Boycotting Dialogue… Another Opposition Achievement!

The achievements of the Lebanese so-called opposition seem to be endless...
Indeed, after this opposition proved that nothing concerns it except returning to authority, and after it basically did nothing to translate its slogans into facts, the opposition is threatening to boycott the national dialogue, without any appreciation of the sensitive stage the country faces.

Suleiman Seeks to Re-Activate Dialogue Table

Following a break which lasted for more than one year, Lebanese President Michel Suleiman perceived that the current situation of the country, alongside the threats and dangers surrounding it at all levels, requires re-activating the dialogue table which proved to be beneficial in many occasions.

Thus, the president set June 11 for the new dialogue round, under the same headline: the country's defense strategy. According to him, the planned dialogue will discuss the issue of a national defense strategy designed to protect Lebanon against a possible attack. The dialogue session will also discuss "the resistance's arms and how to benefit from them in a positive way to defend Lebanon, and answering questions such as: why, when, how and where these arms are used?". He added that the conference will also discuss "how to remove Palestinian arms from outside the refugee camps, how to deal with Palestinian arms inside the camps... and how to remove arms spread inside and outside cities."

It's worth mentioning that the dialogue call came days after a meeting between Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Saudi Ambassador Ali Awad Assiri, in which the two men highlighted the importance of overcoming all the upcoming challenges through dialogue. It also came after Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz sent a letter to the president calling on him to sponsor national dialogue after expressing the kingdom's concerns over recent developments in Lebanon.

Exceptional Stage Requires Positive Spirit

In his invitation for dialogue, President Michel Suleiman cited "the citizens' deep worry over their security and safety following the latest incidents and "Israel's" continued threats and its violations of Lebanese sovereignty." He underlined the need for dialogue among the leaders to agree on ways to deal with the "dangers surrounding the country."

This is basically where resides the exceptional importance of the dialogue among all political parties. "What confirms this is what actually preceded the dialogue call, mainly at the security level," member of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri's Development and Liberation parliamentary bloc, MP Abdul Majid Saleh, said. 

"What happened in Akkar, Tripoli and other Lebanese regions threatened the whole country and warned of negative repercussions at many levels," Saleh told moqawama.org. He explained that these unfortunate incidents have pushed the country's wise and prudent leaders to launch initiatives to seek to save the country from the strife. "This is why, and after seeing that the crisis has actually intensified, Speaker Nabih Berri called for a dialogue without preconditions," he added.
The Lebanese lawmaker noted that President Michel Suleiman and Speaker Nabih Berri understood that the situation was no longer affordable and that such an exceptional and critical stage requires re-activating the dialogue spirit, but with a positive spirit. He remarked that the mentioned security repercussions came as the Lebanese Army was targeted by an unjust and wrongful campaign by some political groups. He said that wise behavior also requires standing at the side of the military institution in the face of such campaigns, given that it constitutes the only remaining guarantee for Lebanese to gain stability and peace.

Conditions... End Dialogue!

"Those who immediately accepted the president's call for dialogue were aware that setting conditions was not possible," MP Abdul Majid Saleh told moqawama.org. He was referring to the other bloc, so-called opposition, negative stance toward the dialogue. Indeed, the bloc which classifies itself as openness sponsor, did not hesitate to reject a call for dialogue and claim that it was nothing but a "waste of time." However, the opposition didn't seem to be unified over this stance: while the Lebanese Forces immediately rejected the call, the Future movement seems not to have taken a final stance, while the Phalange party is supporting the dialogue, in harmony with its values and principles. For the Phalange, resumption of dialogue sessions is the gateway to dealing with the causes of the crisis with all its regional political and security dimensions."

MP Saleh warned that setting conditions to take part in the dialogue, such as forming a so-called neutral government, was tantamount to putting obstacles and preventing transparent discussions among Lebanese. "Such behavior does not help in calming the general atmosphere," Saleh emphasized. 

He explained that the stage was critical, and this is why everyone should support dialogue. "Lebanon faced during the previous day a crisis with the kidnapping of a number of Lebanese pilgrims in Syria. This crisis could not be overcome without the calm and solid political reactions which help preventing any tension which could put the country on the edge of the abyss, just like in 1975."
For Saleh, the dialogue should be successful, whether in form or content. However, he stressed that the mere fact of witnessing a meeting of the feuding parties was positive.

National Assembly... Why Not?

Another proof of the negativity played by the other bloc was its "feedback" following the call made by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah for a national conference on state building.

In his latest speech, Sayyed Nasrallah called for the establishment of an elected national body tasked with studying ways to build a "true state" capable of providing its citizens with security and economic stability. His eminence stressed that such a conference would not be considered as a substitute for dialogue. "A national assembly can work to return Lebanon to the right path," Sayyed Nasrallah highlighted, as he said that the state was the only guarantor of security and civil peace.Yet, the so-called opposition did not wait to understand his eminence's proposal. They immediately rejected it for many non-convincing reasons. For some, the proposal was a flagrant blow to the Taef Agreement. For others, it was another form of domination. "This is simply nonsense," MP Abdul Majid Saleh told moqawama.org, that Sayyed Nasrallah's call was a proof that he was with a strong, powerful and capable state.
The sponsors of openness, the March 14 camp, are now rejecting dialogue. For them to accept to sit with their country partners at one table, they should obtain "offers", such as the government's "resignation".
They seem to have forgotten that dialogue loses all its quality when conditions enter the "game"!

Source: moqawama.org