Resistance, in its physical sense, refers to the opposition to electric current. Scientifically, it is explained as the collision between negative and positive charges, which generates strong heat. In its human and political sense, resistance is the foundation of history. It means defending against an attack, rejecting, opposing, and refusing to submit to the will of another.

At the invitation of the Lebanese Forces Party in Houston, represented by its President Joseph Zeitouni and Vice President Johnny Richany, the annual picnic was held with a large turnout of supporters and comrades, in an atmosphere marked by warmth and a strong sense of belonging.

Amid regional and domestic tensions, Lebanon is preparing for a major democratic event: the municipal and mukhtar (local mayor) elections. Set to begin next Sunday, these elections are not merely a routine administrative process, but a true test of Lebanese democracy in the face of significant challenges. While the echoes of regional conflicts continue, albeit with reduced intensity, attention turns to the ballot boxes, where various political parties and factions compete in a democratic contest that directly affects citizens’ daily lives. These political actors have been intensively preparing for this electoral event, fully aware of its importance in shaping local governance and its impact on the broader political landscape.

For the third time since November 27, the date the ceasefire agreement signed by “Hezbollah” came into effect, Beirut’s southern suburbs have been targeted by Israel. Most observers outside Hezbollah’s orbit or affiliations believe that, despite the noise and the exaggerated rhetoric of the party’s leaders and MPs, and their repeated accusations of negligence against the state, no one can guarantee that these strikes will cease or that more attacks won’t follow. There are objective and obvious reasons for this that are hardly debatable.

Incidents of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) being prevented from conducting their routine patrols in southern villages and towns have become a recurring and troubling phenomenon. These incidents raise serious questions about UNIFIL’s ability to fulfill its core duties, especially in areas that are, under the ceasefire agreement, supposed to be free of any armed presence except for the Lebanese army.

Hezb has recently intensified its criticism of the state, holding it responsible for confronting Israel, speaking of the failure of diplomacy to deter Tel Aviv, hinting at resorting to other means, and emphasizing the importance of the so-called resistance and its weapons. When Hezb declared its war against Israel, calling it the “support war,” it was part of the government and held a ministerial majority. Yet, the matter was never presented to the Council of Ministers. Hezb unilaterally decided on the war, just as it did in July 2006, just as it unilaterally decided to confront the state in May 2008, and just as it dragged Lebanon into the war in Syria in support of Assad. Therefore, by what right and according to

In yet another absurd scene added to Lebanon’s endless list of oddities, the “Axis loyalists” woke up to a resounding shock: a Spanish TikToker holding Israeli citizenship dared to set foot in Beirut! If it weren’t for his brazen camera documenting his sightseeing tour, this disastrous security breach would have remained buried under the motto “no sound, no news.” But since TikTok is the favorite hangout of the “Party’s” community, the loyalists soon uncovered the breach of the century.

Setbacks and Achievements – this was the parliamentary scene summarized yesterday. Lebanon took a significant step towards reform yesterday by passing the law to lift banking secrecy, a key demand from the International Monetary Fund, with 87 votes in favor, setting banking secrecy back 10 years. However, it failed to resolve the issue of sectarian divisions resulting from disagreements and proposals related to the municipal elections in Beirut. The discussion on this matter was postponed, and the related legal proposals were referred to the relevant committees, highlighting a notable setback in attempts to regulate sectarian balance in Beirut’s municipal council and other major municipalities, given the absence of legal texts mandating sectarian parity between Muslims and Christians in municipal councils, unlike the clear provisions on sectarian balance in parliamentary elections.

If this claim were true, Israel would not have dared to respond with war when its soldiers were captured in July 2006. If it were strong, it would not have begged for a ceasefire or agreed to Resolution 1701, which places the responsibility for the war on it and demands the surrender of its weapons. If it were strong, Israel would have refrained from violating Lebanese airspace and would not have penetrated the south up to the Litani River, nor would it have dared to kill its Secretary-General and his successor. If it were strong, it would have targeted Israel for every attack it faced, but it has not dared to respond since November 27, while the Israeli army continues its operations against the Party as usual

President General Joseph Aoun confirmed during his meeting with a delegation from the French Senate that “the Israeli withdrawal from the five hills is a necessity to expedite the full deployment of the Lebanese Army along the borders, so that the state alone bears responsibility for border security.” Aoun said: “The Lebanese Army is deployed along the northeastern borders and is fully carrying out its duties in combating terrorism, preventing smuggling operations, and maintaining internal security. Confiscating arms exclusively to the Lebanese state is a decision that has already been made, and it is unacceptable to return to the language of war.”

In clarification of some points raised by MP Ali Fayyad, the Media Department affirms the following: • First, MP Fayyad said: “No one should underestimate the strength of the ‘Party’; it remains the largest party at the popular level in this country.” We have absolutely no problem with this statement. However, the problem lies in the Party’s refusal to fully transition into political life through elections and adherence to the rules of the political game, thereby gaining the influence granted to it by the people, something fundamental to our Lebanese system. Yet the Party still insists, contrary to the overwhelming majority of Lebanese opinion, on holding on to its weapons, which have proven entirely ineffective. In fact, these weapons have pushed Lebanon into an abyss from which it is difficult to escape. In just the past two years alone, they have destroyed 30 border villages, devastated dozens of towns, claimed the lives of thousands of Lebanese, injured tens of thousands more, and caused economic losses estimated between 10 and 15 billion dollars. This is not to mention the Party’s exhausting role that has drawn Lebanon into wars, at least since the withdrawal of the Assad army from Lebanon in 2005.

April 26 was not just another day passing on the calendar, but a moment when truth erupted, a day when the wall of fear collapsed, and the flag of freedom was raised high over a land that had long bled under the yoke of occupation. On that glorious day in 2005, it was not only a foreign army that withdrew, but also an era of oppression, years of interference, and decades of domination and crimes.

For us as Christians first, and as humans second, the sanctity of the Pope of Peace is a matter beyond debate, for this man succeeded in elevating human nature to the divine path set by God for our lives. His contribution is evident through the “Document on Human Fraternity” which he signed with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar. This document restored brotherhood among humans, stripping away the image of man as a predatory wolf seeking to destroy his brother to secure his own existence, void of humaneness.

As the municipal and mukhtar elections in Lebanon approach, the language of threats has once again taken center stage in the political scene of some southern areas. “The Party” is seeking to impose its control over the formation of electoral lists. According to sources in the South, the party is exerting intense pressure on potential candidates in order to ensure the endorsement of loyalist lists in southern towns and villages.

The Washington Chapter of the Lebanese Forces Party participated in a reception hosted by the Lebanese Embassy in the United States, in honor of the Lebanese official delegation that attended the annual spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. The event was attended by the Chapter’s president, Nada Haddad, vice president Antoine Issa, and former chapter president Samer Naoum, along with a crowd of prominent figures and members of the Lebanese community.

The first person to describe Iran’s expansionist project in the region as the “Shiite Crescent” was King Abdullah II in 2004. He coined the term after closely observing Iran’s growing influence following the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003 and Tehran’s ability to link its sphere of influence to Beirut via Baghdad and Damascus. Later, Iranian officials began arrogantly boasting of having control over four Arab capitals, including Sana’a.

Aoun on the 110th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide: Armenians Are an Integral Part of the National Identity On the occasion of the 110th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, stressed “the importance of upholding the principles of justice, human rights, and human dignity.” Aoun stated: “Lebanese citizens of Armenian origin are a model of genuine national belonging, and they have always been an integral part of Lebanon’s rich and diverse identity.”

Any impartial observer doesn’t need to exert much effort, research, or scrutiny to conclude that the remarks made by U.S. Deputy Special Envoy to the Middle East Morgan Ortagus at the reception hosted by the Lebanese Embassy in Washington, on the occasion of the Lebanese official delegation’s participation in the IMF and World Bank spring meetings, did not exactly fall on receptive ears within “the Party.”

Sources close to the U.S. administration have shown little interest in the recent escalation in rhetoric by officials of “the Party,” particularly its Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, describing the party’s stance as “laughable.” According to them, there is a clear ceasefire agreement with binding and explicit terms for all parties involved, including “the Party.”

At the same time President Joseph Aoun confirmed the launch of discussions between himself and “the Party” to implement the decision to confine weapons exclusively to the state, stressing this would be done “wisely” and “without violence”, and stated that this dialogue would be bilateral between the presidency and “the Party,” revealing the existence of “exchanged messages to address the issue of exclusive arms possession,” and expressing hope that “the Party’s weapons would be withdrawn and that only the state would possess arms by 2025,”, at that very moment, “the Party” indirectly announced, through its media outlet Al-Akhbar, that “the dialogue between Aoun and the Party has not yet begun.”

Calls are repeatedly circulating in Lebanese political circles to integrate Hezbollah into the official military institution, in an attempt, promoted by some, to place the party’s weapons under the authority of the state and unify Lebanon’s sovereign decision-making. However, despite its seemingly organizational appearance, this idea conceals political and security landmines that could threaten the structure of the state and the very concept of national sovereignty instead of reinforcing it.

There is a highly dangerous matter concerning what is being said, or more accurately, what Hezbollah is testing the waters for, floating as a trial balloon, wish, or perhaps even a suspicious plan, about absorbing Hezbollah’s leaders and members into the Lebanese Army, as one potential solution to the party’s weapons issue and its military-security structure. To preempt suspicious schemes from the outset, which certainly haven’t escaped the attention of the relevant state and military officials, warnings are already circulating, both domestically and internationally, regarding the grave dangers of such a step, if pursued. It could strike the heart of the Lebanese Army, drastically increasing the risks of dual Israeli-Iranian breaches.

With the end of the Easter holiday and the return of political life to motion in Lebanon, burdened with crises, observers received with unease and displeasure the statements of the Secretary-General of the “Party,” Sheikh Naeem Qassem. He expressed what some described as “terrible” and “pathological denial,” which requires treatment, placing the fundamental institutions of the Lebanese state, the Presidency of the Republic, the government, the army, and the Lebanese people as a whole in the same category as “enemies,” on equal footing with Israel. This statement, which seemed to cross all red lines, not only stirred anger and condemnation but also brought back deep questions about the “Party’s” vision of the state’s role and its relationship with the Lebanese society in all its components.

Headline of the Lebanese Forces website: “The Resistance” Accuses the Army and the People of Treason! As the Easter holiday ends and Lebanon’s crisis-ridden political life resumes, observers reacted with concern and dismay to statements made by the Party’s Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem. In what some have described as a “disturbing” and “pathological” state of denial, Qassem equated key institutions of the Lebanese state, namely the Presidency, the Government, the Army, and the entire Lebanese people with enemies, placing them on the same level as Israel.

The qualitative shift that has taken place in Lebanon lies in the emergence of an authority that is not subordinate to the so-called “Resistance Axis” for the first time since 1991. This is something Hezb has yet to come to terms with, as it has long been accustomed to an authority that glorifies its so-called resistance, night and day, and parrots its hollow rhetoric. Hezb is not used to an authority that starts its discourse with a commitment to the constitution and ends it with affirming the state’s exclusive right to arms and its sovereignty over all Lebanese territory

Indicators are growing in Lebanon that the issue of exclusive state control over arms is no longer merely a political slogan, but has turned into a serious course of action being outlined at the highest official levels. The Cabinet has dedicated a session to discuss the weapons issue, coinciding with President General Joseph Aoun’s declaration that 2025 will be the year the state regains authority over arms. This practically means setting a timeline to end the phenomenon of illegal weapons, foremost among them Hezbollah’s arsenal.

During his meeting with President General Joseph Aoun, Speaker of the Federal National Council of the United Arab Emirates, Saqr Ghobash, affirmed the commitment of UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed to Lebanon’s unity and to building a national state that includes all components of the Lebanese people, stressing the importance of strengthening bilateral relations between the two countries.

Saddi told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the ministry finalized the eligibility criteria for candidates applying to the electricity regulatory authority and sent them, along with the draft announcement to open applications, to the Ministry of Administrative Development. The announcement will be published a few days after Easter, and once the applicants’ files are complete, a committee composed of the Ministers of Energy and Water, and Administrative Development, the head of the Civil Service Council, and three expert specialists will review them. Those who pass this stage will proceed to oral interviews. Based on the results, names will be selected and proposed by the Minister of Energy to the Council of Ministers, which will then appoint the authority’s

Those who lived through the arrest of the Lebanese Forces leader, Dr. Samir Geagea, on April 21, 1994, felt for a moment that they were witnessing the end of history, the history of the cause, of Lebanese resistance, of free existence, of the martyrs’ caravans and military epics. In their eyes, everything had ended. There was no longer any value or reason to continue in Lebanon, for with the arrest of “Al-Hakim,” the dreams of building a bright and free homeland worthy of the sacrifices of the martyrs, and reflective of those who had struggled for it, had died.

MP Sethrida Geagea affirmed that “our greatest achievement has been our unwavering adherence to the law and only the law. With us, no one is favored over another, no services are granted through connections or favoritism. Whoever has a right shall obtain it, regardless of who they are, and whoever does not shall not receive it, even if they are among our closest.” She emphasized, “Bsharri is the land of law and transparency. It has always been, and will remain, the leading Lebanese region on the path to the Strong Republic!”

On April 21st, it was not a man who was imprisoned, but a nation. It was not only Samir Geagea who was led to a cell, but all of Lebanon was dragged into the darkness of a vast prison, a time when the air was suffocated by intimidation and dignity was crushed by the grip of tyranny. That ominous day was not just another date in the memory of the free; it was a mark of shame on the forehead of the Syrian terrorist intelligence regime and its partners in Lebanon. It was the day when tyrants decided to silence the true voice of resistance, to break the will of a man who refused to bow to the guardianship of humiliation, and to crush Lebanon beneath the feet of occupiers.

We thought this day would pass without politics and headaches, but a word must be said, even if it’s a word of anger, directed at the “Secretary General of the Party of Terror,” Naim Qassem, and his partner in deceit and veiled threats, Wafiq Safa:

The cross was known in ancient history as an execution tool of degrading punishment, where a human being was stripped of their humanity, their body scattered into a shapeless mass, pecked at by ravens, their blood flowing, watering the dead wood, thus adding death upon death, completing death.

The Lebanese Forces have adopted a fundamental principle: without a state that exclusively controls all weapons, everything that is built is subject to collapse. This firm stance was heavily criticized for its rigid idealism, but events have proven it right, sovereignty cannot be separated from the economy or development. Sovereignty is the gateway to building a true state, and without it, construction takes place on quicksand. Today, the path of reclaiming sovereignty is progressing steadily and with confidence.

The issue of Hezbollah’s weapons has once again come to the forefront of the Lebanese political scene—this time amid undeniable regional and international shifts. The visit of U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus marked a pivotal moment, as she clearly linked the continuation of American partnership with Lebanon to the exclusive possession of weapons by the state and the implementation of structural reforms. This firm international stance stirred stagnant waters, prompting President Joseph Aoun to announce his intention to initiate dialogue with Hezbollah on what is referred to as a “national defense strategy.” Meanwhile, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam affirmed from Bkerke that the weapons issue will soon be brought to the Cabinet table.

Like wildfire, news spread across social media about the “Party” conducting the largest deportation operation in its history, sending key active leaders on the ground out of Lebanon. Reports indicate that over 400 field commanders from the “Party,” along with their families, have been relocated to Latin America for permanent settlement. Why Latin America? Because the “Party” sees it as a suitable ground for its illicit financing operations. According to international reports, it has long established a foothold there, particularly in the tri-border area between Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay, a hub for smuggling and various criminal activities including drug trafficking, money laundering, and other shady businesses disguised as commercial projects.

Amid ongoing debates over reform agendas and the disarmament of Hezbollah, another crisis looms on the horizon, one no less dangerous or impactful for Lebanon: the continuous Syrian displacement. While the Lebanese authorities are preoccupied with pressing internal and external issues, the matter of organizing Syrian asylum seems to be slipping down the list of priorities. This issue has grown increasingly complex due to recent developments in the Syrian coastal region, which have triggered a new wave of displacement, adding to the already significant number of Syrians in Lebanon and further straining the state’s limited resources.

Amid the ongoing debate around reform files and the disarmament of Hezbollah, another crisis looms on the horizon that is no less dangerous or impactful for Lebanon—the continuing crisis of Syrian displacement. While Lebanese authorities are preoccupied with pressing domestic and international issues, the matter of regulating Syrian asylum seems to be slipping down the list of priorities, becoming increasingly complicated due to recent developments along the Syrian coast. These recent events have triggered a new wave of displacement, adding to the already large number of Syrians in Lebanon, further straining the state’s limited resources.

Prominent Yesterday Was the Position of Jaafari Mufti Sheikh Ahmad Qabalan, who spoke of “a crazed political lobby acting as an agent between Washington and Beirut, with its eye on disarming the resistance, which constitutes the greatest guarantee of sovereignty. This will not happen, and there is no power on earth capable of accomplishing this dirty task. The only discussion worth having is about benefiting from the resistance’s capabilities and employing them for national purposes.” This is not the first time that such an inciting position has been issued by this religious authority. We could respond to this fabricated and spiteful rhetoric, coming from the highest religious authority of a respected sect, but our reply will be more compassionate, as befits someone who values culture, knowledge, and is truly concerned about the nation and the sect to which he belongs.

Noteworthy are the remarks made by President Joseph Aoun during his visit to Qatar, in which he set a specific deadline for confining all weapons to the hands of the Lebanese state by the end of 2025. He also addressed the fate of Hezbollah’s members, affirming they can be integrated into the Lebanese Army. He emphasized that the Lebanese state will not replicate the Popular Mobilization Forces experience in Iraq.

“The Party” is trying to keep its head as nations shift, and it seems to have decided to lift the curtain on a new show called the “defensive strategy.” But there’s one small problem… no one knows what defense they’re talking about! Is it the defense of Lebanon or of Iran’s interests? And since when has the Party’s weaponry become part of Lebanon’s official defensive strategy?

The speeches on April 13, commemorating the outbreak of the Lebanese civil war, were notable for their unified call to confine weapons to the authority of the state. President Joseph Aoun emphasized that any weapons outside the framework of the state pose a threat to Lebanon and its stability, an implicit reference to Hezbollah’s arms. Likewise, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam affirmed his commitment to the process of placing all weapons under the state’s control. Observers see this as a clear sign of Lebanon’s seriousness in addressing this issue, especially after the momentum provided by U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus in this direction.

A statement from the Jordanian General Intelligence Service reported that it had foiled “plots aimed at undermining national security, stirring chaos, and causing material sabotage within the Kingdom.” Sixteen individuals involved in these plots were arrested. The Directorate had been closely tracking them through precise intelligence work since 2021. The statement noted that the plans were linked to four cells receiving funding and training in southern Lebanon.

Since its inception, Hezbollah has not been a traditional political party, but rather a military organization cloaked in a political guise—like someone wearing a formal suit over a battlefield uniform soaked in gunpowder. While political parties sometimes resort to armed wings when necessary, Hezbollah has always been the opposite: a military organization toying with a political mask. The fundamental difference lies in who leads whom: in the former case, if the military wing falls, the political project remains. But in Hezbollah’s case, the fall of its armed wing means the entire play is over—its audience, stage, and director included.

There is no escaping the handover of the “Party’s” weapons to the state, and there is no option but to proceed with its implementation. “The decision to limit arms to the state has been made,” as President Joseph Aoun has reiterated. It’s acceptable for the implementation to occur through dialogue, no one objects to how the monopoly of weapons in the state’s hands is achieved; what matters is the result. President Aoun emphasized that “the dialogue over arms exclusivity will be bilateral between the presidency and the Party,” not like the previous fruitless dialogue tables.

Lebanon’s official scene was expressive yesterday, beginning with the statements made by President Joseph Aoun, in which he confirmed that the decision to confine all arms to the state has been made. This was followed by a meeting between Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and the accompanying ministerial delegation with Syrian President Ahmad Al-Shara, in an effort to open a new chapter in Lebanese-Syrian relations and to reaffirm Lebanon’s borders and sovereignty.

A surge of visits and intense diplomatic and political activity is currently underway, led by official trips from President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. These tours, marked by exceptional significance, aim to realign Lebanon’s political path, which had veered off course in recent years, and to mend strained relations between Beirut and Arab countries that were impacted by Lebanon’s foreign policies during previous periods.

Regarding the Lebanese scene, the area south of the Litani River has emerged as a stage for unprecedented movements by the Lebanese army. Information confirms the dismantling of nearly 500 positions and depots of heavy and medium weaponry belonging to Hezbollah, without significant resistance or confrontation. Conversely, little remains of Hezbollah’s arsenal outside this zone, as it has been repeatedly targeted by Israeli strikes, with its members pursued across the country. Even the border areas between Lebanon and Syria have not been spared, with Israeli artillery shelling weapons depots and sites inside adjacent Syrian towns.

That day was not just a date on the calendar, but a deep wound in the heart of Lebanon, where we all paid the price of discord and blind loyalties, the price of division. Yet, we did not break. Lebanon remained, and its people endured. They stood like mountains, unshaken by storms, unbroken by the flames of war. We commemorate this day not to rekindle hatred, but to draw lessons from it. We commemorate it to say to those who bet on the fall of this nation: Your wagers have failed, your illusions have crumbled, and Lebanon stands strong.

“Let us fully implement the provisions of the Taif Agreement, correct what has been implemented contrary to its text or spirit, and address the gaps that have emerged in it. The Taif Agreement called for the extension of state authority over all its territory with its own forces — something we have long failed to do. Therefore, we must emphasize today that there can be no true state unless the legitimate armed forces exclusively possess weapons. Only the state can provide security and safety for all citizens, and only the state is capable of enforcing the rule of law throughout the country and protecting public and private freedoms. Let us then work for a strong and just state that restores confidence to our youth — a modern state whose institutions are rebuilt on the basis of merit, not patronage, a civil state that places the individual at the center of its policies, equal in rights and duties with his or her fellow citizens, not with their sect or denomination.”

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War, accompanied by an unprecedented awakening and an uprising against illegal arms, the most pressing and prominent issue on the scene. Meetings are intensifying amid talks of a plan under discussion. Coinciding with the war’s anniversary, President General Joseph Aoun will deliver a speech today for the occasion. Meanwhile, President Aoun’s surprise inspections of the Vehicle Registration Authority and then the Port of Beirut underscore the seriousness of tackling corruption deeply rooted in these institutions. His visit to the port comes just days after reports of questionable activities by the “Party” within the port, as it attempts to regain strength after its aerial and ground supply routes were severed and Syria shut its doors to it following Assad’s weakening.

Negotiations between the Americans and Iranians will take place in the same room and at the same table. The American side will speak directly, while the Iranian side will speak through the Omani mediator. Therefore, the Americans consider the negotiations direct, while the Iranians consider them indirect. The disagreement is thus formal, not substantive.

Once again, Lebanon’s Ministry of Education and Higher Education proves itself completely disconnected from the people’s concerns, lost in educational priorities, and involved—knowingly or unknowingly—in introducing rejected concepts into schools and universities, this time through a “seemingly innocent, suspiciously intended” survey.

President Joseph Aoun did well by inspecting vital public facilities, such as the NAFIA (vehicle registration authority) and the Port of Beirut, which for years were considered among the main strongholds of corruption in Lebanon. These facilities, perceived by citizens as a “treasure trove of corruption,” were surrounded by countless suspicions and plagued with widespread corruption cases, representing a daily challenge for citizens struggling to complete their paperwork.

Since the Taif Agreement until today, Lebanon has never witnessed such a broad consensus on the need to limit weapons to the hands of the Lebanese state as it does now. While there are clear differences regarding the mechanisms the state should use to control weapons, there is near-unanimous agreement on one fundamental point: it is unacceptable for weapons to remain outside the state’s framework, and the state must be the only authority authorized to bear arms.

The head of the Lebanese Forces party, Samir Geagea, dismissed attempts to drive a wedge between him and President Joseph Aoun as well as Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. He affirmed that what has been achieved so far is not insignificant, emphasizing that the differences lie in approach, not in goals, chief among them being the establishment of an effective state. He also noted that after a phone conversation with President Aoun, it became clear to him that the President is not proposing a national dialogue table, but rather direct communication with Hezb and the development of a plan and timeline for disarmament.

The “Party” has expressed its willingness to discuss handing over its weapons, but it set a key condition: Israel must withdraw from the five disputed points, according to a source close to the “Party” speaking to Reuters. This statement comes at a sensitive time following intense U.S. and international pressure to relinquish the Party’s illegal arms. Notably, the statement appears to have been made following the visit of U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus to Lebanon, amid reports of upcoming negotiations between Washington and Tehran in Amman in the coming days.

After the expiration of the rhetoric around normalization, a topic that is not raised externally or internally, of course, in an attempt to divert attention from the issue of illegal arms, and following a test of the consequences and repercussions of launching “unknown-known” rockets from the environment of their launcher, with objectives ranging between sending Iranian messages and proclaiming the so-called “resistance continues,” and after the fall of political rockets through the proposal to turn Lebanon into a single electoral district, aiming to maintain control over the country’s decision-making through numbers instead of weapons, it is now time to play the tune of discord between the “Lebanese Forces” and both the President of the Republic and the Prime Minister.

President Nawaf Salam’s government has shown notable enthusiasm in completing the required structural reforms, a direction reinforced by the visit of Morgan Ortagus, the U.S. Deputy Envoy to the Middle East, who praised the Lebanese government’s efforts in bringing about change. She emphasized that its commitment to disarmament and reforms is key to attracting international support, especially in the areas of reconstruction and providing the Lebanese economy with international financing. During this visit, Ortagus reiterated the need to accelerate reforms, warning that delays in implementation could lead to postponing the required funding.

We once again thank the newspaper “Al-Akhbar” for dedicating its issue published today to the Lebanese Forces, not by accident, but based on the important national role played by the Lebanese Forces. However, it is unfortunate that “Al-Akhbar” has, as usual, committed countless inaccuracies. We will only highlight a few of them, which clearly show that ideological rivalry sometimes blinds people’s vision. • First, “Al-Akhbar” tried to portray the Lebanese Forces as being in an intense struggle with the pillars of power, particularly with the Presidents of the Republic and the Government. Here, it should be reminded that the Lebanese Forces were the first to propose the candidacy of General Joseph Aoun from the beginning of the constitutional timeframe and considered him one of the third option candidates who meet the required qualifications. Meanwhile, the forces behind “Al-Akhbar” were among the strongest opponents of his election, which led the newspaper itself to dedicate many issues to attacking General Joseph Aoun and describing him with the worst epithets. Also, these forces were the last to elect him, only doing so at the last minute after the first round, under intense Arab and international pressure.

On March 28, the head of the Lebanese Forces Party, Dr. Samir Geagea, questioned “the outcome of the investigations that were supposedly concluded regarding the first rocket attack from Lebanon on March 22. What did these investigations reveal? And who was responsible for launching those rockets?”, this came on the same day a second round of rockets was launched.

In informal settings and during casual conversations with several individuals interested in regional and international affairs, a former diplomat—who had worked on multiple foreign dossiers—does not stop talking about the possible “rehabilitation” of “the Party” in the upcoming negotiations between Washington and Tehran in Amman. Amid all the questions raised about this file, the diplomat laughs loudly and says: “The Party, and those who keep orbiting around it, need to stop planting illusions in their minds and the minds of their followers. Either they are incapable of reading the situation, or we need to translate what’s happening in the region into another language for them to understand.”

Hezbollah wasted no time in responding to what appeared to be a recalibration by the state to clarify confusion among many—both domestically and abroad—regarding the state’s stance toward Hezbollah and its arms. Hezbollah promptly addressed Presidents Joseph Aoun and Nawaf Salam with a “sharp message” following their respective meetings with the U.S. Working Group in Support of Lebanon. A senior Hezbollah official stated: “The resistance is ready and present, and no one in this world can take its weapons away… Our message to both domestic and foreign parties: do not miscalculate or you will burn yourselves with fire.” He also didn’t spare “internal and external agents, delusional and mistaken, who think we are in a position of weakness,” wrapping his clear though veiled threat in a claim of “concern for the country and its people.”

After Rafik Hariri International Airport was cleared of Hezbollah’s dominance and the flow of weapons through the Lebanese-Syrian border was halted, it seems that Hezbollah has found a new route to rearm itself. This renewed armament raises many questions about its real objectives, especially as Hezbollah has repeatedly declared its commitment to the ceasefire and support for the Lebanese state. However, current developments suggest that the group is bypassing the state and continuing to implement Iran’s agenda, thereby putting Lebanon at real risk by placing the Beirut Port under suspicious control—threatening the port and the entire capital.

A Lebanese engineer hopes to launch his country’s “first-ever solar-powered electric bus” called the “Lira Bus,” bnm IntelliNews has learned. Hisham Houssami announced plans for the electric vehicle as a follow-up to Lebanon’s first electric car, also named “Lira,” launched in 2023 but remains limited to a few trial vehicles in Beirut. The engineer says the Lira Bus is designed to accommodate up to 14 passengers; however, the latest prototype seats nine, with plans in place to increase capacity in subsequent models.

The truth, no matter how difficult… Many deny the truth because they prefer to hear what they love or what they wish for. The soul is drawn to what it desires and falls in love with what it is used to hearing for its own interests. It becomes hard for it to accept anything else, even if it realizes it is the truth or senses it to be so.

Minister of Displaced Persons and Minister of State for Technology and Artificial Intelligence, Dr. Kamal Shahadeh, confirmed that the national security strategy emphasizes the exclusivity of weapons in the hands of the state, as stated in the ministerial statement. He stressed the necessity of implementing all international resolutions, including 1701, 1680, and 1559. He pointed out that the government committed, in the ministerial statement, to adopting a national security strategy, which is not subject to dialogue or wasting time.

Over a month has passed since President Joseph Aoun visited Saudi Arabia, his first foreign visit since assuming the presidency, and more than a week has passed since Prime Minister Nawaf Salam made his first official visit to Saudi Arabia. Despite all the hopes the Lebanese people pinned , and still pin, on the positive outcomes of these visits, which they expected would translate into tangible economic and financial improvement, no change has been observed. The travel ban on Saudi and Gulf nationals visiting Lebanon has not been lifted, despite the exceptional warmth and high regard both Aoun and Salam received in Saudi Arabia, and despite the Kingdom affirming to both leaders its readiness to offer full support to Lebanon as swiftly as possible. It’s worth noting that Saudi Arabia has never hesitated to stand by Lebanon and support it through various critical junctures.

A Western security source announced that “the Party” operates freely at the Port of Beirut through collaborators within customs and monitoring mechanisms at the port. He revealed that Wafiq Safa, head of the Liaison and Coordination Unit in “the Party,” runs the network of collaborators, and that his control over the port facilitates the reception of weapons via the sea.

Iran, under increasing international pressure, finds itself in a difficult and unenviable position. It is cautiously maneuvering under the tightening American grip. Washington’s policies have gone beyond merely threatening Iran’s proxies – they are actively dismantling them one by one. Meanwhile, Tehran is desperately seeking solutions to avoid a seemingly inevitable fate, even if that means offering superficial concessions – concessions that fall short of satisfying the U.S. administration, which is demanding decisive measures, starting with the disarmament of Iran-backed militias.

Several powerful armed factions in Iraq backed by Iran are entering a new phase, having for the first time made a serious decision to disarm — a step aimed at avoiding escalation that could threaten their stability amid growing U.S. pressure. These factions, long operating outside the framework of the Iraqi state, are beginning to realize the extent of the threats they face, especially after unofficial warnings from U.S. officials about the potential for conflict under President Donald Trump’s administration.

First development: The U.S. Embassy in Lebanon announced that “the candid discussions conducted by Morgan Ortagus, Assistant to the U.S. President’s envoy to the Middle East, with Lebanese officials, have contributed to pushing Lebanon toward a new era.” This implies a rapid disarmament of Hezb, implementation of reforms to end corruption, and the establishment of an open and transparent government so that all Lebanese citizens can have faith and trust in their state.

Since the Nakba of Palestine, Southern Lebanon has witnessed major transformations that have deeply impacted Lebanon’s political and military landscape. The 1970s, in particular, were among the most sensitive and critical periods in Lebanon’s modern history. During this time, documentation and analysis of the situation were key efforts led by Imam Musa al-Sadr, who tirelessly sought to protect his community and the interests of Lebanon, especially in the south.

The Maronite Church of Our Lady of Lebanon in Chicago hosted His Excellency Bishop Elias Zaydan, the shepherd of the Diocese of Los Angelos, for a special pastoral visit. He presided over the Divine Liturgy, assisted by the parish priest Father Pierre Khoury, with a large congregation of Lebanese community members in attendance. A delegation from the Lebanese Forces Center in Chicago also participated in the Mass, led by the Coordinator of the Central-North Sector, Elie Sleiman, and the Center’s President, William Harb.

Prominent political sources affirm that “the party” is experiencing a noticeable absence from the political scene, as its positions appear extremely reserved compared to previous times. While “the party” seeks to maintain its relations with certain political forces it considers close, coordination and interaction between the two sides seem virtually non-existent—except for some statements made by MPs from the Loyalty to the Resistance Bloc. These positions are merely aimed at boosting the morale of the party’s support base and usually revolve around the themes of resistance and arms, which now lack any real impact on the political landscape, sounding like repetitive rhetoric without any noteworthy novelty.

The southern suburb has today become the subject of serious questions regarding the role of the state and its actual control over its territory. Despite some security measures taken by the state, the situation remains stagnant, as the party’s control appears strong in the streets and alleys. Armed and masked party members are still part of the daily scene in the suburb. They do not hesitate to stop passersby and search them under the pretext of “suspicion,” even going beyond all logical bounds by demanding identification papers as if they were government officials. It is as though they have forgotten the fundamental concept of a state — which is supposed to be the sole authority controlling Lebanese territory and guaranteeing citizens’ rights and freedoms.

The President of the Food Importers Union, Hani Bahsali, reassured that the prices of food products imported from abroad will remain stable in the foreseeable future and have not been affected by the significant increase in tariffs imposed by the United States on imported goods and similar countermeasures taken by some targeted countries.

The visit of U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus to Lebanon was pivotal and different from previous ones, as it carried direct and decisive messages regarding the situation in Lebanon. Ortagus confirmed that the U.S. policy towards Lebanon will not be open-ended and that the American support Lebanon receives is primarily dependent on tangible results, the most important of which is the state’s authority over all Lebanese territories.

Information obtained by “MTV” revealed that official Lebanon confirmed to U.S. Special Envoy for Lebanon, Morgan Ortagus, that regarding the disarmament of “the party,” the army has begun the mission. However, the American response indicated that the steps appear slow and need to be accelerated in order to extend the state’s authority across its entire territory.

Lebanon is still stuck in a complex transitional phase since the declaration of the ceasefire, the election of the president, and the formation of the government. Despite these transformations, Lebanon has not yet moved beyond the consequences of the previous phase, where political parties dominated the state and its institutions, leading to an economic collapse and widespread corruption. At the same time, Lebanon has not fully entered the new phase that the Lebanese have long hoped would mark the beginning of their salvation. President Joseph Aoun had expressed these hopes in his oath speech, and President Nawaf Salam confirmed them in the ministerial statement. However, this progress toward a new phase is still pending due to two main factors that hinder Lebanon’s escape from the spiral of confusion and loss.

The sad and troubling issue is that if there were no clear and firm international pressure on the Lebanese state to assume its responsibility in monopolizing arms, asserting sovereignty, and controlling the borders, and if there were no international conditions for providing Lebanon with financial aid, chief among them being the elimination of illegal weapons, then Hezb would still be roaming freely and arrogantly, and the official stance would be applauding it, just as it did in the past.

Like a phoenix, Beirut Souks shook off the dust following the recent events that devastated the country and its people. They donned a new look to return to being the image of Lebanon we are accustomed to – the image of fashion, modernity, and renewal. In the past few months, we have witnessed the opening of stores featuring global brands in the city center, sparking a new wave of excitement as life officially returns after a long wait.

Shadi, a young Lebanese man, entered the real estate departments in Mount Lebanon to conduct an urgent and necessary official transaction. He was surprised by the level of order within the real estate departments and told one of his relatives: “The work is running like clockwork.” Behind the desks, employees were handling transactions with full organization—no bribes, no brokers. Even brokers were no longer present, neither inside nor outside the building. Alongside the employees, members of the Internal Security Forces were there to oversee people’s affairs and manage the workflow with precision and professionalism. Even a transaction that used to take months was completed in less than half an hour. So, have we truly returned to the days we longed for, when the law held the greatest authority?

The report published by the Telegraph, quoting an Iranian official about Tehran’s withdrawal of support for the Houthis in Yemen and the order for Iranian military personnel to leave, served as an indirect announcement of a significant shift in Iran’s regional policy. It appears that Tehran, which had been betting on escalating confrontation with the U.S. in multiple locations such as Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon, now prefers to avoid direct escalation—especially under increasing pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump. This stance has opened the door for Iran to reorganize its regional cards and has raised many questions about the future role of Iranian officers in countries where Tehran has been directly involved.

All eyes are on the visit of the U.S. Deputy Special Envoy to the Middle East, Morgan Ortagus, to Lebanon, which will carry firm and clear messages from Washington, according to available information. These messages focus on the necessity of the “Party” handing over its weapons and the initiation of a strong state in Lebanon. This time, America’s messages are not soft; they are sharp and very firm, rejecting any leniency and holding the Lebanese state responsible for any slackness with the “Party.”

International pressures on Lebanon are accelerating at a very critical time, as these pressures have begun to take a new direction and have now become a positive motivating factor pushing Lebanon toward the long-awaited reforms. According to what is reported behind the scenes of international diplomacy, these pressures are part of encouraging Lebanon to continue the path it started with the election of Joseph Aoun as president and the appointment of Nawaf Salam to form the government. It is a path aimed at achieving change and improving the situation in Lebanon, focusing on rebuilding the state and strengthening its institutions, which have long been undermined by the political and military dominance of certain controlling powers, especially “the Party.”

All eyes are on Lebanon this summer, with optimistic expectations for a flow of Arab tourists, especially from Saudi Arabia. Some reports have already begun to suggest that this summer will be promising for tourism, with increasing interest in visiting Lebanon after a long hiatus due to the security tensions that the region has experienced in recent years.

International pressures on Lebanon are intensifying at a highly sensitive moment, taking on a new dimension. These pressures have now become a positive incentive, pushing Lebanon toward long-awaited reforms. According to diplomatic sources, these efforts aim to encourage Lebanon to complete the path it started with the election of Joseph Aoun as President and the appointment of Nawaf Salam as Prime Minister. This course seeks to bring about change and improve conditions in Lebanon by rebuilding state institutions that have long suffered from the political and military dominance of certain factions, particularly “the Party.”

Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea will be featured in an exclusive interview with Dr. Fadi Al-Ahmar on the "X" platform tomorrow, Friday, April 4, at 7:00 PM. The interview will be broadcast live on "Radio Liban Libre" and the official website of the Lebanese Forces party. Le leader des Forces libanaises, Samir Geagea, sera l'invité d'une interview exclusive avec Dr. Fadi Al-Ahmar sur la plateforme "x" demain, vendredi 4 avril, à 19h00. L'entretien sera diffusé en direct sur "Radio Liban Libre" et sur le site officiel du parti des Forces libanaises.

The Kurdish issue is once again at the forefront of the Turkish political scene, this time through a proposal by Devlet Bahçeli, leader of the far-right Nationalist Movement Party, regarding the dismantling of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). While this proposal may seem like a step towards a political solution, it once again highlights the deeper challenge: Can the Turkish state address the Kurdish issue from a political and social perspective rather than focusing solely on security and legal solutions?

The two raids on the southern suburbs of the neighborhoods of Al-Jamous and Maawad came within less than a week, after more than four months had passed since the endorsement of Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s government, which confirmed its commitment to applying the ceasefire mechanism by fully implementing the provisions of UN Resolution 1701, along with prior resolutions 1559 and 1680, and the Taif Agreement. Unfortunately, this further confirms that the “Party” continues to read from its Persian dictionary, complicating, rather than unraveling or facilitating, the understanding of the clauses in agreements it was reluctantly forced to comply with, interpreting them selectively since Resolution 425 in 1978, the Taif Agreement in 1989, Resolution 1559 in 2004, and the 1680 and 1701 resolutions in 2006, and of course, its “victorious” reading of the agreement its “resisting government” accepted on November 27, 2024.

Since the withdrawal of the Assad army from Lebanon, the resistance group has participated in the official government for one sole purpose: their narrow personal, service, and strategic interests, with no regard for what serves the higher interests of Lebanon and the Lebanese people.

After the events of September 11, 2001, the world entered a new phase of alliances and conflicts, one of the most significant outcomes of which was the reshaping of the balance of power in the Middle East. The United States and the West, in general, adopted an unconventional strategy in dealing with the region, choosing to rely on political Shiism as a tool to dismantle Arab states and reduce their regional influence, instead of supporting traditional Sunni powers.

“Things are not going well in a key southern city,” according to sources familiar with the situation surrounding a prominent political figure, noting that “numerous pleas have reached the political figure from activists, personalities, and citizens in the southern city, urging him to intervene quickly to address the growing security breakdown that has become unbearable. The city is almost overrun by gangs involved in various types of crimes, including theft, pickpocketing, and even murder.”

In Lebanon, the first of April is considered, like in most countries around the world, as “Global Lie Day.” But let’s be honest, if Lebanon were a country that expressed the truth properly, perhaps that day would only serve as a reminder of one single lie. But the reality says otherwise. In this country, where you can’t find a corner without fictional stories and inaccurate news, lying is not something that is only traded for one day but is a way of life. Yes, this is the true Lebanese life

Heroes do not depart; they are immortalized in the pages of glory, and the echoes of their sacrifices continue to resonate throughout Zahle, telling future generations the story of legendary resilience and unwavering determination. Martyrs of Zahle, you who crafted the epic of honor with your blood, stood like rocks against the storms, refusing to break, raising the banner of dignity high above the walls of your proud city. You are the light that illuminated the darkness of hardship, the sword that carved the path to freedom. Because of you, Zahle remains towering, defiant against tyranny, free and unyielding.

Those who call themselves staunch “resistance advocates” bombard us with the claim that the Lebanese army is incapable of protecting the homeland. Consequently, they argue that what is referred to as “the resistance” is an absolute necessity, with no alternative in the matter of repelling enemy aggression. It is as if these individuals are on a journey outside of history and geography, detached from unfolding events, indulging in fervent appearances with populist rhetoric that fuels their supportive environment, all while chanting, “At your service, O Resistance!”

Coinciding with the 44th anniversary of the Battle of Zahle, during which the people of the city made it clear to the Syrian regime at the time that “Zahle is not a journey,” “the party” is now attempting to provoke the residents of the area—and the Lebanese in general—with outdated provocations. Specifically, a branch of the “Whish Money” store chain in Zahle recently displayed a banner on its storefront bearing the slogan “Indeed, the party is victorious,” sparking outrage among locals, who immediately took it down.

It appears that the deep financial crisis afflicting “Al-Qard Al-Hassan” can no longer be concealed, according to many experts, observers, and analysts. They also point out that the growing anger within the party’s supportive environment is becoming increasingly evident. Over the past two consecutive months, “Al-Qard Al-Hassan” has issued two decisions to postpone the payment of compensations to those affected by the last war—a war that the party dragged Lebanon into, bringing death, destruction, and devastation. The consequences of this war have primarily impacted its own support base, whose outcries are growing louder, surpassing the barrier of fear after the party failed to fulfill its promises to rebuild the destroyed villages and towns in an even better condition than before.

Are you passionate about making a difference and shaping the future of Lebanon? Join the USA Lebanese Forces Youth Group! Connect with like-minded individuals, foster leadership skills, and actively contribute to your community while honoring your heritage. Together, we can empower the next generation to unite, work for positive change, and uphold the values that matter most. Be a part of something bigger - your voice, your impact, your future.

Lebanon has entered a new phase on various levels, particularly in terms of sovereignty and reforms. The international, Arab, and Gulf communities are anticipating a new approach to governance, especially after the inaugural speech of President Joseph Aoun, in which he promised to “open a new chapter in Lebanon’s history.” His speech contained commitments to sovereignty, reforms, and economic and social improvements. The most notable promises included the state’s exclusive right to bear arms, the implementation of a ceasefire agreement, and the enforcement of international resolutions—foremost among them, Resolution 1701 in all its provisions—alongside key reform commitments.

Negotiations between Lebanon and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have returned to square one, as the previous agreement no longer seems viable in light of the political and economic changes the country has witnessed. With General Joseph Aoun assuming the presidency and Nawaf Salam heading the government, a new round of negotiations is set to begin based on a different agreement. This new approach focuses on restructuring the banking sector, tightening financial oversight, and granting tax authorities broader powers to access banking data in order to regulate financial operations and combat tax evasion.

Despite circulating reports about the Lebanese authorities' intention to hand over more than 700 Syrian prisoners to Damascus, Lebanese Minister of Justice Adel Nassar denied that any final decision had been made in this regard. Nassar explained in a statement to Nidaa Al-Watan that the ministry had formed a special committee to address the overcrowding crisis in prisons by reviewing prisoners' files on a case-by-case basis. He confirmed that work is underway to prepare a protocol to resolve this issue, but no decisive decision has been reached yet.

If the borders with Israel are now under direct American supervision, amidst a firm insistence on permanently removing these borders from the conflict and from Iranian control through the enforcement of UN Resolution 1701 south of the Litani River by force, as well as the revival of the armistice agreement between Tel Aviv and Beirut, the borders between Lebanon and Syria have not been left solely to the two countries. This is particularly significant given the recent tensions along these borders, signaling a decisive international approach to neutralizing Lebanon from regional conflicts through soft power.

The issue of border demarcation between Lebanon and Syria has never been a priority, despite media talks, official visits, and the signing of vague agreements between the two countries. Syria dominated Lebanon for over 27 years, and the issue remained unresolved due to the imposition of the status quo and the subjugation of Lebanese negotiators. From 2005 until recently, Lebanon was also subjected to the status quo and the reality imposed by Bashar al-Assad’s regime, supported by Iran, which left the borders unsettled, facilitating smuggling, violations, and all forms of border disorder.

The first divergence between President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, which emerged quite early, raised questions, especially given Salam’s reservations about Karim Soueid’s nomination for the governorship of the Central Bank of Lebanon. However, ultimately, after ministers from the “Lebanese Forces” proposed voting to avoid conflict within the government—being the true constructive backbone of the cabinet—the Council of Ministers appointed Karim Soueid as governor of the Central Bank through a vote, in which he secured 17 out of 24 votes. Ministers from the “Lebanese Forces,” “The Party,” “Amal Movement,” “Progressive Socialist Party,” and “Kataeb Party,” along with ministers affiliated with the President, voted in favor of Soueid. Meanwhile, Salam, his deputy Tarek Mitri, Minister of Culture Ghassan Salameh, Minister of Social Affairs Haneen Al-Sayyed, Minister of Administrative Development Fadi Makki, Minister of Economy Amer Al-Bassat, and Minister of Education Reema Karami abstained from voting.

In less than 24 hours, a group of the party’s members was targeted three times, resulting in the deaths of seven of them. What stands out about these attacks is that they all took place south of the Litani, an area that is supposed to be free of any party presence under ceasefire agreements and resolutions following the last war.

The external and internal picture can be summarized as follows: Firstly, Iran refuses to abandon its armed project in the region before reaching a deal with the United States, while the latter refuses to discuss the continuation of Iran’s destabilizing role. This means Tehran will

• First, the two proposals presented in Parliament were introduced by the Shiite duo, represented by Minister of the Amal Movement, Ali Hassan Khalil. What Khalil said was: “This law has been presented for six years… with an emphasis on parity, constitutionalism, and pluralism, and the absence of any exclusivity or monopoly…” He aimed to present these proposals in a favorable light to pass one of them. The proposals include: Lebanon as one electoral district, the creation of a Senate, lowering the voting age to 18, and other amendments. • Second, the creation of a Senate requires the abolition of political sectarianism, which necessitates the establishment of a National Commission for the Abolition of Political Sectarianism, as stipulated in the Taif Agreement. This requires a constitutional amendment as well as a change in the voting age, which the government must have a say on and a decision about.

“The Party” is experiencing a state of ambiguity and internal tensions, as conflicts have escalated between the military base—comprising field commanders appointed after the last war—and the party’s political leadership, represented by Sheikh Naim Qassem and his political team. This internal struggle nearly spiraled out of control if not for Iran’s decisive intervention, playing a pivotal role in containing the disputes and maintaining the balance of power within “The Party.”

With the changing political landscape in Syria and shifts in power, Iran continues its attempts to leave its ideological imprint through Khamenei’s policies, which fuel tensions in the region. Despite the new Syrian authorities’ efforts to assert control and stabilize the internal situation, Iran still plays a significant role in destabilizing the region by supporting loyal militias and creating tension hotspots that keep the area in a state of unrest.

The visit of French Presidential Envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian to Beirut comes at a critical time, especially with recent developments in the south, escalating tensions, and the ongoing issues surrounding the implementation of Resolution 1701 and the ceasefire agreement. Additionally, the eastern and northern Lebanese-Syrian borders have witnessed heightened tensions, raising concerns about renewed skirmishes. While the matter is now in the hands of Lebanese and Syrian officials, discussions have begun on ways to establish stability along the borders. However, the Syrian side has requested to postpone the meeting scheduled for yesterday with Defense Minister General Michel Manssah and the accompanying delegation in Damascus to a later date to discuss the issue.

The state’s control of its borders is a priority, especially since Lebanon’s collapse began at the border with Israel due to military operations that overturned the armistice agreement, as well as at the border with Syria through the smuggling of weapons to militants. Since the mid-1960s, these borders have remained open to resistance armies and their wars. While the border with Israel is subject to UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and is experiencing unprecedented international and American enforcement to prevent a repeat of past events, the border with Syria remains the responsibility of the Lebanese government.

In the recent Joint Committees session, many questions were raised regarding the feasibility of the proposed suggestions, which were seemingly aimed at achieving some reforms. However, in reality, they might represent a step backward in the political representation process. There is a prevailing sense of concern due to the Shiite duo’s introduction of new proposals, including the adoption of a single electoral district law and the creation of a Senate. These steps were viewed by opponents as paving the way to obstruct elections and solidify the dominance of one side if these amendments were approved under the current military restrictions and the implementation of Resolution 1701.

The country’s break yesterday, in celebration of the Feast of the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary, was not devoid of dynamics and movement, sparked by Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s visit to the north, amidst heavy anticipation and an open market of names for the governorship of Lebanon’s Central Bank and the upcoming appointments in Thursday’s session.

Political sources commented on the proposal of a single electoral district at this time, as if someone wants to change the image of Lebanon, which is unacceptable. Those who propose such electoral laws are disregarding the constitution and choosing what suits them from the Taif Agreement to serve their own interests. Before embarking on anything, we must not forget that there is a weapon outside the legitimacy that must be handed over, and this matter is a priority before any changes to the electoral law.

The idea of dividing Lebanon into a single electoral district through an electoral law is a sensitive issue with significant political and social consequences. Implementing this electoral system, which expands the electoral district to include all of Lebanon as one unit, carries many risks that could negatively impact Lebanon’s democratic process. Additionally, this law effectively dissolves the Christian vote.

International political movements related to the border conflict between Lebanon and Israel continue, with the possibility of a new visit by Morgan Ortagus, the official spokesperson for the U.S. Department of State, to Lebanon, following her recent visit to Israel. This visit comes at a sensitive time, as she seeks to stay updated on the ongoing developments in the region and facilitate indirect negotiations between the two countries. These movements are part of the international community’s support for efforts aimed at enhancing stability and avoiding military escalation, which aligns with the calls of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and Foreign Minister Jo Rahi for adherence to international resolutions to ensure Lebanon’s protection from the risk of slipping into a new military conflict.

It is clear that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nabih Berri, is seeking to change the political landscape, driven by a desire to pull political forces towards a new path, away from the traditional issues dominating the Lebanese scene. At a time when the country faces dual challenges, ranging from security concerns on the borders with Israel and Syria, to ongoing international pressures to implement UN resolutions, MP Ali Hassan Khalil, Berri’s political assistant, introduces two proposals reflecting the new direction. The first pertains to amending the electoral law, and the second addresses the idea of creating a Senate.

The state has demonstrated full firmness and seriousness in handling the rockets that Hezb disavowed launching. This was evident both on the ground, by opening an investigation to uncover the circumstances, details, and background of the incident, leading to the arrest of those responsible, and at the official level, through a categorical rejection of using Lebanese territory as a battleground or a messagin

The joint parliamentary committees held a “crowded” session on Monday, which marked the beginning of an early political battle over the electoral law, more than a year before the scheduled parliamentary elections in May 2026. Despite the session being brief, it was characterized by clear differences in positions, especially regarding the proposed electoral law based on a single district and the creation of a Senate, presented by MP Ali Hassan Khalil, a member of President Nabih Berri’s bloc.

The Lebanese Forces website has learned that journalist Bassam Abou Zaid is steadily moving towards Télé Liban, where he is expected to be appointed as the station’s General Manager. Our sources indicate that the appointment is awaiting the approval of the Council of Ministers in its session on Thursday.

“The Party” denies responsibility for the rockets fired last Saturday from southern Lebanon toward Israel, which prompted Israel’s harshest response since the ceasefire agreement. But who can convince the Lebanese that “the Party” did not prefer to classify these rockets as “stray rockets” because it is too weak to bear the consequences of Israel’s broader retaliation in front of its devastated audience if it had openly claimed responsibility? At the same time, who can convince the Lebanese that these rockets were not a response to Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s sovereign stance, which completely dismantled the “Army, People, Resistance” triad and turned the page on it? Wasn’t a response necessary to counter Salam’s position and mitigate the sense of defeat and frustration among the Party’s supporters after his statements?

Since the implementation of the ceasefire decision in southern Lebanon, the region has witnessed a cautious calm, as rocket launches from Lebanon towards Israel ceased. However, this stability was short-lived, as the launch of rockets from primitive platforms resumed, and the specter of escalation quickly returned to the forefront. The Lebanese army discovered and dismantled these platforms, while Israel intercepted the rockets before they reached its territory, increasing the likelihood of military tension resurfacing on the Lebanese front. Despite Hezbollah’s swift denial of any involvement with these rockets through an official statement, the location of the platforms in the Arnoun-Shuqayf area, overlooking the Khyam plain near the Israeli border, raises questions, especially since this area is free of any Palestinian factions, whether military or civilian, making the possibility of another party’s involvement a subject of widespread debate.

The launch of rockets from southern Lebanon towards Al-Motella last Saturday marked the most dangerous breach from the Lebanese side of the ceasefire agreement in “Lebanon Today,” raising widespread concerns that this breach might serve as the perfect excuse for Israel to once again strike Lebanese territory with an escalation similar to the one ongoing in Gaza. However, the “Party,” which was the primary accused of launching the rockets, denied the accusation. The Lebanese government did not only distance itself from the responsibility of launching the rockets, but Prime Minister Nawaf Salam went much further, raising the stakes to an unprecedented level. Through Al-Arabiya TV—choosing this channel was a statement in itself—he issued a series of positions, the most significant of which was that “the page of the ‘Party’ weapon and the ‘golden triangle’ has turned after the ministerial statement, and the slogan ‘People, Army, Resistance’ is now a thing of the past.” He reminded everyone that “the ministerial statement clearly stipulates that arms are the exclusive responsibility of the state, and everyone is committed to that.”

Lebanon went through a highly sensitive and anxious phase following the mysterious missile launches from the south of the country, with suspicions clouding the skies about the party responsible for these attacks. Despite the party’s denial of any involvement in the incident, doubts still linger, especially amid the tense regional conditions and ongoing threats from Israel. This incident served as a real wake-up call for Lebanon, which was on the brink of entering a security crisis that could escalate into military action with severe consequences for the internal situation and the Lebanese-Israeli border.

Amid the ongoing escalation in the Middle East, the discussion about combating Iran’s proxies in the region is no longer confined to American circles but has become an open issue. Morgan Ortagus, Deputy Special Representative of the U.S. President to the Middle East, confirmed in an interview with Fox News that the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump would support Israel in its efforts to destroy Iran’s proxies in Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen.

Lebanon recently went through a highly sensitive and anxious phase following a mysterious rocket launch from the south of the country. The atmosphere was filled with uncertainty regarding the responsible party behind these attacks. Although “the party” denied any involvement in the incident, suspicions continue to surround it, particularly given the tense regional circumstances and Israel’s ongoing threats. This event served as a real wake-up call for Lebanon, which was on the brink of a security crisis that could have escalated into a military confrontation with dire consequences for both its internal situation and its border with Israel.

The war that Lebanon has witnessed, which claimed lives and destroyed infrastructure, has demonstrated the grave danger of failing to adhere to international resolutions. Had Resolution 1701 been fully implemented, the so-called “support war” would not have occurred. If this resolution—designed to establish the foundations for halting hostilities between Lebanon and Israel—is not enforced, and if the ceasefire agreement is not respected, tensions and instability along the southern border will persist, leaving Lebanon a battlefield and a mere messaging tool.

No political faction in a country built on diversity, plurality, and civilizational harmony can eliminate another. History, both old and modern, has proven this in Lebanon. Every attempt at military or political elimination has failed. In fact, such attempts have always backfired on their perpetrators in the most horrific ways. Those who sought to erase others have themselves been erased by history.

Recently, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam announced the approval of the new appointment mechanism, which relies on nine key principles, including priority, competition, transparency, inclusivity, absence of conflict of interest, in addition to flexibility and rotation, with a focus on transparency and accountability. These principles represent an important step toward reforming the administrative work mechanism in Lebanon and mark the beginning of a new phase of organization and transparency in the public sector.

With the election of a new president for the Lebanese Republic, the discussion has resurfaced regarding the ability of the head of state to bring about a radical change in the political game as a whole, in a country governed by complexities and intertwined interests, where behaviors and legacies thrive on clientelism, settlements, and sectarianism. In this context, President Joseph Aoun faces a real challenge in determining whether, within this complex reality, he can break the inherited patterns of behavior that control the political game in Lebanon and bring about a fundamental difference in the management of the state.

The appointment mechanism in Lebanon was approved today in the second Cabinet session dedicated to the appointment file, which was held at the Grand Serail on Thursday, chaired by President Nawaf Salam. There will be no government session today in Baabda as no agreement has been reached yet on the name of the new Central Bank Governor. The Cabinet’s approval of the appointment mechanism is seen as a significant and pioneering step in putting the reform commitments of President Nawaf Salam’s government into action or starting their implementation. It is important to note that ensuring the full credibility of the government and ministries in transitioning public administration from a deteriorating era to a reformist one will be a key factor in monitoring this highly important process.

Based on the belief in the national principles on which the “Lebanese Forces” were founded, the shared political constants that unite Sheikh Mansour Ghanem El-Bon and the “Lebanese Forces,” their history of national struggle, their mutual commitment to Keserwan and its people, their shared vision for the future development and prosperity of the district, and their dedication to networking efforts and exerting joint efforts to achieve the interests of the region and the aspirations of the people of Keserwan-Ftouh,

President Joseph Aoun declared on the International Day of La Francophonie that being Francophone is not just a matter of language but a matter of belonging to a culture and civilization, to a system of values—an entire intellectual system.

The new and likely final chapter of the ongoing war in the region for the past year and a half necessitates a different Lebanese approach, promised by the presidency and its government. This approach moves beyond containment, accommodation, and temporary conflict management to actual implementation of the commitments stated in the presidential speech, ministerial statement, and the written agreement on the “cessation of hostilities” announced on November 26, 2024, which came into effect the following morning.

As part of its annual tradition, the Washington Chapter of the Lebanese Forces Party in the United States held a celebratory gathering for Mother’s Day. The event was attended by the chapter’s president, Nada Haddad, along with a large number of party members, supporters, and Lebanese women from the communities in Virginia and Maryland.

In a scene that is both sad and laughable, no longer strange to the “party” in the politically doomed Lebanon of today, exposed to all sides, it is evident that the party treats the state’s existence with the absurdity that the Lebanese have become accustomed to since its “glorious era.” The “party” has resorted to accusing the Lebanese army of treason and collaboration with Israel during its entry into the Lebanese part of the town of Hosh Al-Sayed Ali. It is clear that the “party” is attempting to use the scraps of its “excess power” to overturn the concept of the state, which it has rejected since it swallowed the country’s power.

On February 8, 2025, Joseph Sadi, from the town of Al-Qlayaat in Akkar, was appointed as Lebanon’s new Minister of Energy and Water. A man of special caliber, his selection for this position was not a mere coincidence; it came at a time when Lebanon’s energy sector is facing a deep crisis, one as complex as solving a missing puzzle. The electricity that has been absent, the mounting debts, and the widespread poverty are all elements that place the new minister in front of an extremely difficult test, but he is not afraid of such challenges.

“The book, Elie…the book,” were the last words said by Charles Keyrouz before his passing to his brother, former MP Elie Keyrouz . “The book, Elie,” which had been in preparation for some time, was temporarily placed on the shelf of delay after Charles fell ill. However, after his premature death from cancer, and after persistent requests from his comrade in struggle, Makhoul Awwad, who also passed away while insisting that Elie finish his book, the brother and friend passed away, and Elie had to fulfill the dual bequest. Elie Keyrouz took his papers, brushed off the dust of delay, and began writing again, leading to a book with a tender dedication to the late brother Charles and the late friend Makhoul, titled “Hezbollah and Lebanon… Two Lines That Never Meet.” The book’s signing event took place at the book fair in Antelias.

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam confirmed that his government has started working on a range of political, economic, and social issues, emphasizing that “the state’s train must start on more than one level or path, from the far north to the far south, and in Beirut, the capital.” This came during a series of meetings held at the Grand Serail.

The Lebanese Cultural University in the World, along with the expatriates, looks forward to establishing internal stability and securing all borders, awaiting a promising summer. We hope to restore confidence and contribute again to investments, especially in the presence of a new era under the leadership of His Excellency President Joseph Aoun, whose inaugural speech we strongly support. In the context of a government with clear objectives in its ministerial statement to implement international resolutions and assert state authority, we are appalled by what is happening at the southern borders and the northeastern borders of the country. Therefore, we declare the following:

The request by the United Nations for Syria and Israel to provide a “temporary definition” of the Shebaa Farms region is an important step in the context of international efforts to find a solution to the long-standing dispute between Lebanon and Israel over this sensitive area. The Shebaa Farms is a small region located at the border triangle between Lebanon, Syria, and Israel, and has become a major point of contention due to the overlapping regional interests around it.