The Lebanese and Syrian arenas are one and the battle is one

The writer and political analyst Sarkis Abu Zeid said in an interview to Islam Times’ website that the internal situation in Lebanon is linked to the situation in Syria, since no one is able to carry out any agreement before things are resolved in Syria and before we see how it bounces on the Lebanese interior. Thus, we are facing a delicate stage waiting to resolve the issues militarily in the Syrian arena.
Abu Zaid believes that there is no way to achieve a political understanding neither on issues related to the elections law, nor on issues related to conducting the elections or to any issue as long as there is no solution.

Regarding the Syrian situation and the role of Hezbollah, he pointed out that those who bet on the intervention in the Syrian arena is the March 14 team, and it is the one that sent arms to the opposition in Syria, supported it in media, and facilitated the passage of militants and gear. According to Sarkis Abu Zeid, Saad Al-Hariri had once said: “I will not return to Lebanon but only through Syria”, he continued saying that the March 14 was unifying the path and destiny with the Syrian opposition and considered that its status in Lebanon is linked to the Syrian opposition, for which it provided support including the armed manifestation.

Abu Zaid considered that the Lebanese and the Syrian arenas are one and the battle is one as well, and those who have linked the fate of Lebanon to the Syrian arena are the March 14 team and the Future Movement primarily. In fact, the primary objective of this step is the weapon of the resistance and its role and thus the resistance has the right to defend itself in every way. He called the March 14 and the Future Movement to take position against Israel and against its crimes and abuses carried out by it rather than comparing Hezbollah’s acts with the heinous crimes of Israel.

He stressed that the conflict in the region exists between the two projects; a team supporting the resistance versus a team opposing it. Hence, the conflict is not on a geographical basis as much as it is based on a single issue, namely, the resistance in the region.

Finally Sarkis Abu Zeid pointed to the failure of building a strong State that could be committed to a serious defense policy regarding Lebanon in the face of the Israeli aggressions, adding that the lack of the commitment by a lot of the political forces to address the Israeli attacks is what paved the way for the Lebanese people, or some of the forces, to confront the Israeli aggressions by their selves. Therefore, the failure of the State and the shortening of some of the parties to pursue the policy of defense against Israel have led to what we are facing nowadays.