On Hezbollah’s decision to participate in the Lebanese government
She studied philosophy and literature at the university, and Jean-Paul Sartre’s literature was an anthology. I chose for him the play “The Flies”, which is based on an ancient Greek myth, which is the legend of Orst in Argos. And in it, Akhesnus killed his brother Agamemnon, the father of Orst, and married Clementra, the widow of Agamemnon and the mother of Orst. Her mother and her father fought the usurper of the throne, Aisha al-Ubaid. She is waiting for her brother to come one day, to save the city and save it. Argus returns to town, Achesnus kills his father’s murderer and usurper and kills his mother Clementstra. He does not feel remorse, but his sister asks him if her mother was in pain, so he warns her so that she does not fall into regret and is eaten by flies.With the multiplicity of ideas in this wonderful play, it remains basically a resistance play, which the German occupation stopped performing in Paris in 1943. In short, the following demarcation can be put:
EGIST: Represents the occupation
Clemenstra: representing clients
Orst: represents resistance
Electra: represents the common people
There are two main problems in the play that I raised to my students at the Lebanese University and at the Islamic Azad University.
1- Orst killed the occupier, and the agents killed the occupier in the person of his mother, meaning the agents treated as their occupiers’ masters. According to Mao Zedong
2- Orst: He left the city and refused to take power over it
These two problems were subject to extensive discussions, especially in the philosophy class at Azad University, which included the finest students of religious sciences working in Hezbollah. The discussion was mainly focused on the question, “Does August have the right after the liberation of the city to leave it alone and not participate in its administration?” Especially since what he did created a basic variable, which he is responsible for, with the consequences that resulted from it. Examples were given, from the positions of the Communists in France from President Charles de Gaulle, to the revolution in Algeria, to Vietnam, and the rest of the revolutions in the world; On the right of the revolution to assume power after the country’s liberation from occupation.
And accordingly, based on this doctrine of the revolutionary movements that preceded it, His Eminence the Secretary-General, after the liberation of the year 2000, visited the President of the Republic at Baabda Palace. That day, a discussion took place in the Lebanese press regarding this visit, and the meanings contained in it. I recall that the late Joseph Samaha wrote in the newspaper “As-Safir”:
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is not entitled only to visit Baabda Palace. In the bases of all revolutions in the world, whoever liberates the country becomes ruler in Baabda Palace.
This is the general logic that does not apply to the characteristics of a combination that we all know in boring detail.
Hezbollah did not hold the agents accountable as their masters, according to Sartre’s views on “The Flies”, Mao Zedong and other philosophers and leaders of revolutions and resistance. And he did what Urst did by leaving the rule in the country to others, contenting himself with participating in Parliament and preparing the resistance force, to fortify Lebanon from aggression, and to establish its missile force that established a balance of deterrence, in which we live under the imposed rules of engagement, and drawing frank strings for war and peace.
This situation continued until 2005, and many international, regional, and Arab variables took place during this period, the most important of which are:
1) The international attitudes expressed by the studies of the competent bodies at the United Nations on issues of development, freedom, democracy, good order, the empowerment of women … etc., which directed strong criticisms of the nature of Arab regimes.
2) The balance of power in favor of the Islamic parties (the Muslim Brotherhood) has lost its way at the expense of the national movements in several Arab countries – the situation inside Palestine itself has turned in the interest of the Islamic movements, “Hamas” and “Jihad”, after the weakening of the “Fatah” movement, after a period of leadership Yasser Arafat, and after going to the settlements at the expense of separating the resistance.
These events developed in light of the encouraging international relations that brought the matter to the stage of the Arab revolutions. There was a beginning of a shift in the activity of Al-Qaeda and takfiri terrorism, from the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq to building an Islamic caliphate, destroying the regional Arab system, and demolishing the state’s structure in more than one Arab country.
The end of the first political phase of Haririya related to the reconstruction of Lebanon and the progress of the game of new balances, and the consequences of that preceded by the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, by forces that want to bring Lebanon into the furnace of Arab changes, then the subsequent withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon, and the issuance of the resolution 1559, and the emergence of a vacuum somewhere in the Lebanese authority that threatens the resistance and leads to general chaos.
The debate in Hezbollah was about every share of power. There was a difficult and important discussion about participation in Parliament, and whoever lived that stage knows its merits, and it was agreed to participate in Parliament to defend the rights of the people, but caution remained against participating in the government for political reasons, including jurisprudence, considering the consequences of participating in executive powers. Be obsolete or corrupt at one stage.
According to the theory of Wilayat al-Faqih, participation in the government is required, because Wilayat al-Faqih legitimizes political action. Therefore, the resistance is responsible for the effects of the changes it creates in the general political system. Just as was the case in the discussion of the position of Urst in the Flies, and other evidence of the philosophy of political mind, or the so-called mental evidence.
The resistance liberated Lebanon from occupation, and therefore the implications of this liberation should not leave it to the players’ game, and the world around Lebanon is full of variables: several Islamic movements that openly demonstrate their pursuit of power, major changes in the balance of power, retreat of movements that used to rule For another interest. Major countries are seeking to impose new regimes in the region, and there is the beginning and generalization of the soft war, and Lebanon is at the heart of this conflict and not far from it. Accordingly, the correct decision taken by the wise resistance leadership was to participate in the government, to establish the bases and gains of liberation, protect the resistance from the Zionist enemy in the context of preparing for the war that was openly and effectively, and protect Lebanon from paying the price for the changes around it, as happened with the assassination of a president His ministers, and the consequent pushing the situation in it to the brink of chaos and strife, and perhaps civil war, and the bulk of the vacuum left by the Syrian withdrawal, and the imbalance it created in the power structure, used to use the Syrian role to establish its balances.
In this international, regional and national climate, Hezbollah decided to enter the government, which is a wise and correct decision, and at its appropriate historical moment, and the need for it is still present, and it is consistent with the political action and the foundations of Hezbollah’s political jurisprudence, in order to consider it a party that measures positions on its mental bases And mobility.
Accordingly, the foregoing shows evidence from international political literature, and the responsibility that results from the effects of the act. This is in agreement with the Wilayat al-Faqih, as it is an endorsement of the legitimacy of political action, and the burden of assuming responsibility and confronting it, which was realistically achieved.
According to the political realities surrounding Lebanon at that stage and the internal dialogue that accompanied it in Hezbollah, and how this decision led to the production of a wise and correct decision, which still preserves its legitimacy, laws and wisdom, this did not happen from al-Khater’s pardon, or in negligence, It is a fleeting occasion, but it happened in response to facts and consideration of reason and transmission, and it is a true picture of realistic policy making.
This participation in the government has proven its effectiveness in several things, including:
1- Responding to dangers in the July war, reconstruction, and stabilizing the balance of power with the enemy after the war.
2- Preventing internal forces from taking the country into a state of chaos, and fixing the rules for forming governments in a national version, with the difficulties associated with them.
3- Protect Lebanon from the war of terror that was threatening its structure and stability.
4- Establishing the saying of the army, the people and the resistance as a strategic saying that secures the foundations of national defense.
5- Hizbullah has established effective rules for government action, away from all forms of hegemony, quotas and corruption.
And if I had the honor to be the first Hezbollah minister in Najib Mikati’s government, in 2005, before that I had participated in international dialogues about several variables, with the participation of my friend Walid Sharara, and we knew what is happening around us in terms of variables, we might write about them together, if Circumstances arose for us, hoping that this would be achieved with the help of God Almighty.
EGIST: Represents the occupation
Clemenstra: representing clients
Orst: represents resistance
Electra: represents the common people
There are two main problems in the play that I raised to my students at the Lebanese University and at the Islamic Azad University.
1- Orst killed the occupier, and the agents killed the occupier in the person of his mother, meaning the agents treated as their occupiers’ masters. According to Mao Zedong
2- Orst: He left the city and refused to take power over it
These two problems were subject to extensive discussions, especially in the philosophy class at Azad University, which included the finest students of religious sciences working in Hezbollah. The discussion was mainly focused on the question, “Does August have the right after the liberation of the city to leave it alone and not participate in its administration?” Especially since what he did created a basic variable, which he is responsible for, with the consequences that resulted from it. Examples were given, from the positions of the Communists in France from President Charles de Gaulle, to the revolution in Algeria, to Vietnam, and the rest of the revolutions in the world; On the right of the revolution to assume power after the country’s liberation from occupation.
And accordingly, based on this doctrine of the revolutionary movements that preceded it, His Eminence the Secretary-General, after the liberation of the year 2000, visited the President of the Republic at Baabda Palace. That day, a discussion took place in the Lebanese press regarding this visit, and the meanings contained in it. I recall that the late Joseph Samaha wrote in the newspaper “As-Safir”:
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is not entitled only to visit Baabda Palace. In the bases of all revolutions in the world, whoever liberates the country becomes ruler in Baabda Palace.
This is the general logic that does not apply to the characteristics of a combination that we all know in boring detail.
Hezbollah did not hold the agents accountable as their masters, according to Sartre’s views on “The Flies”, Mao Zedong and other philosophers and leaders of revolutions and resistance. And he did what Urst did by leaving the rule in the country to others, contenting himself with participating in Parliament and preparing the resistance force, to fortify Lebanon from aggression, and to establish its missile force that established a balance of deterrence, in which we live under the imposed rules of engagement, and drawing frank strings for war and peace.
This situation continued until 2005, and many international, regional, and Arab variables took place during this period, the most important of which are:
1) The international attitudes expressed by the studies of the competent bodies at the United Nations on issues of development, freedom, democracy, good order, the empowerment of women … etc., which directed strong criticisms of the nature of Arab regimes.
2) The balance of power in favor of the Islamic parties (the Muslim Brotherhood) has lost its way at the expense of the national movements in several Arab countries – the situation inside Palestine itself has turned in the interest of the Islamic movements, “Hamas” and “Jihad”, after the weakening of the “Fatah” movement, after a period of leadership Yasser Arafat, and after going to the settlements at the expense of separating the resistance.
These events developed in light of the encouraging international relations that brought the matter to the stage of the Arab revolutions. There was a beginning of a shift in the activity of Al-Qaeda and takfiri terrorism, from the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq to building an Islamic caliphate, destroying the regional Arab system, and demolishing the state’s structure in more than one Arab country.
The end of the first political phase of Haririya related to the reconstruction of Lebanon and the progress of the game of new balances, and the consequences of that preceded by the assassination of Prime Minister Hariri, by forces that want to bring Lebanon into the furnace of Arab changes, then the subsequent withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon, and the issuance of the resolution 1559, and the emergence of a vacuum somewhere in the Lebanese authority that threatens the resistance and leads to general chaos.
The debate in Hezbollah was about every share of power. There was a difficult and important discussion about participation in Parliament, and whoever lived that stage knows its merits, and it was agreed to participate in Parliament to defend the rights of the people, but caution remained against participating in the government for political reasons, including jurisprudence, considering the consequences of participating in executive powers. Be obsolete or corrupt at one stage.
According to the theory of Wilayat al-Faqih, participation in the government is required, because Wilayat al-Faqih legitimizes political action. Therefore, the resistance is responsible for the effects of the changes it creates in the general political system. Just as was the case in the discussion of the position of Urst in the Flies, and other evidence of the philosophy of political mind, or the so-called mental evidence.
The resistance liberated Lebanon from occupation, and therefore the implications of this liberation should not leave it to the players’ game, and the world around Lebanon is full of variables: several Islamic movements that openly demonstrate their pursuit of power, major changes in the balance of power, retreat of movements that used to rule For another interest. Major countries are seeking to impose new regimes in the region, and there is the beginning and generalization of the soft war, and Lebanon is at the heart of this conflict and not far from it. Accordingly, the correct decision taken by the wise resistance leadership was to participate in the government, to establish the bases and gains of liberation, protect the resistance from the Zionist enemy in the context of preparing for the war that was openly and effectively, and protect Lebanon from paying the price for the changes around it, as happened with the assassination of a president His ministers, and the consequent pushing the situation in it to the brink of chaos and strife, and perhaps civil war, and the bulk of the vacuum left by the Syrian withdrawal, and the imbalance it created in the power structure, used to use the Syrian role to establish its balances.
In this international, regional and national climate, Hezbollah decided to enter the government, which is a wise and correct decision, and at its appropriate historical moment, and the need for it is still present, and it is consistent with the political action and the foundations of Hezbollah’s political jurisprudence, in order to consider it a party that measures positions on its mental bases And mobility.
Accordingly, the foregoing shows evidence from international political literature, and the responsibility that results from the effects of the act. This is in agreement with the Wilayat al-Faqih, as it is an endorsement of the legitimacy of political action, and the burden of assuming responsibility and confronting it, which was realistically achieved.
According to the political realities surrounding Lebanon at that stage and the internal dialogue that accompanied it in Hezbollah, and how this decision led to the production of a wise and correct decision, which still preserves its legitimacy, laws and wisdom, this did not happen from al-Khater’s pardon, or in negligence, It is a fleeting occasion, but it happened in response to facts and consideration of reason and transmission, and it is a true picture of realistic policy making.
This participation in the government has proven its effectiveness in several things, including:
1- Responding to dangers in the July war, reconstruction, and stabilizing the balance of power with the enemy after the war.
2- Preventing internal forces from taking the country into a state of chaos, and fixing the rules for forming governments in a national version, with the difficulties associated with them.
3- Protect Lebanon from the war of terror that was threatening its structure and stability.
4- Establishing the saying of the army, the people and the resistance as a strategic saying that secures the foundations of national defense.
5- Hizbullah has established effective rules for government action, away from all forms of hegemony, quotas and corruption.
And if I had the honor to be the first Hezbollah minister in Najib Mikati’s government, in 2005, before that I had participated in international dialogues about several variables, with the participation of my friend Walid Sharara, and we knew what is happening around us in terms of variables, we might write about them together, if Circumstances arose for us, hoping that this would be achieved with the help of God Almighty.
* Writer and former minister
Subscribe to «News» on YouTube Here
These were the details of the news On Hezbollah’s decision to participate in the Lebanese government for this day. We hope that we have succeeded by giving you the full details and information. To follow all our news, you can subscribe to the alerts system or to one of our different systems to provide you with all that is new.
It is also worth noting that the original news has been published and is available at saudi24news and the editorial team at AlKhaleej Today has confirmed it and it has been modified, and it may have been completely transferred or quoted from it and you can read and follow this news from its main source.
