Suleiman Denies Syria Smuggled Chemical Arms to Hizbullah
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
President Michel Suleiman stated that Hizbullah does not accept the use of chemical weapons, reported the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat on Saturday.
He therefore told the daily: “Syria's chemical weapons have not been smuggled to Lebanon and there is no evidence of their presence in the country.”
Asked if he discussed this matter with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on the margins of the United Nations General Assembly earlier this week, he responded: “Iran will not allow itself to resort to weapons of mass destruction.”
He revealed that his discussions with his Iranian counterpart stressed the need to respect the Baabda Declaration and adopt Lebanon's policy of disassociation from regional developments.
“Rouhani voiced his support that Lebanese steer away from regional developments and that it be kept away from their repercussions,” continued Suleiman.
He revealed however that he did not explicitly discuss Hizbullah's involvement in Syria, but only emphasized that Lebanon's stability be preserved.
Asked by the daily if they addressed the tense ties between him and Hizbullah, Suleiman responded: “Our ties are not strained as I held talks recently with the head of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc MP Mohammed Raad during which he expressed Hizbullah's understanding of my views.”
“They are aware of my opinion on Hizbullah's involvement in Syria, which stem from my position as president and duty to preserve Lebanon,” he explained.
“The strength of my relationships with others are directly proportional to how committed they are to the Lebanese state,” he said.
“It is in the interest of all sides to implement the Baabda Declaration and I think it will be implemented sooner or later,” he continued.
In a speech marking Army Day in August, the president lashed out at the military interventions in Syria, without naming any sides, saying the blood of Lebanese should not be sacrificed to serve the interests of other countries.
He called for a review of the national defense strategy in light of Hizbullah’s involvement in Syria, while stressing the state should enjoy a monopoly over the use of military force to defend Lebanon’s sovereignty.
Syrian government troops are backed by Hizbullah members in their fight against rebels seeking to topple President Bashar Assad.
Also on the margins of the U.N. General Assembly, Suleiman met with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, revealing that he sensed an easing in tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which he hoped will reflect positively on the region, and most importantly, Lebanon.
Commenting on his upcoming visit to Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, Suleiman said: “I will discuss with kingdom officials the developments in the region and their impact on Lebanon.”
“Saudi Arabia has been Lebanon's main supporter throughout its history of political and economic crises,” he explained while denying that the talks will address the formation of a new government in Lebanon.
He is scheduled to hold talks in Saudi Arabia with King Abdullah and former Premier Saad Hariri.
Asked about the alleged severing of ties between him and Assad, Suleiman explained: “The ties have not been cut, but we deal with Syria on the basis of the Taef Accord.”
Moreover, he added: “A misunderstanding took place after the arrest of former Minister Michel Samaha which led to a halt of telephone calls between me and Assad.”
“My ties with the Syrian president are built on other foundations that are linked to the interests of Lebanon and Syria and their people,” he continued.
In addition, Suleiman cited Assad's failure to offer his condolences to him over the assassination of Internal Security Forces Intelligence Bureau chief Wissam al-Hasan as another factor that led to the current state of the ties between the two presidents.
Samaha, who is considered close to the Syrian regime, was arrested in August 2012 for planning attacks in Lebanon along with Syrian security chief General Ali Mamlouk and a colonel known only by his first name as Adnan.
In October 2012, Hasan was killed in a car bomb attack in the Beirut district of Ashrafiyeh.
The powerful explosion rocked a street adjacent to Sassine Square in Ashrafiyeh, leaving seven other people dead and 78 others wounded, in the first such attack in the Lebanese capital since 2008.
Hasan was close to former Prime Minister Saad Hariri and hostile to the regime in Syria.
The ISF played a central role in Samaha's arrest.
28 September 2013, 10:26
107
Yislam Timmak Mr. Prez for denying the Islamic Secular Resistance aka HA (Hussain Army) smuggled chemical weapons into Lebanon. Coming from you, it gives the international community the confidence needed to dissociate Lebanon from the turmoil in Syria. Sayyed Hassan has already stated use of these horrible weapons is not permissible against Israel in the Shia faith (Haram), but could be used against Sunni takfiris should the need arise. As to the brotherly ties but you and President Assad, It is normal for brothers to disagree sometimes on trivial things such as the brutal assassination of Wissam Hassan. He planned and welcomed the assassination, you disagreed. Give it time Mr. President.... I am sure all will be fine. Blood is thicker than water:) Bless You
28 September 2013, 12:04
41
Southern: the only reason I am against HA is because of you, please stop repeating the same old crap to address every issue.
28 September 2013, 12:18
52
Why all these attacks on the President? How do you know that the President is not informed about the issue of the transfer of chemical weapons to Lebanon? Granted, our security and intelligence services are relatively weak but they do exist and they are trying to do their job, and part of their job is to keep the President informed.
As Maronites, the presidency is one of the few offices left to guarantee us a say in the affairs of this country. Criticize it by all means, but keep your criticism civil and constructive. Do not weaken it with empty rhetoric.
28 September 2013, 12:18
35
Regarding HA: If HA is serious about building up the defensive capabilities of this country, it should put forward roadmap that will lead to having one military body to defend Lebanon, under the exclusive authority of the Lebanese government. HA cannot expect to take upon itself the role of defender when half the Lebanese population is against it. It you don't have cross the board support, you will be laying the groundwork for trouble. The military exist as a tool for the elected government, not just Hezbollah. It is time to start moving forward on this issue.
28 September 2013, 20:55
01
Jabal: You are absolutely correct to demand H.A. to build the defenses under the exclusive authority of Lebanese government. But the question that I ask, and probably know the answer already, who is giving the money to purchase H.A.'s weapons and train the militia? If it is Iran, then the commitment has to come from the Iranians. Hassan Nasrallah is not in control and can not pack his bags and join the legitimate Lebanese forces. Iran will not let him. So, this alleged "resistance to defend" is not to defend Lebanon as you and I know it as our "wattan". These Iranians divided Lebanon and see Lebanon as sexy/pretty girl who lives under the roof of her parents, and Iran enters her whenever it pleases Iran with total disregard to her parents and brothers.
28 September 2013, 20:56
00
Iran sees Lebanon as "bargash" and the Shiites as a tool to achieve purely religious and Iranian agenda. Yes for sure H.A. has a defensive posture in the South, but is H.A. willing to defend Tripoli, or are the Trablousis willing to defend the South in case of Israeli attack if H.A. is dismantled and incorporated into the Lebanese army? When there is no trust, it is very easy for outsiders to enter our home and rape us amid our family. I am not just talking about Iran.
28 September 2013, 12:18
32
@Southern, you and I are on opposing political sides, but I do agree with you that the United States needs to emphasize on more patient diplomacy before reaching for the gun. As you mention, Iraq and Afghanistan are glaring examples of military adventures gone tragically wrong. Obama initiated a call to Rouhani and they spoke for 15 minutes. This is diplomacy at work. I think that Obama is doing a great job in trying to solve conflicts through diplomatic means, and this is very encouraging.
28 September 2013, 13:18
32
FT, in my opinion WMDs should not be possessed by countries that are prone to regime changes by unlawful means (Pakistan is an example). As for chems, they are banned by international law. We are part of the community of nations and should play a constructive role in this community instead of net agonizing it.
The reason why Lebanon is easy to dump on by Arabs and Israelis alike is because we're a fractured country. A basket case if you will.
28 September 2013, 20:23
00
Well I can't but agree with your statement. Our politicians sure know how to go through the motions. But honestly, the most effective weapon against our many enemies is neither chems nor nukes; The weapon is called unity. In Lebanon, it is the most difficult weapon to produce.
28 September 2013, 19:49
21
My man, you are so on point and correct. Saddam Hussein should have been left alone to kill the Iraqi Shiites and more Kurds. Start another war with Iraq and dump some more chemical weapons on Iranian boys. As to Afghanistan/Taliban, God bless those nice folks. The Taliban is needed to be brought back to power to terrorize and subjugate the Shiites (and not so radical Sunnis) living and working in the Arab countries with the help of the Saudi style Al-Qaeda terrorists. But I take it, neither Iran nor any of your Arab/Muslim brothers in the region had the courage, guts and/or good sense to bring Saddam to his knees inside a rat hole or push the Taliban to their caves, something that even your friends, the Russians, could not do, and not that I have a pressing reason to pick a bone with the Russians. War monger heh, but not when it suits you?
29 September 2013, 00:51
20
Southern: As you know, I do not prescribe to sectarianism. I would ask the Iraqi Shiites and Kurds today if they were better of during Saddam's rule. I would also ask the moderate Afghanistanis if they prefer to go back to the times when the Taliban was in power. FYI, I take the position that the U.S. should not have invaded Afghanistan the way they did. Having said that, I think given the chance even you and I would have considered taking out the Taliban because what they represent.
28 September 2013, 20:07
00
OK, sounds good. I'll accept H.A.'s, Syria's and Iran's words on this. The key question is, with what consequences? My position is as follows: If Iran, Syria and/or H.A. do not agree with or support the statements made by the President, speak now and make a record of it. In the future, if credible evidence proves the President's declaration to the contrary, and that the President was coerced, intentionally mislead to deceive and hide the true facts, give me whatever weapons necessary, even weapons of mass destruction, to wipe these regimes off the map. Enough is enough. Even a Country like Lebanon who is not a warmonger (and I don't use this term lightly as others do) have all the right reasons to participate in achieving the demise of adversarial regimes whose sole interest is to harm us for our own national security interests. Tall order. May be not so much if we are united.
28 September 2013, 20:30
01
Here is some fresh and relevant facts for you: CAMBRIDGE, Mass. A Pakistani girl who survived an assassination attempt by the Taliban has been honored as Harvard University's humanitarian of the year.
Malala Yousafzai, an outspoken proponent for girls' education, was at Harvard on Friday to accept the 2013 Humanitarian Award. She was shot in the head last October. Militants said she was attacked because she criticized the Taliban, not because of her views on education. Mr. Southern, you are correct, let's undo what the U.S. did and bring Taliban back in power so they continue being just so lovely human beings.
29 September 2013, 01:49
01
With all due respect Mr. President, but you likewise denied that Hizb was out in Syria butchering people before Hasan himself conceded that they were there doing just that. 7ajé kizb 3a rasna, ya ma3ali 'lra2ees!
