Is the real “substantial” problem in Lebanon today about the form of Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s resignation and where he resigned from? Or is it what the resignation indicates? Or, more importantly, is it the contents of the resignation speech?
Hassan Nasrallah disrupted the Lebanese scene. Those who belong to his “axis,” from the Lebanese president to the speaker of parliament and those who revolve in their orbit, did the same.
It’s expected for Hezbollah’s leader to evade discussing the reasons of the resignation as they condemn him and his terrorist party.
Lebanese President Michel Aoun’s insistence to discuss the formalities of the resignation, how it was made and where Saad Hariri is right now is like “running forward.”
There is a Saudi determination that’s backed by Arab countries and that’s in harmony with a “decisive” American policy to prevent Iranian “malicious” activities, as the American administration led by President Trump put it.
This is the point of everything. It’s something that goes beyond the shallow folkloric local Lebanese discussion of “where is Sheikh Saad?” As part of this new policy, the American administration began to pursue Iranian-Iraqi formations affiliated with the Popular Mobilization and blacklist them as terrorist. It’s doing the same in Yemen and in Syria.
As for Lebanon and its “international” crisis, Nasrallah hinted during his speech that US Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson’s policy is different than Trump’s.
Tillerson, however, said that the US rejects the presence or role of any militia in Lebanon. This is the stance of the “entire” American administration, beginning with Trump who announced his plan with the four aims to end Iran’s destructive role in the region.
There is a Saudi determination that’s backed by Arab countries and that’s in harmony with a “decisive” American policy to prevent Iranian “malicious” activities, as the American administration led by President Trump put it.Mashari Althaydi