- 09:00
The cascading events that have resulted in the defeat of Iranian proxies in the Near East have not yet elicited the due questioning among political actors. The systematic dismantling of the power nodes that have structured the strategic continuum patiently woven by Iran throughout the last two decades should have impelled political actors to review their operational schemes and their underlying ideological subtexts. Paradoxically enough, they seem to surf on a seamless web of contradictions and fallacies that serve their vested interests, helping them strengthen their psychotic defenses and shield themselves from realities. The purported ontological enmity with Israel caters to their hoaxes and conceals their true motivations: stay in power, transmit power to their heirs, set aside cognitive dissonance, and safeguard their privileges and institutionalized perquisites.
The newly propelled strategic and political dynamics have barely impacted Lebanese politics, and none of the political actors realize that the politics-as-usual template has become redundant and irrelevant. Traditional politicians, warlords and political parvenus are still operating with a sense of unmistakable certainty to dampen their insecurities and extend their political tenures, without the slightest concern for the new issues they are supposed to tackle. The warmongering of Hezbollah, its trail of Shiite millenarianism, institutionalized terrorism and organized criminality has come to an end with the destruction of its operational platforms, the extermination of its leaders at every scale, and the debunking of its ideological and military rhetoric and narratives.
However, the traditional oligarchs and the purported reformers have not yet drawn the proper conclusions and dared to challenge Hezbollah’s politics of domination and brazen audacity. The late presidential election and the newly formed cabinet are still operating within the bounds of the oligarchic system and instrumentalizing the anti-Israeli rhetoric to keep the system afloat and make sure to remain in power. The state of denial in the face of the transformative dynamics and their revolutionary effects is quite puzzling and questions the rationale behind it. The Shiite fascist group is impervious to critical self-examination, dismissive of its defeat, and still adamant about its domination and unrealistic power projections.
The incoming executive, while accommodating the Shiite political whims and exculpating their destructive power strategies, recapitulates the indolent cliches of political antisemitism, fails to implement the international security resolutions, continues the immature game of externalizing blame, and refuses to engage the true question of pacification in a country that had to cope with six decades of open-ended conflicts triggered by ideological fallacies and undeconstructed enmity and its strategic doubles.
The idle discussions about the Israeli threats are fraudulent since they reject the conflict resolution blueprints based on negotiations and the conclusion of a peace treaty that circumvents the institutional fallacies and their ideological framing. The blind indoctrination and its political criminality double within the Shiite community, rather than being critically parsed and politically deconstructed, resonate with the members of the motley cabinet, which rehearses the trite ideological tropes while disengaging the real diplomacy inspired and impelled by the strategic transformation driven by the Israeli counteroffensive.
The incoming executive has a hard time adjusting to the emerging realities of the post-Iranian era for both ideological and psychological reasons. Breaking away from the weighty legacy of the Islamic Cold Wars, Islamist radicalism and the residual “Palestinian” ideology of erstwhile leftism (Nawaf Salam, Ghassan Salameh, Tarek Mitri) and the fears and inhibitions of an inexperienced president is no easy task, and the laborious gestation of the ministerial declaration testifies to these obstacles. The casuistry around the strategic and defense issues is at best hedging tactics mandated by ideological views and binding strategic interests.
The commissioned team to draft the statement (namely Ghassan Salameh and Tarek Mitri) reveals its partisan nature, the sturdy shackles of Shiite revanchism, and the flawed political representation of the current cabinet. As long as these imbalances persist, the ability to redress them is difficult, if not impossible. The cabinet is still hostage to the ideological views of its core component and the power calculations of the Shiite vetoing power and sabotaging stratagems. The only way out of these dilemmas is to adhere to the internationally mandated agenda and depart from the conventional narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The signing of a peace treaty with Israel is the only path to stability and reconstruction if we are to end this era of open-ended conflicts that have been plaguing our country for six decades. I am highly skeptical about the willingness and ability of the current executive to operate major inflections and rewrite the narrative of a destructive conflict and its institutionalized impasses.
Comments