jordan pulse -

​AMMAN
​By: Dr. Rashed Al-Shashani
​Away from the idea of Netanyahu benefiting from emphasizing the need to strike Lebanon—and utilizing that to reinforce the doctrine of needing to topple the Iranian regime to counter the threat of Hezbollah on its borders—one ought to ponder the driving context behind bringing up such an issue, which is neither abnormal nor alien, within the soil of Lebanese "politics," particularly in this manner of presentation. We explicitly put politics between quotation marks because we do not recognize what is taking place as actual politics, given that we do not acknowledge "appointees, employees, workers, hirelings, subordinates, loyalists, collaborators, agents, cronies, ... etc." as statesmen.
​To be direct, presenting the operation in this manner was not intended to serve Netanyahu, even if done unintentionally. Rather, we say immediately: behind this is an attempt to cement a "legitimate status" for seeking assistance from external parties, particularly the Syrian neighbor, while simultaneously exploiting Gulf blackmail by attempting to extract additional funds under pretexts of this nature. It has been proven to us that Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, have grown weary and fed up with maneuvers of this naive kind, and are no longer driven to bear the troubles of the Lebanese, even with Qatari efforts to capitalize on Saudi Arabia and the UAE's preoccupation with the war in Yemen.
​It was within the capacity of Lebanon’s authorities—had there been anyone among the operational chain who knew how to act wisely, and assuming that intercepting the shipment was a purely professional and technical act unmotivated by the tactics of "women's spite and divorcees' tricks"—to keep the operation confidential. They could have returned to Hezbollah with this catch, demanding a pragmatic deal of direct benefit that would spare Lebanese authorities, chief among them the army, further embarrassment amidst the immense pressure between Washington and Israel's demands to crush Hezbollah on one hand, and Hezbollah's maneuvering on the other, as well as the scattering and fragmentation of Lebanon while the rest of the ruling gangs seize threads of discord and bargaining alike.
​Incident-driven bargaining over such an issue has not only opened neighboring borders to the appetite for intervention under the pretext of securing border control, but has also whetted the appetite of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states to turn their backs and exit the predicament of the "responsible reference"—by which we mean the Taif Agreement. The agreement has become a tool for hanging the mistakes of official Lebanon before the rest of its components and blocs, and has even turned into a reference for begging at the doors of the Gulf and elsewhere, as well as a rope for pulling between the East and West.
​The Lebanese are not the only ones fed up with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf being used as a tool to cover for gangs that robbed and plundered them; Saudi Arabia and the Gulf preceded them in this weariness. We remind you here of the "Al-Sankari" issue.
​This weariness will not only allow waves of getting rid of sectarian rule to forge their path, but will also seek out, cooperate with, and support anyone who will bring an end to this regime—a regime that some are now attempting to "beautify the ugly with the attire of the fair" through the window of dividing the Parliament into a House of Representatives and a Senate, while floating the concept of "citizenship." These individuals forgot that "the mold dictates the shape" and that "one spoiled piece ruins the whole box."
​Envisioning such a matter brings to mind the Lebanese proverb: "We treated him so he would heal; he was merely leaking, but now he is completely defecating."
​Source: Rum News Agency