Al-Hariri’s options
Written by Nasser Kandil,
When Moshe Ya’alon the former minister of the war in the occupation entity says that what was issued by the statement of the Arab foreign ministers is a copy of what Israel says in Hebrew, then the resigned Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri who is coming to Lebanon or who will retreat of his resignation has to think deeply in the options which he wants to take before he utters the first word before the President of the Republic, because it will draw a new track for him rather a new track for the country. Everyone have released from the obligations towards him through solidarity positions against what he has been exposed to as humiliation by his Saudi friends that he does not want to admit, as they released from the obligations towards the keenness on the consensus which led to the settlement which brought him to the premiership in conjunction with the election of the General Michael Aoun as a President of the Republic.
It is useful for Al-Hariri to pay attention that the settlement which is related to link the dispute over the differences towards the regional options will not be affected by a trivial accusation to Hezbollah of bombing Riyadh, while the talk about the description of Hezbollah with terrorism is something else that is only uttered by the Israelis and the Americans, while embroiling Lebanon of uttering it makes his staying as a prime minister impossible, and makes his nomination once again for the premiership if he resigned impossible too. It is useful for Al-Hariri to know and to be told by those who lived in the stage between the Israeli invasion and Al Taif Agreement that Saudi Arabia during the regime of Amin Gemayel was putting its importance to overthrow the resistance, and that the explosive of Bir Al-Abed which was put by Bandar Bin Sultan according to the confessions of William Casey the Director of the CIA in 1983 was targeting the resistance choice with “terrorism”. It is enough for the resistance and Hezbollah at its forefront what has been said by the Palestinian factions unanimously about their consensus despite their many disputes against any attempt of describing the forefront of the Arab resistance against Israel with terrorism.
Al-Hariri can ask for more detailed texts about the settlement that includes the non-involvement of Lebanon as a country in any regional axis, but he has to be aware that every text about Iran will be met by a text about Saudi Arabia whether by hinting or stating. Lebanon will not be a partner in any Saudi-Iranian confrontation, this is from the content of the settlement, but to be a partner with Saudi Arabia against Iran then it is a fault that will not be committed by Lebanon for the sake of ensuring the return of Al-Hariri to the premiership. Al-Hariri can consider the withdrawal of Hezbollah soon from Iraq enough if he wanted to talk about the national consensus, as long as there is no presence of Hezbollah in Yemen, Bahrain, and Kuwait and as long as the presence in Syria is subject to complicated equations that are related to the needs of the war on terrorism which did not end and which threaten the security of Lebanon, and in order not to grant Israel free profits that make it achieve its demands, as well as the position of the Syrian legitimacy, even when Hezbollah does not find a reason for its stay in Syria it will not do so in the context of Saudi –Israeli bazaar where buying and selling is clear.
Al-Hariri has to choose between playing a compromising role to absorb the Saudi fabricated tension, and then he will find the cooperation through finding solutions that do not grant Israel any gains, or to accept to be the guardian of implementing planned Saudi policy to appease Israel in Lebanon from within the agenda of the mutual commitments between the parties of the new alliance, so upon his decision the dealing with him will be determined, there is no alternative responsible, but there is a national and personal dignity which is not replaced.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,