The head of the Lebanese Phalange Party, MP Sami Gemayel, often calls things by their right names in his approach to the vacuum that befell Lebanon in the presidency of the republic approaching its first year, the collapse of the operational system of government, a severe financial and monetary crisis, and a growing influx of displaced people from Syria to the “Land of the Cedars.” .
In mountainous Bikfaya… here is the house of Bashir (the late President of the Republic who was assassinated on September 14, 1982), and within sight is the “House of the Future” where the former President of the Republic, Amin Gemayel (1982 – 1988), is spending his political retirement, and between them is the headquarters of the head of the Phalange Party. who took over the torch after his brother Pierre was martyred in a broad daylight assassination (November 21, 2006).
It was not possible to meet with MP Gemayel at the Central Phalange House in Saifi, Beirut, as he is cautious in his movements and takes noteworthy measures. Therefore, Patriarch Boutrus Al Rai visited him in his stronghold in Bikfaya and conducted a dialogue with him, at the beginning of which he asked him about the secret of this “precaution”, and is it just an automatic precaution or based on security advice, or because the nature of the crisis political moment requires it?
He replied, “Something of everything. There are threats and there are security advices, in addition to an analysis of the seriousness of the situation.”
Gemayel did not want to reveal anything, regarding the nature of the threats and their source,
“I will not go into the details.”
“Is there a fear that the security issue will be used to cause a breach in the political status quo?
“In my opinion, this danger exists,” he said.
“In the details of the presidential impasse, it is almost difficult to answer the “black box” of the presidential crisis and what could break the deadlock after a lot of international mediation – from the French envoy to the Qatari mediation- to no avail until now, despite the fact that Jean-Yves Le Drian announced it with a full mouth on the eve of his visit to Riyadh and his meeting with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said, “It is time for the third option.”
Gemayel approaches the impasse by what he considers “putting a finger in the wound,” “irrespective of what the international mediators say or do in the context of their efforts to find solutions to the crisis,
“The truth is that as long as Hezbollah clings to its candidate, all these initiatives and statements will go nowhere.” Here is the crucial point, as it does not matter what my opinion is, nor what the Frenchman says or the Qatari thinks, and as long as the party insists on disrupting the presidential election and trying to impose its candidate, this means that we are back to square one .”
Regarding the role of the Qatari envoy in terms of extracting an acknowledgment from all parties of the principle of the “third option,” Gemayel said, “This is something that all parties in Lebanon have acknowledged except Hezbollah. We in the opposition went to the third option unilaterally without waiting for anything.”
“A guarantee or a step from the other team, when we supported the candidacy of Jihad Azour. Let us remind everyone that our candidate who represents our aspirations is Michel Moawad, and we took the decision to withdraw his candidacy in coordination with him to give a signal to the international community and the parties at home that we are ready to compromise for the sake of the country and go to a third option. Minister Azour proposed this premise, and consequently the 59 representatives who voted for Azour, including the parties, blocs and independents they also represent, have approved since his nomination 4 months ago the third option, but the problem is that whenever we go to a third option, we are asked by the resistance team for a fourth candidate. When we reach the fourth, they will treat him as if he has become our candidate and invite us to nominate a fifth candidate, while they are still on their first candidate.”
When he was asked : ” What is the external dynamic betting on?”
He responded, “In my opinion, the resistance team is lying to the mediators delegates, as it tells them that we are open to listen, a claim the mediators considered as a positive signs, but when we get to the seriousness and names, the party returns to clinging to its candidate”.
“And why did the French proposal hit a dead end?”
“Minister Le Drian proposed the third option, and who stopped this path? Hezbollah. “
Now the Qatari envoy will adopt the same approach, and different results are not expected unless there is a change in the party’s position by withdrawing its candidate. Once the party agrees to move to a third option, there is no longer a need for mediators. “
“Internally, we can resolve the issue between each other. The problem is that until now Hezbollah is hijacking the presidential election, the state, and institutions and wants to impose its candidate on everyone. Either it owns the state or there will be no state “
“The Qatari envoy’s visit, revealed that Hezbollah will not accept the principle of the third option, i.e. giving up on Franjieh, before it knows who the real third candidate is .”
“Why doesn’t the opposition announce its Third candidate and meet with the French envoy? ” Gemayel was asked
Gemayel said “We do not have a camouflage candidate or a real candidate. We are working to try to reach a solution. Our main candidate is Michel Moawad, and we agreed to Jihad Azour as a step in the direction of the other team, and they did not meet us halfway. Where do we invent names?”
Rai interrupt him:
But in a moment you will abandon Azour? And he responds
“We went for a centrist candidate, and the choice fell on Jihad Azour because he was the subject of consensus among the majority of opposition parties and the Free Patriotic Movement backed him.”
Rai told him: But Azour is not on the table for the French or the Qataris, and the “third option” certainly does not apply to him at this stage.
He asserts, “This problem is not with us, but with Hezbollah. And let Hezbollah begin by announcing that it will not adhere to his candidate, and tell us who it wants an alternative.
Why us?” Why do we always have to name?
In response to his clarification regarding his previous announcement that he would not have a veto on the army commander, Gemayel asked, “and does he believe that his chances are ahead of others?”
“Does Hezbollah approve of General Joseph Aoun?”
Regarding the issue of dialogue which was raised by the “resistance” as a mandatory path to any open election sessions, why you do not meet Speaker Nabih Berri , and what do you lose by sitting at a table instead of holding yourself responsible for disrupting the dialogue? Gemayel was asked
“We, as the opposition, were the first to open a dialogue and make it public from the moment Jihad Azour was nominated,” “This is a kind of public dialogue in front of all the Lebanese, and why do we want to sit in a closed room? If they really had the intention of reaching an agreement with others in Lebanon, they should have met us halfway when we withdrew Michel Moawad’s nomination, which they did not do with their candidate.” .
What did Nasrallah mean when he said that Hezbollah wanted guarantees for its weapons… What guarantees specifically was he talking about, and through whom did the party request them?”, he was asked
Gemayel replies, “It has become common in the media and political circles that Hezbollah wants guarantees in the presidency. Hence I said, is the armed Hezbollah that uses violence, and that is accused of assassinations and disrupting the constitution, and whose ally does not call for elections, the one who wants guarantees? The truth is that the one who needs guarantees is us. These are guarantees that we want for the state, institutions, and the republic, guarantees about stability and reforms, guarantees that governments will not be disrupted or that conditions be imposed in the interest of allies at the expense of the constitution. In this, we are not asking for anything for ourselves, but rather we want the state that guarantees for everyone, while he wants guarantees for his illegal weapons.”
“Does he share those who fear that the resistance will reach the stage of “let’s sit down to talk about the system and redistribute the power cake”?
He said: “The problem is not here, but rather in the presence of a team that hijacks the country and democracy, threatens with weapons and kills, and uses weapons to occupy Beirut as it did on May 7, 2008, and imposes its will with the power of these weapons, and this is what requires to be dealt with before any talk about changing the regime. How could this be done in light of the disruption of Parliament and the absence of a President of the Republic, and at a time when there is a party holding the entire system hostage.”
Asked about Hezbollah’s call for allowing the displaced Syrian to emigrate to Europe . He replied
“Nasrallah is implanting the agenda of the Syrian regime and is using the displaced Syrians to blackmail the Lebanese.”
translated from Lebanon Files article in Arabic
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.