The following is the draft translation of a political analysis article written in Arabic.
Question: What is this tug-of-war taking place in Lebanon which erupts at time and quietens down in another without any stability. The regime supporters are not able to remain on a steadfast position and nor are they able to adopt a resolute decision. The same applies to the opposition, whose statements change and whose priorities are not fixed on any situation. Rather, the issue of Hariri’s killing, over which events exploded, the issue of elections is about to dominate over it, whether from the supporters or opposition where the interests of the politicians are more prominent than the issue itself. This is clear from what the meetings and contacts between some members of the supporters and opposition have mentioned. All of them fluctuate in their positions without any resolute stance. Rather, the international committee for investigation gained sovereignty and powers in Lebanon, above the sovereignty and powers of the state of Lebanon. But despite this the matter has been passed over by the supporters and opposition without any feeling or concern. How should this be interpreted?
Answer: The answer to this question does not require a lot of explanation since it is clear to those who have insight. The answer is as follows:
1- What is taking place in Lebanon is an intense struggle between America on one side and Europe on the other (whist France is public about it and Britain works behind the scenes). America is trying to continue her influence in Lebanon which existed before, especially since the Taif agreement until today and preserve this influence in the same way it existed before, without being diminished after the departure of the Syrian army. And Europe see in this an opportunity to expel the American influence and take its place.
2- These states, which struggle against each other, possess internal instruments which reflect the ambitions of these colonial states internally and execute their wishes and plans. That is why the internal instruments change their stance and comments according to the decisions of these vying states. That is why we find some of these instruments adopt a stance today which differs greatly from what the stance was a day or even hours ago because they themselves do not adopt the stance but the stance of others. The decision is not in the hand of these instruments but in the hand of the vying states. This is what explains the fact that the supporters and opposition, despite raising the same flag, the same Taif agreement, freedom, sovereignty, independence and revealing the truth (behind the killing of Al-Hariri)….cannot unite and come up with a solution because the decision is not in their hands. Had America and Europe agreed on a solution this instant then all the sides would have executed it and changed their views to be in harmony with this solution, they would do this not even gradually, but instantly.
3- The dominance of the interest of the supporters and the opposition and their electoral aims regarding the Hariri issue is expected. Both the supporters and the opposition do not look at the Hariri issue except in terms of achieving the interests of the vying states and the interests of their followers in Lebanon. When these states realise their interests then the Harriri issue will be forgotten as other similar issues were forgotten before. There will be then a search for a scapegoat to put the blame on according to a method they are adept at. After that they will present to the public the result of investigation, in a way that pleases the vying colonial powers and wins the applause of the internal instruments.
4- The fact that the supporters and the opposition do not sense the danger of the international investigation committee and the fact that this committee is a mandate over Lebanon is due to the fact that these groups are busy in pursuing their special interests an they are not concerned with a mandate or sovereignty. The political classes, both the supporters and the opposition, have found pleasure in mandate (over Lebanon), regardless of the names given to this mandate.
Lebanon, under its current situation, with its political class which controls it, and with the influence over which the colonial states, America and Europe, struggle will remain a prey over which the colonial Kuffar compete. It will remain also an extreme harm to its people and the region. The only solution for its problems is that it should be returned to its origin, which is the lands of ash-Sham and all of it should be organised into one strong, God fearing, powerful and just state: the Khilafah Rashidah. At that time the citizens, whether Muslims or non-Muslims will enjoy safety and security, without depreciation or exaggeration. All of the citizens will have their equal rights and duties before judiciary, without any discrimination based on colour, race or religion; rather they will all be treated justly before judiciary.
30 Safar 1426 AH
09/04/2005
Question: What is this tug-of-war taking place in Lebanon which erupts at time and quietens down in another without any stability. The regime supporters are not able to remain on a steadfast position and nor are they able to adopt a resolute decision. The same applies to the opposition, whose statements change and whose priorities are not fixed on any situation. Rather, the issue of Hariri’s killing, over which events exploded, the issue of elections is about to dominate over it, whether from the supporters or opposition where the interests of the politicians are more prominent than the issue itself. This is clear from what the meetings and contacts between some members of the supporters and opposition have mentioned. All of them fluctuate in their positions without any resolute stance. Rather, the international committee for investigation gained sovereignty and powers in Lebanon, above the sovereignty and powers of the state of Lebanon. But despite this the matter has been passed over by the supporters and opposition without any feeling or concern. How should this be interpreted?
Answer: The answer to this question does not require a lot of explanation since it is clear to those who have insight. The answer is as follows:
1- What is taking place in Lebanon is an intense struggle between America on one side and Europe on the other (whist France is public about it and Britain works behind the scenes). America is trying to continue her influence in Lebanon which existed before, especially since the Taif agreement until today and preserve this influence in the same way it existed before, without being diminished after the departure of the Syrian army. And Europe see in this an opportunity to expel the American influence and take its place.
2- These states, which struggle against each other, possess internal instruments which reflect the ambitions of these colonial states internally and execute their wishes and plans. That is why the internal instruments change their stance and comments according to the decisions of these vying states. That is why we find some of these instruments adopt a stance today which differs greatly from what the stance was a day or even hours ago because they themselves do not adopt the stance but the stance of others. The decision is not in the hand of these instruments but in the hand of the vying states. This is what explains the fact that the supporters and opposition, despite raising the same flag, the same Taif agreement, freedom, sovereignty, independence and revealing the truth (behind the killing of Al-Hariri)….cannot unite and come up with a solution because the decision is not in their hands. Had America and Europe agreed on a solution this instant then all the sides would have executed it and changed their views to be in harmony with this solution, they would do this not even gradually, but instantly.
3- The dominance of the interest of the supporters and the opposition and their electoral aims regarding the Hariri issue is expected. Both the supporters and the opposition do not look at the Hariri issue except in terms of achieving the interests of the vying states and the interests of their followers in Lebanon. When these states realise their interests then the Harriri issue will be forgotten as other similar issues were forgotten before. There will be then a search for a scapegoat to put the blame on according to a method they are adept at. After that they will present to the public the result of investigation, in a way that pleases the vying colonial powers and wins the applause of the internal instruments.
4- The fact that the supporters and the opposition do not sense the danger of the international investigation committee and the fact that this committee is a mandate over Lebanon is due to the fact that these groups are busy in pursuing their special interests an they are not concerned with a mandate or sovereignty. The political classes, both the supporters and the opposition, have found pleasure in mandate (over Lebanon), regardless of the names given to this mandate.
Lebanon, under its current situation, with its political class which controls it, and with the influence over which the colonial states, America and Europe, struggle will remain a prey over which the colonial Kuffar compete. It will remain also an extreme harm to its people and the region. The only solution for its problems is that it should be returned to its origin, which is the lands of ash-Sham and all of it should be organised into one strong, God fearing, powerful and just state: the Khilafah Rashidah. At that time the citizens, whether Muslims or non-Muslims will enjoy safety and security, without depreciation or exaggeration. All of the citizens will have their equal rights and duties before judiciary, without any discrimination based on colour, race or religion; rather they will all be treated justly before judiciary.
30 Safar 1426 AH
09/04/2005
Comments