After the Storm, the Wind of Change?

For long decades, Israel waited for the right moment to liquidate what it considers a threat to its project, whether Palestinian, Lebanese, or linked to the Iranian regional agenda. Beyond military preparation, it worked steadily to arrange the diplomatic and media conditions needed to secure international cover for a major battle whose ambition was to redraw the face of the Middle East.

When the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation erupted on October 7, Benjamin Netanyahu's government promoted the discourse of “existential danger”, exploiting the alignment of the major Western powers and above all the United States. That was the historic opportunity Netanyahu had been waiting for to unleash the devastating war machine, not only against Hamas but against anything that could be classified as an ally or supporter.

At the heart of this plan, Iran committed its first sin by issuing the order to drag Lebanon into the war through Hezbollah, in what was called the “support front”, on October 8. That day, Israel did not conceal its intentions but warned clearly that southern Lebanon risked becoming “a second Gaza”. The second sin followed when the confrontation widened and transformed into a battle directly tied to Iranian calculations for avenging the death of Khamenei, with no connection whatsoever to Lebanese interests, to the security of the Lebanese people, or to the future of the South.

The catastrophic reality now lies exposed for all to see: for every Israeli armoured vehicle hit, an entire village is erased, its inhabitants displaced, its sons killed. It has become unmistakably clear that Lebanon is paying the price of a confrontation between two foreign projects — Israel, which rejects the Lebanese model, civilisational, plural and prosperous, and Iran, which persists in keeping Lebanon an advanced terrain and a first line of defence for its Islamic revolution.

Amid this existentially grave tableau, the President of the Republic launched a courageous and bold initiative, one that no one before him had dared to undertake, driven solely by the ambition to save the country and restore decision-making to the State. In complementarity with that position, the Prime Minister affirmed on his part that the path of dialogue and direct negotiation, however difficult and complex, remains the only realistic course for sparing the Lebanese further haemorrhage and destruction.

What gives some reason for hope today is that authentic cry which rose from beneath the rubble and ashes of our steadfast South. It is the voice of the true Southerner, who refuses gratuitous death, who refuses to see his villages and his sons serve as fuel for others' wars or as a sacrifice on the altar of regional calculations. That voice calls openly for the full and effective presence of the State, for the monopoly of arms in the hands of legitimate institutions, and for rallying behind the Lebanese Army as the sole authority in matters of security and sovereignty.

Faced with this reality, one can no longer count on the conscience or good faith of local parties who continue to practise evasion and dissimulation, knowing full well they are losers in advance. In these decisive circumstances, the policy of equivocation, obstinacy, and sabotage of national solutions is no longer merely a political error; it has become a form of abdication of national responsibility, a betrayal of the people and the homeland.

Supporting the President of the Republic and the head of government, backing these rescue orientations, and standing firmly behind the Lebanese Army is no longer an ordinary political choice among many; it has become a national and moral duty that imposes itself on everyone.

And the question swells, the call grows urgent: where are the forces of change? Where are the protesters of 17 October? Where are the children of the Cedar Revolution and all those who believe in sovereignty and freedom? Why do you not unite today around the cry of your own people in the South? Why do you not stand as one front against the occupier and the usurper to support the project of building the State?

The hour of truth and decisive choice has come: either move toward a sovereign, free, capable State that holds exclusively the decision of war and peace and protects its children, or remain in the whirlwind of collapse and destruction, leaving the homeland hostage to the foreign projects that contend over its soil.