By: Sammi Ibrahem,Sr
“Lebanon Debate” – Abdullah Wheat
Washington “treads” its head in almost everything. Yesterday, for example, I ordered operations to Al Hurra to follow the protests in Lebanon closely. The translation soon emerged through the emptying of the latter wide areas to deal with the Lebanese file.
Moreover, Washington has expressed its readiness to provide political carte blanche lines for the channel. We are talking about American political lines in the form of the official statement made two days ago by a State Department official.
Like them, they did and do other Arab channels, which met the protests according to their mood. For example, Al-Jazeera has always pointed out that the rebellious people in Lebanon are defying a government in which Hizbullah and the Free Patriotic Movement have an absolute majority. Hey! Why do you deliberately refer to this very idea at a time when people are not going to the streets? Why do some channels insist on deliberately turning the “exit” into a purely political, not economic, context? It is a particular exploitation!
No wonder, as long as Lebanon remains on the same hot political battlefield, it makes sense to turn the facts into political instruments, just as the Americans do now, as they try to “ride the wave” and secure a position for them.
Originally, such popular movements Washington finds as a viable environment for investment and commercialization of ideas, and in view of the nature of the American mentality based on the logic of exploitation and benefit, it is not surprising that it is crammed into a purely Lebanese issue in the form of an “uprising” and trying to dictate its fingertips.
There is more than one experience in this regard, in Egypt, for example, and with the testimony of the Egyptians, the Americans transformed the revolution and turned it into a pure American political investment institution, as well as Ukraine and Latin American countries, which were not a revolution but Washington is squeezing its nose in it, either overload it or penetrate it and make it Good position to reap political profits.
There are more than one sign of the emergence of similar and surprising American situations in Lebanon. At the diplomatic level, the Embassy in Beirut strives to work on more than one level:
Politically, by communicating with politicians from the list of friends and exploring their positions and getting information from them about what is happening accurately. Between them, Aokar opens the “shop” advice to senior politicians, such as Prime Minister Saad Hariri, and urges him not to leave his position and resign.
On the other hand, the words of support are being pumped in favor of the political allies of the parties “Try Sadness” and pull their hands to enter the movement.
Logistically, through attempts to ride the uprising wave, that is, the exploitation of the movement in its next stages after it began spontaneously, through several levels:
Directly, through specific media outlets trying to inject protesters into pre-prepared positions, and of course to take advantage of the capabilities of some activists. Also, politically, by ensuring a smooth transition of some faces from one bank to another.
Therefore, the American “easy” goal is to try to break through the movement and divert it from its origins and introduce dramatic political changes to it. One of its forms today is to convey the speech from my human rights demands to a politician.
This is not surprising. It is not surprising that Americans do not invest in revolutions. This logic of investment is at the heart of the American view.
Uprising groups are in the process of realizing these projects. Such models, for example, require acceptance of support or assistance from those with explicit, unidentified identities, not with US-backed social institutions, or through “suspicious” people.
Some are beginning to point to such attempts, including an attempt to seduce some groups. But immunity to “mobility” seems to be quite strong.
On the other hand, there is unacceptable laziness whose features become clearer as the size of the movement grows, whether in terms of “revolutionary” political discourse or regarding plans, but there is a loss in the volatile political discourse from one party to another, and this is a negative factor in such a movement that may put it on the ladder of chaos. Lack of organization, and when established in the ground it becomes difficult to correct the path.
Consequently, it is necessary to think about building organizational coordination committees, first in order to prevent the movement of the movement from its ends, second, to remove it from impurities, and third, to strengthen and strengthen and increase its immunity in order to remove attempts to penetrate it if any, and basically, to do the necessary way to infiltrate Embassies seeking to invest, and this is a fact that the movement will experience more in the coming days.
The biggest creeping threat to mobility, as well as personal interests and selfishness, are sources of power that do not appear to be acting with him on the grounds that he is a “stray member” or a “disease of the body” that must be eradicated. On the basis of this, the estimates of confrontation are high proportions as the mobility of his age and his ability to rise, it is not to sleep on silk in front of an authority that in 2015 tried and nurtured the movement and succeeded.
