Elias Bejjani/Text & Video: President Aoun’s appointment of former minister Ali Hamie—a Hezbollah loyalist in ideology, thought, and allegiance—as a presidential advisor is a disturbing and suspicious move that raises serious doubts
President Aoun’s appointment of former minister Ali Hamie—a Hezbollah loyalist in ideology, thought, and allegiance—as a presidential advisor is a disturbing and suspicious move that raises serious doubts Elias Bejjani/June 03/2025
In a move that can only be described as baffling, disgraceful, and deeply disappointing, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has today appointed former minister Ali Hamie as presidential advisor for reconstruction affairs. This decision flagrantly disregards all principles of sovereignty, politics, and constitutional integrity, while sending a dangerous signal about the direction of Aoun’s presidency and the nature of those surrounding him. It also reflects a gross misunderstanding—or willful ignorance—of the existential threat posed by Hezbollah, the Iranian-controlled terrorist group whose ideological foundation is rooted in the doctrine of Wilayat al-Faqih.
Who is Ali Hamie? Simply put, he is a partisan figure wholly committed—intellectually, ideologically, and culturally—to Hezbollah’s system and worldview. This means his loyalty lies not with Lebanon, but with an external power, as dictated by the concept of Wilayat al-Faqih, which rejects national allegiance in favor of religious obedience to the Iranian Supreme Leader. Within this framework, no Shiite adherent to such ideology can be truly independent in thought, honest in counsel, or patriotic in orientation, because his compass always points to Qom and Tehran—not to Beirut.
So by what logic, with what understanding, and in pursuit of what reform agenda, does the president appoint such a figure as an advisor on national reconstruction? What meaningful contributions can Ali Hamie make to Lebanon in this capacity? Will his counsel be sovereign and patriotic? Of course not. Even if he desired to serve Lebanon, his ideological chains bind him, preventing him from acting outside the parameters of the Iranian agenda.
Even more alarming is the nature of the post itself: “Reconstruction Affairs.” As if reconstruction were even remotely feasible in a country still under Hezbollah’s security and military occupation. Which international, regional, or Gulf donor would finance reconstruction while the Iranian militia-state remains intact? Who would fund rebuilding under the shadow of a group answerable to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, executing a sectarian expansionist agenda fundamentally at odds with Lebanon’s national identity and the very concept of a sovereign state?
This appointment doesn’t just raise questions—it sounds the alarm about the troubling direction of President Aoun’s tenure. Since the very day he was named president—imposed on Lebanon through international and regional arrangements over the heads of both the corrupt political class and Hezbollah’s own preferences—Aoun has consistently sought to appease Hezbollah, turning a blind eye to the central crisis: its weapons and parallel state.
Now, by naming Hamie as advisor, Aoun sends a clear message: he either does not understand—or chooses to ignore—the foundational tenets of Hezbollah’s ideology, which neither respects concessions, nor acknowledges goodwill, nor reciprocates leniency with anything but manipulation. Hezbollah does not make decisions—it merely executes them. And executioners do not return favors. They exploit, consume, and discard.
The timing of the appointment is also troubling: it coincides with the visit of Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to Lebanon. This can only reinforce suspicions that this move is part of a broader orchestration—or at the very least, a calculated alignment with the preferences of the so-called “Axis of Resistance” inside Lebanon. At a time when the Lebanese president should be spearheading the implementation of international resolutions demanding the disarmament of all militias, this step instead legitimizes them by inviting them into the very heart of the presidency as “advisors” and “experts.”
Social media erupted today with scathing criticism and widespread condemnation of the decision. The Lebanese sovereign public expressed deep disappointment and outrage—few imagined that Joseph Aoun’s presidency would begin with such a dangerous and misleading signal. Instead of appointing independent, competent, and ideologically neutral advisors, Aoun has opted for one of the worst—and most alarming—choices possible: a figure ideologically aligned with a supra-national sectarian project that has turned Lebanon into a battlefield for Iran’s regional ambitions.
What happened today is not merely a mistake—it is a full-fledged political transgression that signals this presidency is, from the very start, headed down a dangerous and declining path that could lead Lebanon into disaster. Unless this course is corrected immediately—unless the presidency breaks free from the urge to appease Hezbollah and restores the values of statehood, sovereignty, independent decision-making, and constitutional legitimacy—there is little hope for redemption.
In conclusion, many Lebanese were stunned, overcome with doubt, and deeply disappointed by the caliber of advisors President Joseph Aoun has chosen. If this is the path he intends to follow—one rooted in the same failed concepts and practices—then the momentum of his presidency has ended before it even began… unless he swiftly changes course and reclaims his authority before he is consumed by the serpents of hesitation, fear, submissiveness, and foreign dependency.
