Nasrallah sin tale 16 januar 2011


Libanon er i en status av politisk kaos. Den 16 januar 2011 talte Nasrallah om grunnlaget for at regjeringen gikk ad dundas.

“We supported Saudi-Syrian efforts to defuse tensions in Lebanon. We gambled on it along with everyone who wanted what is good for Lebanon. The talks were launched, although some in Lebanon denied that ideas were floated [to resolve the impasse]. I want to be very clear regarding the issue, [so] no one presents any made-up stories to the people. From the beginning, Saudi Arabia was very clear. [Riyadh] said that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon cannot be abolished. We said that we understand this fact. Also, Saudi Arabia said that the STL’s indictment cannot be abolished. We also understood this fact. Saudi Arabia was not able to [convince] the US and Israel to cancel [the indictment]. The issue we [wanted] was : One, to postpone the issue of the indictment and two, to contain the repercussions of the indictment.

We refuse the indictment and believe that we are targeted by it.

The results of the talks reached the following: How to neutralize Lebanon: The cabinet meets and withdraws the Lebanese judges from the STL, Lebanon stops funding the tribunal and Lebanon’s agreement with the STL is abrogated.

It is not the job of the Lebanese government to arrest those indicted by the STL. If we had agreed to these three [conditions], we would be preventing conflict in Lebanon. We want to reach a middle ground. We were informed by Saudi Arabia that they and Hariri agree on these three conditions. In return, they stated that other [conditions] should be fulfilled by the March 8 coalition. They told us these conditions… the atmosphere [at first] was positive.

The medical condition of the Saudi king slowed down the [progress of the talks]. A couple of weeks ago, we were told [by Saudi Arabia] that the king is adamant about the compromise. We were told that PM Saad Hariri was going to travel to the US for further talks. He even made a statement before he traveled to the US announcing that a [Saudi-Syrian] agreement had been reached; although he held [March 8] responsible [for not implementing its terms].

Hariri traveled to the US and out of nowhere, Saudi Arabia contacted Damascus, telling it that it cannot carry out the efforts and that the talks have suddenly stopped.

We were also informed that the STL’s indictment will be issued soon.

We agreed [last week] that it was better to resign from the cabinet. Why did this happen?

First, it is clear that the US and Israel rejected the Saudi-Syrian talks…They let them run for some time thinking that Riyadh and Damascus would not reach an agreement, but when they saw that a solution was about to be reached, the [US and Israel] interfered and obstructed the process. This is the only explanation to [what happened].

Second, there is no doubt that some Lebanese parties were seeking to support [US and Israeli] aims to obstruct the talks.

Third, regarding Hariri and his allies, he said at first that the [Saudi-Syrian] agreement had been achieved, but that [March 8] did not fulfill its side of the deal. This is not true. Since the Lebanese people are concerned about the situation, I want to ask: Why did we reach this phase?

Fourth, Hariri and his allies either do not want [to negotiate] but were sticking to the talks out of Saudi pressure, or they were supporting the talks and [the efforts] were halted due to the US’ strong will.

Fifth, Hariri said after he came back from the US that his demands [during the talks] would benefit the country. I will not reveal [Hariri’s conditions]. The rest of the conditions [only] benefit a certain political party. I will only mention one [condition] later during the speech. Or let us mention it now: When we said in the cabinet that the issue of false witnesses was very important and [greatly affected] the domestic situation and relations with Syria, we [requested] the cabinet to transfer the false witnesses file to the Justice Council. We wanted to vote on the issue and said that we would agree with the result [of the vote].

One of [Hariri’s conditions] during the talks was to cancel the false witnesses issue. Why does [March 14] want to cancel the false witnesses issue when it is supposed to be the party that it most keen on uncovering the truth behind it?

Regarding the New TV broadcast: Experts can say that it could be fabricated. The funny thing is that they can claim [the tape] is fabricated, but they will say the [STL indictment’s] alleged evidence, which relies heavily on telecom data, cannot be made up.

Future News says that it will broadcast all of the Saad Hariri [recordings tonight]. I ask them, how did you acquire [the tape] when it is said to be classified?

I would like to praise Minister of State Adnan as-Sayyed Hussein [who also resigned] because he acted based on his conscience. On why we resigned from the cabinet: First, from the first day, they aimed to make it fail. Yet, we were betting on giving things a chance… so that we could reach a [better] place.

Many months passed by and the [March 8] ministers were calling for accounting past government expenditures, but there was no result. If we called for investigating past financial account, they accused us of seeking strife. Second [as to why we resigned]: The cabinet was not capable of finalizing the issue of false witnesses. This cabinet [was] not qualified.

[Hariri] acted in a way that prevents [Lebanon] from containing the repercussions of the STL’s indictment. The people have demands. They might take to the streets. We are asked to prevent the people from taking to the streets. Taking down the incapable cabinet might allow Lebanon to form a new cabinet that will be able to assume its responsibility. It was impossible to maintain the government as it was before its fall.

Seventh, based on our evaluation of the cabinet status, we decided to resign. We exercised our constitutional right. We did not take to the streets to bring the cabinet down.

When [they sensed] that there was a probability that we will not support [Hariri] as the new premier, there was no one in the world that did not make calls to [make sure Hariri remains]. The opposition unanimously agrees on not backing Saad Hariri for the premiership.

As members of the opposition, we are not afraid of anyone’s speech or threat. We act according to our convictions. We should be thanked that we resigned in a constitutional way.

I will not announce who the opposition supports for the premiership. The parliamentary blocs will announce it tomorrow.

Calls are taking place to [pressure] for Hariri to be re-named as PM. Is this what should happen in a democratic state? [Should] parties be pressured by foreign states [to support Hariri]?

If a new cabinet is formed this way, does it mean it will be transparent? Will the parliamentary consultations really reflect the will of the MPs?

US Ambassador to Lebanon [Maura Connelly] went all the way to Zahle to meet with MP Nicolas Fattouch. This means that they are working on the MPs one by one.

I know that [STL Prosecutor Daniel] Bellemare was asked to issue the indictment more quickly. The scandal is that Bellemare’s [sources] announced that the indictment will be issued on Monday. I know for sure that the Lebanese government was officially informed that the indictment will be submitted [to STL Pre-trial judge Daniel Fransen] on Monday.

I would like to be very clear and honest. In the coming days, there will be two tracks: The first is the parliamentary consultations to name a new PM, and the second is that of the upcoming indictment.

Both tracks will be dealt with independently. We will take part in the consultations [with President Michel Sleiman] to name a new premier. The MPs and parties have a national responsibility. Let them ask what cabinet and performance they want to offer the Lebanese people. I leave that to their conscience.

For us, as Hezbollah specifically, we might have an evaluation regarding the cabinet performance: Any new cabinet that will be formed should bear responsibility. It is impossible to remain silent on any cabinet that will protect false witnesses. We will also not remain silent on any cabinet that will protect financial gaps. We will also not remain silent on any cabinet that neglects the demands of the people.

We ask [upcoming cabinets] not to plot against the Resistance. We will not remain silent on that issue. We hope that the Lebanese people will be able to form a cabinet capable of fulfilling their needs.

The events in Tunisia should be a lesson [for us]. I am not closing the door [in the face of any initiative]. If we, the Lebanese, are not able to reach a solution, then this will complicate the matter even more.

Finally, regarding the STL indictment, we described the tribunal as a US and Israeli tool based on the material we had in hand.

The parliamentary consultations [to name a new premier] are independent from the indictment issue. This country has been dragged into conflict years ago as results of greed. I reiterate that Israel killed former PM Rafik Hariri. In the past years, there was nothing we did not confront. You see us where we are today. Those who are carrying out with the project [against Hezbollah] are miscalculating. Based on what will be issued by Bellemare in the coming days, I will make [another] address. It is possible that the MPs’ consultations might result in naming Hariri again as premier.

I hope that God gives the wisdom and responsibility to all Lebanese in order to overcome the distress in this country. May God be with you.”

Oversatt av NOWLebanon

Reklamer

Legg igjen en kommentar

Fyll inn i feltene under, eller klikk på et ikon for å logge inn:

WordPress.com-logo

Du kommenterer med bruk av din WordPress.com konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Twitter-bilde

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Twitter konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Facebookbilde

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Facebook konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Google+-bilde

Du kommenterer med bruk av din Google+ konto. Logg ut / Endre )

Kobler til %s

%d bloggere like this: