What made Michel Aoun recall the dialogue option?
Yes, Dialogue. Dialogue is essential and important in normal circumstances and under diverse conditions, but how is it in Lebanon, where crises increase and crowd out, the majority of which are structural in origin and connected to the entity’s essence? However, discussion is one thing, and the discourse that the President of the Republic is seeking now is quite another. Michel Aoun opposes a genuine national conversation. Rather, he wants to act as a crane or lever for his son on law who has plunged underneath the ground since he is on the list of American sanctioned figures.
Why didn’t Aoun call for a dialogue table until two weeks ago, despite the fact that he has been taking office at Baabda Palace for five years, two months, and ten days? Returning to the archive reveals that in his inauguration speech, Aoun stated that he would call for a discussion table to debate the defense strategy. Why should he break his promises and keep his words? Isn’t it because he does not want to anger the “sensitive” Hezbollah over everything related to the defensive strategy?
The reason is clear: Aoun wants to send a negative message to the party in response to the blow he and his ally, the Amal movement, received on a number of issues and files, and after ensuring that the party cannot prioritize its relationship with the movement over its relation with the Amal movement. As a result, Aoun reverted to his previous perspective, believing that he was squeezing political leaders.
In any event, the defensive strategy’s flaw is well-known, and it stems from Hezbollah’s participation.
Is Michel Aoun ready to confront Hassan Nasrallah with the harsh realities, the most important of which is that he must give up his arms in order to maintain the unity of arms? Of course, the answer is no. As a result, there is no need to have a dialogue table, and those who negotiate are unnecessary!