the American official did not mention, is “Washington’s desire to move the file of the southern maritime borders,” stressing to those who met them that “Washington will send a delegation soon to take charge of resuming communication on the file.” This desire, which coincides with the Israeli announcement of the start of exploration in close proximity to Block 9, can only be understood in light of the de facto pressure on Lebanon, to draw it to negotiate and cede its rights.
Iraq and Iran
With all this escalation, Americans do not lose the element of “pragmatism.” The foregone conclusion is that Hezbollah will not be lulling into threats, and its solution is ready for the oil blockade by buying Iranian oil. Here, too, the Americans express great apprehension. This option, on the one hand, breaks the embargo on Lebanon in its most severe way by resolving the diesel crisis (and gasoline in the event of an escalation of the embargo), and secondly, it allows Iran to sell part of its oil in a currency other than the dollar. The Americans believe that a similar option would allow Iran to fund Hezbollah without a dollar.
From here, the American retreat from the strictness towards Lebanon’s relationship with the “Caesar Law” is understood. And based on what Al-Akhbar learned, Washington, through Xia, expressed its willingness to discuss the possibility of issuing “exceptions” for Lebanon, regarding the implementation of the “Caesar Law”, to facilitate the arrival of Iraqi oil to Lebanon, similar to the exceptions provided by Washington to Iraq, Japan, Korea and Turkey to deal With Iran. The ambassador asked before President Nabih Berri, who visited him yesterday, that the government provide the embassy with a “list of materials or addresses that you need, which allows the concerned authorities in America to study and answer them quickly.” According to the information, the Americans chose between Lebanon obtaining oil from Iran or Iraq, to have cooperation with Iraq, in light of the existing balance relationship between the Iranian and American roles and their influence on the Iraqi government. This American retreat, even though it carries with it a detract from the Lebanese sovereignty in the need to take permission from the Americans to achieve Lebanon’s interests and its relations with Syria and Iraq, but it carries a serious opportunity for the Lebanese government, to go quickly towards understandings and agreements with the Iraqi government, to stop the decline and before conditions change, Which changes the impact of the rapid events in crucial moments in the life of the region.
Internally, yesterday, the Maronite Patriarchate appeared to be the wall of the weeping Hezbollah opponents, who are still betting on the American role of turning the equations inside. Apart from Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who is only interested in permanent marketing to himself as a potential candidate for the presidency of any future government, and his desperate defense of what he calls “the free economy”, visitors to Bkerke (former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, for example) seemed like researchers looking for a shepherd, after the Patriarch presented Bishara The shepherd himself as a potential leader of the leadership of the “American Front” in Lebanon, in repetition of failed scenarios, which was paid only by America’s allies by abandoning them permanently.
Hill reprimands Chia
It is not enough that the position that the American Ambassador in Beirut Dorothy Chia was exposed to after the decision of Judge Muhammad joked that she was prevented from speaking to the Lebanese media, until an additional inconvenience came from the US State Department, which considered that “the mere summoning of an American ambassador to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Lebanon represents a weakness” . It turned out that the embassy tried to cancel the summons and arrange a later date with Minister Nassif until. But the latter stressed the existence of “instructions” that the matter should take place on time. For his part, the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs David Hill “reprimanded” Chia, because of what he considered «mismanagement of the file, and that she had to let the Lebanese quarrels with the judiciary, with the government and with Hezbollah, not to take care of it and make it go from it The US ambassador is easy. ”