Former allies of Hezbollah are stepping forward, advocating for diplomacy rather than war to resolve the ongoing issues between Lebanon and Israel. This marks a significant shift in the country’s political landscape.
In his latest interview on Sar El Waet with journalist Marcel Ghanem, MP Tony Frangieh spoke with a boldness rarely seen among Hezbollah’s allies, addressing both what happened in the last war and the broader political course since the 1980s.
Tony Frangieh stated that the war of support was a wrong choice, emphasizing that Lebanon is no longer capable of bearing the consequences of other nations' wars. Moreover, he argued that the peace process with Israel should not be approached unilaterally, but rather as part of a broader regional effort—especially if the entire region moves toward peace.
Nonetheless, diplomacy is the core of this issue. Tony Frangieh, along with many in his political camp, embraced diplomatic efforts in order to liberate the land and take the necessary steps to end the military conflict in southern Lebanon, rather than resorting to resistance, arms and other measures that have proven ineffective.
As acknowledged by the entire Mumanaa axis, it became clear that all the grandeur Hezbollah attributed to its weaponry was nothing but an illusion. The Israelis outclassed them in technology and aviation, and Hezbollah was unable to withstand the assault it faced, which ultimately resulted in the assassination of its leadership and senior military commanders.
If Hezbollah, along with its allies, has not been convinced that diplomacy represents the actual opportunity in these times, then it remains out of step with the present reality.
Consequently, the acknowledgment by its allies of its defeat and the necessity of diplomacy—particularly after the agreement that allowed Israel to neutralize all of Hezbollah’s capabilities— now clears the path for Lebanon to realign itself within the global context. Lebanon can, like any other nation, engage in international diplomacy to achieve its goals, rather than resorting to measures that have historically isolated it from both its regional environment and the broader world.
Diplomacy speaks the language of the real world in which nations must function, not the fractured reality Lebanon has experienced. While some may perceive this as a capitulation to the demands of normalization, it is unfortunate that we have reached a point where some still view war as a preferable option to peace.
Let this be a lesson: take heed of the positive shift toward statehood made by those who have come to realize that their past reality was just an illusion. They have now understood that Lebanon’s only viable future lies within the framework of the state.
Comments