BEIRUT – Despite sparking widespread public and political outrage, Lebanese military leader Samir Giagea has quickly justified the threat to Lebanon as part of the Levant, including Lebanon’s “concessions” and “concessions” to Syria and its inclusion.
Geagea did not view the US envoy’s statement as a direct threat to Lebanon, but warned it was strong enough to Lebanese authorities to avoid being annexed into a “new map of the region.”
Geagea argued that international policy was heading towards “restructuring the local situation.”
The observers described Giagea’s statement, accepting the Barracks’ position that threatens Lebanon’s very existence, as “suspecting” in timing and content, without any condemnation from Foreign Minister Yousef Raj (Certified Minister of Lebanese’s military), who has not defended Lebanon’s sovereignty.
This raises important questions about the Lebanese military’s understanding of the concept of sovereignty and independence.
– In Geagea’s view, how strong is the nation?
-Even if there is a single diplomatic step in which the government’s Lebanese military minister continues to reject it, is there anything more important than relying on first to oppose the violations of Zionist enemies?
-Do these reckless threats guarantee the summoning of the US ambassador?
Hezbollah MP Ibrahim al-Masawi, sitting on the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, criticized Barrack’s statement “contradicts historical facts, the most basic rules of logic, the foundations of politics and diplomacy.”
Almasawi emphasized that Lebanon “resistes annexation and compromise on its sovereignty and unity of its people.”
He warned that these statements reflect dangerous intent and clearly outline the US-Zionist projects for the region in general, and Lebanon in particular.
Hezbollah MP added: “It is the reality of Lebanon that the Barracks have overlooked or perhaps ignorant. They are not even countries that do not submit to threats, but rather countries that are resistance, pride and immovable.
Al Masawi called for a serious formal move that the US administration must respect Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and refrain from obstructing its internal affairs.
On his part, Major General Abbas Ibrahim, former Director of General Security in Lebanon, commented on the statement of the US envoy.
Ibrahim states, “Lebanon and Syria are two independent states. We are brothers and we remain brothers. Therefore, there is no drawing of maps or infringement of sovereignty. Lebanon is in existential danger, and Syria is in a state of “revelation.” The boundary that must be redrawn. ”
“Does this discourse justify the demand for disarmament? Therefore, the call for disarmament will turn into the best campaign to promote compliance with arms,” the Major General said.
He asked surprisingly: “Did Tom Barrack’s Lebanese origins motivate us to deal with it that way?
The Major added: “Anyone whose hometown is at risk must arm themselves and mobilize. Yes, Syria may have made it clear, but no matter how big the sacrifice is, we won’t abandon Lebanon.”
Clearly, Geagea’s rhetoric presents a dangerous approach. But what’s reassuring is the protests of most Lebanese people who reject Barrack’s words.
Geagea and the people behind him must carefully reflect on the explosive ambush of Gaza by enemy forces starving brutal and starving people in homes, markets, homes, dozens, hospitals and schools for over 21 months.
Geagea and the entire anti-resistance team must remember that they cannot rely on them as the US-led bloody Israel project failed.
They must also remember that submitting to Zionists and American instructions is a loss. Learn from the fierce experiences of those who succumbed to the deception of their settlements with Israel and the United States.