Mustaqbal: Limiting Possession of Arms to State, Forming Unbiased Govt. Basis for Resuming Dialogue
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
The Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc praised on Tuesday President Michel Suleiman’s call for the resumption of the national dialogue, noting that it is a proper way to tackle pending disputes.
It noted however after its weekly meeting: “Limiting the possession of arms to the state and forming an unbiased government are the basis for resuming the dialogue.”
“The bloc is not keen on resuming unproductive dialogue with hidden preconditions,” it added.
“Any dialogue must take into account the need to limit the possession of arms in Lebanon to the state,” it said in a statement.
Suleiman had issued on Monday an invitation to all the concerned powers to resume the national dialogue on June 11.
The March 14-led opposition had voiced its support for the dialogue on condition that Hizbullah’s possession of arms be the sole topic of discussion.
Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had said that the party is ready to resume the talks without preconditions.
The current government is unfit to oversee the talks because of its bias to Syria and its “great failures in different endeavors,” added the Mustaqbal bloc.
“This government serves to increase the tensions between the Lebanese through wasting the role of the security and political institutions,” it continued.
“Its practices have had a detrimental effect on the country’s economic sector and Lebanon’s sovereignty, which it has given up to the Syrian regime as demonstrated by its failure to respond to the Syrian government’s letter to the U.N. in which accused Lebanon of harboring terrorists,” it remarked.
On May 18, the Syrian Ambassador to the U.N. Bashar al-Jaafari issued a letter to U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon claiming that some Lebanese areas near the Lebanese-Syrian border “have become an incubator for terrorist elements from the al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood organizations who are tampering with the security of Syria and its citizens.”
Addressing the kidnapping of Lebanese pilgrims in Syria a week ago, the Mustaqbal bloc condemned the incident, saying that it “rejects such practices regardless of which side commits them because they target innocent Lebanese civilians.”
The bloc hoped that the pilgrims will be returned safely to their families, praising the national unity demonstrated by the various Lebanese factions over this issue.
The 11 pilgrims were kidnapped in Aleppo last Tuesday as they were returning to Lebanon by land from a pilgrimage in Iran.
29 May 2012, 19:59
04
I support limiting arm possession to the official armed forces. I think the rest, bringing down the government is not as important. Even if the government came using Hizbollah arms, once the arms are removed, the democratic process can solve all the other issues.
29 May 2012, 20:11
51
Here we go again. Putting "shorot" for resuming dialogue.
This clearly indicates that they do not want dialogue. Do you really think that hezb. will give up their weapons over a night just because you say so?
30 May 2012, 10:16
20
“Limiting the possession of arms to the state and forming an unbiased government are the basis for resuming the dialogue.”
That is not "talking about" the weapons as you say but they want them to drop the weapons before sitting at the same table.
This is another way of creating deadlock in the country. Whatever we say, I personally think that the weapons has turned into a burden for Lebanon but the way of resolving it is through discussions, planning for a common defense strategy and assure the southerners that they will not be invaded by israel again.
At the same time the hezb weapons creates a reason for others to arm themselves, we still cannot forget that many other factions carry weapons, not least the palestinians in the camps.
So, go to discussion and put no shorot if you want the country to go forward.
30 May 2012, 11:38
02
the shorot they are demanding are the same one's hezb had agreed to at the last dialogue. they include addressing their weapons and the palestinians weapons, neither of these have seen the light of day, therefore at the risk of fruitless and meaningless dialogue this time around this is the least they can ask for.
30 May 2012, 12:11
20
Forces. You said it yourself. They agreed on "addressing". So this is what we should do, sit down, talk and adress.
If I´m not wrong, your boss the doctor, adressed a solution a couple of years ago of merging hezbs arms into the army.
Why not sit down and work on this idea:-)
30 May 2012, 13:52
02
ulpianus i agree that is exactley what they should do, however this conference was several years ago and hezb have not made any positive progress towards this,dispite geagea's proposal they have even on numerous occasions stated they will not give up their arms, now adding oil exploration to their argument.
This dialogue would be about addressing the current crisis which involves dissarming certain groups to avert any possibility for civil unrest, but these talks are doomed to fail if we single out one group from another.
and the doctor is not my boss, i support his stance and direction for the country, he sometimes makes mistakes but thats ok, as long as he works for the greater good. :)
29 May 2012, 20:53
11
@ Ulpianus, i agree with you but it is what everybody does when they are in a situation of advantage against one another. Now syria is very weak and hezb as well because weapons cannot float as easily as before in case some problems erupts in the lebanese scene. As well as Iran beeing cornered and new jets capable of going inside the iranian defense are delivered to the israelis soon ( F-35 ). It is the same thing that happened in 2009 , when hezbollah proved to the lebanese governement that they can absorb beirut in few hours. Now the situation is different, militias everywhere and weapons everywhere , + Hezbollah is weakened because of Syria and iran situation. But my advice to march 14th and march 8th, DISARM PALESTINIANS FIRST. this should be the first priority of all.
29 May 2012, 20:53
01
Hezbollah will never disarm if palestinians have weapons because they remember what happend during the civil war, the raping and killing of chiites in the south by the PLO, which prompted after Amal to fight them. Anyway , there is a saying in french" a bon entendeur salut."
29 May 2012, 21:31
21
By the way, the article about Saed Hariri and Saudi King was Suspiciously removed.
29 May 2012, 22:08
13
“Limiting the possession of arms to the state = yes, it is the root of all lebanese problems! and lebanon will stay a weak country till the state is not the only one to be armed...but hezb doesn t want to talk about the armed palestinians for example because it would lead to talk about them too! so it is their benefit to leave palestinians armed!!!
and forming an unbiased government = no, how can a gvt be unbiased? all gvt are biased because normally they defend the policy they were elected for normally...
but how can their be dialogue if one side refuses to talk about the most important matter which is the uncontrolled weapons in the country?....
