In today’s news bulletin:
– Bahaa Hariri: I will continue the path of my father, Martyr Prime Minister Rafic Hariri
– Derian-Mikati meeting: No Sunni boycott of the parliamentary elections
– Why did Washington bring the border demarcation negotiations back to the fore?

Officials are in an immense trouble. Title of the impasse: the Kuwaiti paper, which is in fact, a Gulf-Arab-international card. The content of the paper has become clear, but what is not clear, is the response of the Lebanese officials. It is natural that the Lebanese response is not quickly clear, as the officials feel confused, for they did not expect that Arab and international demands, would be submitted to them through a written paper. And thus, their stance seems ambiguous and vague till now. According to the information, the concerned officials, in order to eliminate some of the pressure, divided the paper into three section. The first section is the financial, administrative and institutional reforms. Here, there is no problem, as they can pledge what they cannot implement. The second section relates to the implementation of international resolutions, particularly resolutions 1559 and 1701. Here, the officials will respond saying, that it is necessary to convene a national dialogue table to address the issue. The aforementioned stance means postponement, because there is no dialogue table as long as President Michel Aoun is at the Baabda Palace, and as long as the elections are at the door, and as long as Hezbollah does not abide at all by what it pledges. What remains is the third section related to Hezbollah’s weapons, according to the officials’ logic, they will say, that the issue of weapons cannot be discussed now as long as the Shebaa Farms and Kfar Shuba Hills are still under Israeli occupation. These answers clearly mean that the official stance has not changed, and most likely, will not change any time soon. . So, how will the Arab community and the international community act about it? Is Lebanon able, in the current circumstances, to stand in the face of the two mentioned societies? What repercussions will result from taking such a negative stance? The upcoming days have the answer, so, let’s wait.