Who does adopt Feltman’s orphans?

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The words issued unofficially by the US Ambassador in Lebanon commenting on the official speech of the President of the Republic the General Michael Aoun who sticks to the role of the resistance weapons raised inquiries that are circulated among the political circles affiliated to the forces of the Fourteenth of March especially Al Mustaqbal Movement and the Lebanese Forces  about the possibilities of the US escalation to the extent of talking about banning the US nationals from traveling to Lebanon, enlisting Lebanon in the US travel banning,  and stopping the cooperation with the Lebanese army, depending on the special status afforded by the administration of the US President Donald Trump to the security of Israel and the relationship with it.

To classify Hezbollah on the US lists allocated to the terrorism is not new, to consider it a ruthless opponent according to its vision of the interests in the region is an admission in its place, and to make every effort along with the new administration to exert pressure on the Lebanese country for not covering the resistance weapons within the concept of the US support to Israel, then this is a fact which will continue, and when Washington puts its importance to barter Russia for any cooperation in Syria by not allowing the achievement of Iran of any gains that affects Israel, which means the seek to alienate Hezbollah away from the success of fortifying and strengthening the structure of the resistance for the post stage of the stability of Syria then this is the conflict law.

The question is revolving somewhere else. Will Washington raise the pace of pressures in favor of its hostile vision toward the resistance which is accused vitally with the security of Israel, to the extent of exposing Lebanon to instability due to the position of its President who sticks to the resistance and its weapons?, and were these positions hidden in front of Washington before his election? Does Washington consider the stability of Lebanon a secondary matter and the war on terrorism especially ISIS a secondary matter too? Is it ready to sacrifice with them and to freeze this war and considering it mere a platform for the bargains in the war on Hezbollah which proceeds as a priority? Are Washington and Israel in a state of escalation toward the war? Most importantly, did the President of the Republic the General Michael Aoun raise the ceiling of his position which sticks to the resistance and its weapons, while he could saying that the weapons is a matter that the country is unable to bear outside the comprehensive national dialogue that started and will continue till achieving the results according to the words of the former President Michael Suleiman?, maybe this was meanly intended by the inquirers about the purposes of the words of the US Ambassador.

The Deputy UN Secretary-General Jeffrey Feltman who never stop being the most reflective honestly about the positions of the successive US administrations towards the weapons of Hezbollah and its resisting role simply said that if Washington has an escalation agenda then the first platforms for moving will be the United Nations through the gate of the committees to apply the resolution 1701 and linking it with the resolution 1559. Feltman who is the crucial player who has the passwords in the two issues said that in Lebanon there is a miracle its basis is the presence of weapons at the hands of the counterbalanced group outside the country, which is Hezbollah. Despite the crisis and the war as the size of what is going on in the neighboring Syria, Lebanon was not destabilized. These words are contrary to what is anticipated from Feltman the godfather of the hostile decisions and campaigns against Hezbollah and its weapons. They are contrary to the call of organizing UN campaigns that target and affect Lebanon and through it Hezbollah under the title of the weapons, as long as this weapon has proved its eligibility by not turning into a factor for destabilization. The words of Feltman grant the words of the President of the Republic legitimacy and credibility against the circulated speech by the US Ambassador, because the most prominent of what was said by the President was that Hezbollah’s weapons do not constitute a reason for destabilization.

The words of Feltman disclosed those who inquired “innocently” and made them his foundlings after they were his orphans, after he gave up their fatherhood, so they become Americans more than the Americans themselves if not more.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,