Maronite Bishops: National Dialogue Must Be Resumed without Preconditions
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربيةThe Maronite bishops council urged on Wednesday officials to set Lebanon’s interests as a priority above all else, “completely rejecting” attempts to drag the country towards “a new war through fueling sectarian tensions.”
It said in a statement after its monthly meeting: “Officials must comply with President Michel Suleiman’s call to resume the national dialogue without preconditions.”
Lebanon is in need of all of its citizens who must take part in determining their country’s future without placing one faction’s interests above the other, they remarked.
To this end they must commit to the principle of mutual coexistence in order to resolve disputes, added the bishops after their meeting headed by Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi.
Moreover, officials should also keep the army away from political tensions that may serve to tarnish its image and harm its credibility, warning of divisions within the military and security institutions.
“Harming its unity will lead Lebanon towards a dangerous path,” cautioned the bishops.
Suleiman had called on political factions to resume the national dialogue, setting June 11 as the date of its first session.
The army's performance has come under criticism in light of the death of Sheikhs Ahmed Abdul Wahed and Mohammed Merheb at an army checkpoint in the northern town of Kweikhat on May 20.
When you read all these comments, someone naturally needs to take the position of March8, even if they're not with them, just to balance the conversation.
how can we call it dialogue? dialogues normally take place between 2 sides who r willing to listen and compromise in order to sort their differences out.having a dialogue with the hate preachers(hizb) and the bully aoun is like asking for a date with queen elisabeth.
let your hizbushaitan first honor the results of the dialogue meetings, then we will go to a dialogue.
none of your m8 leader respects his word, and they always do the opposite of what promise. this is not an acceptable dialogue.
the only dialogue they want is to secure an electoral law favoring them for the next elections.
(1/2) I do not think the leaders of the opposition should attend the talks for the following reasons:
1- Hizbullah and its allies are not masters of the their own word; they are guided by foreign powers (namely Iran and Syria) and they will obey their orders irrespectively of the outcome of the talks.
2- Hizbullah agreed on many things in the past and did not fulfill them. The oppositions should not try them again. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
3- The issue at hand is a security issue. Everybody knows what needs to be done to keep the streets calm and defuse tension. There is no need for dialogue to agree on the obvious.
(2/2) Plus I do not agree with this whole dialogue mascaraed. There are state institutions for these matters. Any discussions impacting the state outside the state institutions is an impairment to the state, its institutions, and its strength. Such discussions can be held on the sidelines with politicians meeting and discussing and doing their job. But doing things bluntly and in this manner is appalling. Where on earth in the constitution there is a mention of the dialogue table?
The National Dialogue..Why not? What do we have to lose? How much worse can things get in Lebanon? I believe that M14 (and all Lebanese) should attend the dialogue without preconditions. I am NOT a M8 supporter. As for the people claiming that Hezballah supports a secular state, please just read the name of the party.. Hezb "Allah". Really? Party of God wants a secular state? Hmm..I wonder why..Anyway, Lebanon isn't ready for a secular state. It will take several generations to educate the youth in order to instill national and secular values in all Lebanese citizens. That is all.
then no precondition means talk about everything including the illegal arms of hezbollah and others....
If there are a hundred thousand or so Maronites in Lebanon, it seems they have plenty of bishops: one per church?