Brigadier Jamil Al-Sayed wrote: Five foreign embassies accredited in Lebanon issued a surprising announcement requesting:
"A public and clear commitment by all Lebanese representatives confirming their support for the (statements) of Presidents Aon and Salam regarding the exclusivity of a war and peace solution"!!
I personally don't, as an official and citizen, and I don't think any principled Lebanese opposes the exclusivity of the state in deciding war and peace.
but,.
What arouses astonishment and condemnation is that the statement of those embassies actually instructs the representatives to "support the statements" issued by the presidents of the republic and the government, and perhaps also to hang "banners", similar to what happens in dictatorships... word games,.
Although everyone knows that the Lebanese presidential declarations about arms exclusivity are nothing more than rhetorical slogans, because those countries are not able to force the "captives" to withdraw from the south, in addition to the fact that it is forbidden, out of respect for the "captives" and the "captives". If the Lebanese army is really able to defend Lebanon and liberate South Sudan, then it will become exclusive to Salah. This is an inevitable and natural result of the army's ability and negates any need for every Lebanese to resist and defend his homeland...
What I expect from the Speaker of the House of Representatives is that he will initiate a meeting with the ambassadors of the countries that issued the statement to inform them that the rapid withdrawal of "Israel" and the strengthening of the Lebanese army as needed is the shortest path to arms exclusivity...
The role of the representatives, according to the Lebanese constitution, is not to welcome any verbal statements issued by the presidents of the republic and the government.