Listen to the article
The opposition forces’ actions and stances have been calling for an immediate ceasefire in southern Lebanon and the urgent election of a president, all while being in a state of anticipation.
According to sources within the parliamentary opposition, Lebanon’s ongoing war and the looming threat of its escalation require immediate parliamentary dialogue. Consequently, opposition MPs have called for a session to discuss this issue. These sources questioned Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri’s assessment of the risks associated with electing a president without dialogue while overlooking Lebanon’s vulnerability to being drawn into war by Hezbollah. This faction knows how the war was initiated but ignores how to end it.
The opposing parliamentary sources believe their voice will go unheard by the Amal and Hezbollah duo. Nevertheless, they assert that they have at least prompted everyone to confront their responsibilities regarding the potential outcomes and consequences of the situation.
Furthermore, these sources noted that the factions opposing Hezbollah contend with moderate groups, including the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) and the Progressive Socialist Party (PSP). They explained that while the FPM does not openly oppose Hezbollah’s actions, its collaboration with the opposition in endorsing Jihad Azour for the presidency is perceived as a strategic maneuver to pressure Hezbollah rather than a genuine endorsement of Azour. They pointed out that some of the FPM’s positions, which claim to disagree with Hezbollah on the southern war, are seen as attempts to leverage and secure personal interests for its leader, MP Gebran Bassil. These sources described the FPM as a Trojan horse within the opposition, highlighting its exposure due to opportunism and a primary focus on personal gain.
As for the PSP, opposition parliamentary sources see it as adopting a policy of constructive neutrality towards Hezbollah. They note two distinct positions within the party, with some members criticizing Hezbollah while others support it, which they argue undermines opposition unity. They suggest that under different regional circumstances, the PSP might have shifted allegiance, but for now, it remains in the middle, seeking to justify its stance as reasonable while driven by a fear of confrontation and its potential consequences.
