On November 16, 2011, the League of Arab States suspended Syria’s membership in the system of joint Arab action because it had not implemented the Arab peace plan that it had approved on the 2nd of the same month, which stipulated the withdrawal of tanks from cities, the cessation of brutal repression of peaceful demonstrators, and the start of dialogue with the opposition. within two weeks.
However, the Assad regime reneged on its promise exactly 4 days later, and on November 6, its forces killed 23 demonstrators, which revealed the truth of the Assad regime’s commitment to its promises.
By November 13, the number of peaceful demonstrators killed by regime forces since it approved the Arab peace plan had risen to 300.
The Arabs and the Assad regime repeated the experience of the experiment… On December 19, 2011, the Damascus authorities signed a second peace plan with the League of Arab States, which stipulated the withdrawal of all armed men from the streets, the release of political prisoners, and the deployment of 50 observers from the League of Arab States to follow up on implementation and the commitment of the government and dissidents to the terms of the agreement. Peace talks.
But the missions of the observers failed because the regime did not abide by any of the agreed terms. On January 28, 2012, the League of Arab States suspended its monitoring mission due to the escalation of violence resulting from the failure of the regime forces to abide by any of the agreed terms.
However, despite the deterioration of the security situation, the intensification of the battles, and the frequency of information about the perpetration of massacres against civilians and the flight of hundreds of thousands from Syria to the surrounding countries, 125 thousand Syrian “refugees” were elected in their country’s embassy in Yarzeh, Lebanon, on May 29, 2014, Bashar Al-Assad, President of the Syrian Arab Republic So, did those who elected Assad in Lebanon return to the Assad state, or did they remain in Lebanon and their number increased until it reached two million and 800 thousand refugees, whom the Lebanese state prefers to describe as displaced persons?
After 9 years, and specifically on May 7 (2023), the Arab League took a decision to restore Syria to its embrace according to the principle of step for step, in line with Security Council Resolution No. 2254, which calls for a peaceful solution to the Syrian crisis.
The decision to restore Syria to the Arab embrace also included a promise to continue efforts that would allow the delivery of humanitarian aid to all those in need in Syria.
Will the fate of the new decision be the same as the fate of previous decisions that were linked to the extent to which the Assad regime implemented its commitments? any failure?
The answer remains the king of time, pursuant to the Egyptian proverb that says, “Hey, news with money, tomorrow for free.”
However, what is remarkable about the Arab preparations for the forthcoming summit, which is scheduled to be held in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on Friday, is that the tasks of the Arab leaders are topped by 3 main headings: Sudan, Palestine, and Syria.
This means that Lebanon is not presented to the summit as a special file, but rather its conditions are being discussed based on the “frequencies” of the Palestinian and Syrian titles, which means that Lebanon’s problems will be discussed as a regression to the problems of the surroundings.
This means that the future of the Syrian refugees in Lebanon will be discussed based on the stability of the situation in Syria, allowing them to return to their country, and will this return be to their areas from which they were displaced, or to areas of their choice inside Syria because there is no option for everyone to return to where they were before 2011?
The stability of Lebanon is also being discussed based on the stability of the conditions of Palestine, which means that will the theory of Hassan Nasrallah’s party called the unity of the fronts be applied if Palestine or the Golan front flares up again, which means more clearly whether Lebanon will turn again into a proxy war front according to which it will pay the price for what is happening in Palestine as it was since the signing of the Cairo Agreement of 1969, which was canceled after the end of the civil war in 1990?
Regardless of the jurisprudence of some “insights” in this regard, a pivotal question is circulating about the Lebanese before it means others: Will the Arab summit discuss the causes of the Lebanese presidential vacancy without discussing the person of the president himself, as it is a Lebanese matter?
It is no secret that the dilemma of the presidential vacancy in Lebanon is a source of headaches for Arab and foreign leaders alike, especially if it is measured within the success of the totalitarian Assad regime in holding its elections in Syria and Lebanon simultaneously in 2014, and in comparison to the Turkish democratic wedding, where elections for the transfer of power take place smoothly and undisturbed. Any vacancy, without forgetting Israel, which witnessed a series of early elections in the last ten years without witnessing a single vacuum in power, neither at the head of the state nor at the heel of power.
It is no secret that the majority of Arab countries and the West as a whole stand astonished, rather resentful and deplored by Lebanon’s failure to inform the Central Bank Governor, Riad Salameh, of the French judicial summons to listen to him, which was summarized by one of the Lebanese radio stations with the phrase “the judiciary is lagging behind and security is complicit”!
So who is slowing down in a country where there is no speed except to increase taxes, fees and high prices, and there is no complicity in it except for the alliance of the weapon of treachery with the dirty money mafia.
The serious question in Lebanon is not when a president will be elected, but who will be the president of the republic who leads the country to recovery in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and Arab funds?
The serious question in Lebanon is not when the first government of the era will be formed, but rather who will be the head of the first government of the era, which will restore Lebanon’s place in the civilized world and free it from the two families, the families of the Assad regime and the families of the Supreme Leader?
The third serious question in Lebanon is: Who will be the ruler of the central bank who will reorganize the banking sector and remove it from the circle of control of the system of the alliance of treachery and dirty money… and protect, in a way, the remaining deposits, especially for private sector retirees who have no pension or health insurance and whose withdrawals are no longer sufficient Banking to pay electricity and water fees and the price of medicine, without mentioning heating fuel and food costs.
Mohamed Salam – This is Lebanon
