Beirut is hoping to let Israeli enemies dare to challenge the HTS-led regime’s position, based on the pretext of protecting the Druze by strengthening their attacks on “New Syria.”
Given the intertwined geography, the effects of these events represent an existential threat to Lebanon.
It is more certain that the claim that Lebanon could have avoided war if Hezbollah did not open the support front in Gaza today is no longer realistic. Many reasons confirm that it is only a matter of time before targeting resistance.
Furthermore, facing Hezbollah was a priority agreed by the political and military leaders of temporary professional organizations.
Syrian de facto regime not only refrained from opening the front of Golan, but also ensured that Hezbollah’s supply routes would be cut off from day one. Nevertheless, Israel’s enemy destroyed all of Syrian capabilities, turning it into a weak state that could be easily negotiated to achieve Israel’s famous ambitions.
Professional organizations have developed Syrian-like approaches to Lebanon, as they view Lebanon’s ability to resist as an obstacle to its ambition.
Now, and after his martialism, the vision of the secretary general of Sayad Hassan Nasrala is proven right in the thousandth, when he warned that the fall of Syria would at least lead to a siege of Lebanon and Palestinian resistance.
Nasrara’s wisdom in identifying threats to Takfiri groups was also proven, especially after the massacres on the Syrian coast.
Behind Hezbollah, Iran was the main obstacle to Israeli ambitions. Iran has changed the tide of conflict with Israel’s enemy since the victory of the Islamic Revolution under the leadership of Imam Khomeini.
Meanwhile, the loyalty of the Resistance Parliament to the bloc calls on the Lebanese government to adopt clear and serious policies against Israeli attacks, highlighting the sovereignty of the Lebanese people, “condemning sovereignty that rejects occupation, the government’s aggressive approach, and adheres to the national constant.
An informed political source confirmed with the Tehran Times that Lebanese anti-resistance teams were putting pressure on them to block the restructuring of what was destroyed between September and November. The US-led Israel attacks despite the Lebanese government’s financial ability to rebuild at an initial price (over $1.5 billion).
Sources point out that the Iraqi government may decide to transfer the savings of the Lebanese Central Bank to an official Lebanese institution responsible for rebuilding housing units, but the Lebanese government insists on ignoring the issue to achieve political gains.
It is noteworthy that former Prime Minister Najib Mikati justified his refusal to support Iran’s flimsy pretexts and his rejection of Iran’s support.
Mikati refused despite Tehran’s proposal to transfer these contributions through international organizations that are not subject to sanctions, such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, or other institutions.
After the election of President AOUN and the establishment of the current government by Nawaf Salam, both authorities had not even considered opening arguments with Iran for full submission to Washington and Riyadh’s direction.
It is worth noting that Hajiji Hussein Khalil, the political aide to Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, met with Salam to inform him that the recently approved loan for Lebanon by the World Bank and the $75 million agreed during the Paris Conference will be spent on infrastructure!
Samir Giagea reportedly left the media to meet Salam. The concerns of Lebanese military leaders have grown about what he considers as the “monopoly” of Christian arenas.
Geagea is looking to limit Aoun’s influence ahead of next year’s parliamentary elections and form a ministerial front to achieve his core goals ahead of parliamentary elections. Most notably, it ensures exclusive control of weapons by “legitimate” authorities across Lebanon, and prevents the reconstruction of what was destroyed during an ongoing attack on Lebanon.