The Lebanese Forces (LF) and caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati engaged in a heated debate on Tuesday over a proposal to convene a Cabinet meeting to discuss postponing the retirement of Army Commander-in-Chief General Joseph Aoun.
The LF expressed astonishment at the invitation from caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati to this meeting, which they claim aims to “block the way to this extension, which requires the signature of the caretaker Minister of Defense, Maurice Slim, knowing that it is improbable that he would sign.”
They described this move as an “illegal move from the Council of Ministers,” one day after Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri was summoned to a legislative session on Thursday dedicated to this purpose. The LF questioned Mikati’s actions, asking, “Does Mikati know what he’s doing?”
In a statement issued on Tuesday, the LF declared that Mikati “had ample time in recent months to legally extend the term of the Army Commander-in-Chief but failed to do so.”
They continued, “How can we explain this decision that was announced during a time when it had been decided that this issue of the postponement of the Army Commander-in-Chief will be debated in Parliament?” Especially since we know that “if it is decided in the Council of Ministers, this extension is likely to be easily contested and revoked, creating a vacuum within the military institution.”
Mikati’s Response
The caretaker Prime Minister was quick to retort. In a statement, his press office reacted, “Mikati is extremely surprised by the remarks made by the LF.”
According to him, the call for a cabinet meeting aims to postpone the demobilization of the Army’s Commander-in-Chief by six months, which does not run counter to the proposed law put forward by the Lebanese Forces, consisting of raising the retirement age by a full year. In this context, he recalled the visit of Ghassan Hasbani, a member of Parliament from the LF, last November, during which Hasbani called for the postponement of demobilization.
He concluded, “Mikati is fully aware of his actions and is acting for the good of the nation and the preservation of the military institution. He believes that all political parties, including the LF, should cooperate and adopt laws, far from personal considerations.”
Reaction of the Lebanese Forces
The LF quickly responded to Mikati’s statement, expressing regret for “the Prime Minister’s attempt to conceal his intentions behind procedures and measures aimed at blocking the extension of the mandate of the Army Commander-in-Chief.”
In response, they made the following observations. “First, when the opposition MPs, and in particular MP Ghassan Hasbani, met with Mikati, they aimed to ask him to postpone the discharge of General Joseph Aoun within a legal framework. They did not want an apparent, formal postponement that could easily be appealed and revoked."
"Second, the request to postpone the demobilization took place weeks ago. If Mikati had made his decision in accordance with the law, he would have prevented any attempt to challenge it. More importantly, Parliament could have assumed its responsibility if the appeal against the decision had been upheld. However, Mikati waited for Berri to call a parliamentary session before urging the government to extend Aoun’s term of office," they continued.
"Third, any call by the government to postpone the demobilization is now an attempt to prevent the extension of the mandate," they added, before concluding, "Fourth, the only solution is to allow Parliament to approve the law on raising the legal retirement age."
The LF expressed astonishment at the invitation from caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati to this meeting, which they claim aims to “block the way to this extension, which requires the signature of the caretaker Minister of Defense, Maurice Slim, knowing that it is improbable that he would sign.”
They described this move as an “illegal move from the Council of Ministers,” one day after Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri was summoned to a legislative session on Thursday dedicated to this purpose. The LF questioned Mikati’s actions, asking, “Does Mikati know what he’s doing?”
In a statement issued on Tuesday, the LF declared that Mikati “had ample time in recent months to legally extend the term of the Army Commander-in-Chief but failed to do so.”
They continued, “How can we explain this decision that was announced during a time when it had been decided that this issue of the postponement of the Army Commander-in-Chief will be debated in Parliament?” Especially since we know that “if it is decided in the Council of Ministers, this extension is likely to be easily contested and revoked, creating a vacuum within the military institution.”
Mikati’s Response
The caretaker Prime Minister was quick to retort. In a statement, his press office reacted, “Mikati is extremely surprised by the remarks made by the LF.”
According to him, the call for a cabinet meeting aims to postpone the demobilization of the Army’s Commander-in-Chief by six months, which does not run counter to the proposed law put forward by the Lebanese Forces, consisting of raising the retirement age by a full year. In this context, he recalled the visit of Ghassan Hasbani, a member of Parliament from the LF, last November, during which Hasbani called for the postponement of demobilization.
He concluded, “Mikati is fully aware of his actions and is acting for the good of the nation and the preservation of the military institution. He believes that all political parties, including the LF, should cooperate and adopt laws, far from personal considerations.”
Reaction of the Lebanese Forces
The LF quickly responded to Mikati’s statement, expressing regret for “the Prime Minister’s attempt to conceal his intentions behind procedures and measures aimed at blocking the extension of the mandate of the Army Commander-in-Chief.”
In response, they made the following observations. “First, when the opposition MPs, and in particular MP Ghassan Hasbani, met with Mikati, they aimed to ask him to postpone the discharge of General Joseph Aoun within a legal framework. They did not want an apparent, formal postponement that could easily be appealed and revoked."
"Second, the request to postpone the demobilization took place weeks ago. If Mikati had made his decision in accordance with the law, he would have prevented any attempt to challenge it. More importantly, Parliament could have assumed its responsibility if the appeal against the decision had been upheld. However, Mikati waited for Berri to call a parliamentary session before urging the government to extend Aoun’s term of office," they continued.
"Third, any call by the government to postpone the demobilization is now an attempt to prevent the extension of the mandate," they added, before concluding, "Fourth, the only solution is to allow Parliament to approve the law on raising the legal retirement age."
Read more
Comments