Arabs Must Disarm Terrorists, or Import Destruction
By: Elias Bejjani
FrontPageMagazine.com | Thursday, March 19, 2009
On Monday, 02/09/09, the fifth questionable Lebanese National Dialogue Round was convened
at the Baabda Presidential Palace under the patronage of State President,
General Michele Suleiman. After two hours of futile and intricate debates, the 14
participants who represented the majority of the Lebanese mosaic and multi-cultural
communities were only able to agree on setting a new date for the sixth round.
Unfortunately all the deceptive and theatrical hand shaking,
hugging, and congratulations that took place between the participants in front of
the cameras were the only outcome of the gathering.
The participants did not address in any meaningful way the "defense strategy",
which was supposed to be the main topic of the dialogue.
During the session numerous hot topics were debated openly, but not
the defense strategy mentioned by President Michel Suleiman
at the opening of the session: "The national defense strategy requires time and
it is based on a set of elements and components, including political ones, both
internally and externally."
It is no secret that the "Defense Strategy" item was omitted from the session's
agenda by President Suleiman because of the blatant refusal of Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah,
their militant tool in Lebanon, to put up for
debate the fate of Hezbollah's weaponry,
power and authority, under any circumstances. The Axis of Evil which runs and controls the mini state of
Hezbollah in Lebanon has been hindering the functionality
of the legitimately elected Lebanese government and preventing it from reclaiming its sole
authority through its own armed forces over all Lebanese territory.
It is worth mentioning that on June 7-8, Hezbollah with other Lebanese and
Palestinian pro-Syrian and pro-Iranian armed militias, criminally invaded West Beirut
and unsuccessfully attempted to take over Mount Lebanon. They marched
under the slogan "Weapons protect weapons" and warned the Lebanese people
and their legitimate government that they intend to hold on to their
weaponry and authority against the will of all those who say otherwise.
During its deplorable occupation era of Lebanon (1976-2005) and especially since 1982, Ba'athist Syria
forced the armed Hezbollah Shi'ite organization, as well as many other armed
Lebanese and Palestinian militias, on the Lebanese people under the disguise of resistance against Israel. Syria, the occupational power, safeguarded the
outlaw status quo of the cantons it created for Hezbollah, and in the
Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. During its occupation of Lebanon, Syria
encouraged and was (and remained so after its army's withdrawal in 2005) a full
partner with Hezbollah and all other armed militias in corruption,
assassinations, kidnapping, fraud, knavery, and treason.
An Iranian-sponsored Shi'ite militia with cantons based in southern Lebanon,
Beirut, and the Bekaa Valley, Hezbollah was and still is the only Lebanese armed
militia allowed by Syria to remain armed since 1990 when Christian, Druze and
Sunni Lebanese militias were all disarmed in accordance with the "Taef Accord."
Syria also did not disarm any of the Palestinian militias and at the same time
did not allow the Lebanese authorities to carry on this duty.
The question that imposes itself strongly: what are the justifications for this
futile and time consuming Dialogue, and for what purpose is the presentation of
the defense strategy proposal, as long as Hezbollah leadership affirms publicly
that they would not discuss with anyone their party's weaponry, but are only
open to look into means and ways that facilitate the annexation of the Lebanese
state and the Lebanese people into their resistance strategy?
Hezbollah leadership openly, blatantly, describe
their weaponry as holy and sacred. They stridently tie its fate to the Holy
Quran and the Holy Bible: "Our weaponry will and shall remain intact under our full
control as long as the Bible and Quran remain. We will amputate the arms,
decapitate the heads, cut the necks, and slice open the bellies of those who
dare to attempt disarming us." They also
tie the fate of their weaponry with the existence of the State of Israel: "Our
weaponry will remain in our hands as long as the State of Israel remains in the
So, why the dialogue with Hezbollah, and for what purposes are Lebanon's
leaders, including President Michele Suleiman, cajoling and appeasing Hezbollah,
giving the people false hopes and wasting time and resources when they all
definitely know for sure that such dialogue will lead nowhere as far as
disarming Hezbollah? Any Dialogue on any problem without the presence of a
specific declared goal and without the means needed to implement its out come
remains useless, ineffective and pointless. Accordingly, it is much better and
more respectful for all parties not to engage in such a dead dialogue.
Numerous brave and well informed patriotic politicians have openly addressed
this big deceptive lie that is given the "National Dialogue" slogan, and
predicted even before the start of its sessions, that this kind of vague and
indecisive approach is not going to work in disarming Hezbollah.
This dim but realistic stance took in consideration the dire fact that
Hezbollah is an Iranian Army in Lebanon, while its decision making process, as
well as its finances, strategy, education, weaponry and aims all lie in Iran's mullahs hands, and not with the Lebanese.
Ahmad Al Assad, a patriotic Shi'ite Lebanese leader was one of these brave
politicians: "It is naive for any Lebanese to delude himself that Hezbollah will
hand over its weapons to the Lebanese state and give up its powers and authority
through such dialogue mechanism. The problem lies in the fact that the state and
the politicians did not create a mechanism to pressure Hezbollah to take such
steps prior to the start of the dialogue sessions."
Hezbollah's bizarre imposed current armed status quo is in defiance of the
Lebanese constitution, of the "Taef Accord," and UN Security Council Resolutions 1559 and
1701, as well as the "Armistice Agreement" that regulated the Lebanese-Israeli
border signed in 1949. The UN Resolutions and "Taef Accord" all call for the
disarmament of all militias, for the Lebanese army to patrol the Lebanese
Israeli border and for the Lebanese government to enforce its control and
authority on all the Lebanese territories through its own legitimate armed
Therefore, and due to the fact that Hezbollah is actually an Iranian Army in
Lebanon, and an Iranian foreign military occupation tool, its entire file must
and should be brought to .
The Lebanese president must bring this before the UN Security Council. If he is unwilling, Lebanese religious and
political leaders ought to call on
the UN Security Council as soon as possible to step in and take full control of
Hezbollah's arms. Otherwise, every Lebanese community will have no option but to abandon the
state's umbrella, which is non-functional because of Hezbollah's hegemony, and
take the security of its territories into its hands, as was the situation during
the civil war.
Under such a status of instability and standstill, the Lebanese need to
renegotiate peacefully and agree on the kind of state in which they can live in
peace and security. Many Lebanese and non-Lebanese strategists see in the
Switzerland Federation a viable model for Lebanon.
The Lebanese leadership are all required to take a clear-cut stance on this
matter and declare publicly what kind of Lebanon they want.
After more than 30 years of turmoil, the Lebanese people
are entitled to enjoy peace and live freely in their own country without terror
and the wars of others. It is time to put an end to Lebanon being a battlefield
and the arena of constant non-Lebanese conflicts.
We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by