Phalange: Nasrallah’s Call for Constituent Assembly Can’t Succeed in Presence of Illegal Arms
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
The Phalange Party said Monday that the success of the constituent assembly, which Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has recently called for, can only be guaranteed in the presence of a strong state that is exclusively in charge of the political, security and military decisions in the country.
Nasrallah called on Friday for the creation of an elected or appointed constituent assembly to build a strong state and end sectarian divisions. He urged President Michel Suleiman to weigh the creation of such an assembly during the National Dialogue that is set to be held at Baabda palace on June 11.
In a statement issued after the weekly meeting of its political bureau, the Phalange Party condemned the renewed clashes in the northern city of Tripoli between the Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen rival neighborhoods, urging the relevant authorities to take the convenient measures to “pull Tripoli out of the Syrian conflict.”
The party called on the government to refuse “consensual security” and uncover the security violators “because Tripoli has the right for stability and safety.”
The Phalange Party stressed that “the army must impose security and protect civil peace instead of separating between the rival factions."
The party said that its leader Amin Gemayel is holding contacts with “friends and allies to ensure a healthy atmosphere for dialogue, as well as national consensus on basic assumptions to keep Lebanon away from regional conflicts.”
The statement said that all-party talks can only succeed in a strong country with exclusive legitimate arms, adding that the dialogue is meant to establish a modern civil state, free of illegal arms and autonomous security zones.
Separately, the Phalange party reiterated its call concerning the displaced Syrians in Lebanon, for the establishment of a crisis cell to deal with the repercussions of the events in Syria, particularly the issue of the displaced.
04 June 2012, 23:07
03
Alright and if there were this "dialogue" under current circumstances with Hezbollah armed and under instructions from Tehran to maintain Lebanon as Iran's weapon's platform on Israel's northern border which requires that the Assad Regime survive. Let's assume that.
Then lets assume that the dialogue reaches the conclusion that Lebanon should remain neutral in the Syrian Crisis, or at least do no more than humanitarian concerns require with regard to refugees and providing medical treatment. But other than that, no Hezbollah fighters to assist Assad and no Sunni help going to the Opposition.
Let us say that this is the decision of dialogue.
And then Assad reaches his tipping point and only an intervention by Hezbollah can save him. Will Nasrallah abide by the results of the dialogue, or will he act in the interest of his patron Iran?
At the end of the day, Nasrallah's loyalty is to Iran, not to agreements reached with competing Lebanese political parties.
04 June 2012, 23:10
03
Dialogue under these circumstances is therefore pointless. Hezbollah does not exercise power by virtue of political power earned within the Lebanese political arena. Rather, its source of power is its weapons and the patronage money that its weapons draws to it and which it distributes to manufacture a political constituency within Lebanon. The weapons and money all come from foreign powers and it is to them that Hezbollah's ultimate loyalty lies, not to Lebanon.
