We should not ask about the causes or reasons for current political confrontations in Lebanon. Rather, we should ask: what change is intended from the confrontations. Then, we realize that all sides have the same agenda. Whether it is a “garbage crisis” or a “presidential crisis,” Europe is intended to be the beneficiary. The crisis is created, and in time, a European “solution” will be implemented to “closely integrate“ Lebanon with Europe.
The European Agenda For Lebanon
Many American, British, and western politicians referred to the creation of a “New World Order“ under the United Nations. One step towards the intended centralized world governance is the creation of regional unions or alliances — such as the European Union.
Lebanon, Syria, and Israel are members of the “European Neighborhood Policy“ (ENP), and the “Union for the Mediterranean” (referred to as “Euro-Mediterranean Partnership“).
While some Lebanese politicians preach hatred against the Syrian regime and others preach enmity towards Israel, they all share the same regional membership and have the same regional agenda. Eventually, any animosity between them is orchestrated to advance regional interests. For example, in 2005, both Hezballah and its Lebanese political opponents rejected plans aimed at finding a solution to the militant group. The absence of a Lebanese solution led to the 2006 war which resulted in the deployment of 15,000 foreign UNIFIL troops on Lebanese soil — most of whom are European. This deployment was fully consented to by Hezballah and its Lebanese opponents. In other words, both sides rejected Lebanese solutions intentionally to pave the way for regional “solutions.”Today, the same strategy is being pursued by both political camps.
Of course, this “very delicate phase” is created by Lebanese political camps on both sides to eventually justify foreign “political assistance” to resolve matters which they themselves could resolve but refuse to do so.
Within two days of becoming a Prime Minister, Former P.M. Saad Hariri expressed support to the Mediterranean union, in a speech before a similar group. Former President Michel Sleiman expressed the same during his presidential visit to Spain.
The Islamic Agenda For Lebanon
Former Mufti Mohammad Rashid Qabbani stated that a “New Order is coming and no one could stop it.” No one asked him what he meant.
The terrorist group Daesh or ISIS seeks to establish a regional “Islamic State.”
It is evident that Daesh, Hezbollah, and their opponents have the same ideology — creating some type of a regional Islamic union.
The real objective for the mostly Sunni refugees in Lebanon is to drastically increase the level of Sunnis in the country — to facilitate the country’s absorption into a region the vast majority of which is Sunni.
The “solutions” to the refugees’ issue remain slogans intended for public appeasement and never get implemented even by those who publicly oppose the refugee situation and have good relations with the Syrian regime to implement their own solutions.
The Vatican Agenda For Lebanon
Maronite Patriarch Rahi stated in his first speech as a Patriarch that “the purpose of the Vatican Synod for the Middle East is to put the region under the banner of Mary.” No one asked the Patriarch what he meant by the “banner of Mary” — which reflects some type of unity (geographical or spiritual) under one banner.
The real Mary, mother of Jesus, never had a political or a geographical ambition. The Patriarch is required to explain what he meant, especially after the losses suffered by Christians in the aftermath of the Synod.
What could the “banner of Mary” mean?
On December 8, 1955, on the Catholic Feast of The Immaculate Conception, the Council of Europe adopted the Flag of Europe. The designer of the flag, Arsene Heitz, later revealed to a French magazine that the flag (twelve stars on a blue background) was designed exactly the way it is represented in traditional iconography of the image of the Immaculate Conception (where twelve stars are shown around the head of Mary, with a blue background).
Could the European Union flag be “the banner of Mary” the Patriarch is referring to? If that is the case, then the Vatican agenda is the same as the European agenda. After all, Europe is under Vatican authority. The Marian symbol of twelve stars is on every banknote and every license plate in Europe.
Is there a conflict between the “Islamic Union” and the “Marian Union”? Not at all. Even if Muslims rule, it does not mean that they are not ruled from Europe. After all, the ENP already has nine Arab nations as members in it.
Conclusion
Some sources claim that the foreign agenda is to divide certain Arab nations. Even if divisions take place, the final objective is not to establish smaller independent states — but to unify these states under some form of a federation.
It took two world wars and a fifty years cold war to finally achieve a “European Union.” It is not clear how many wars it will take to achieve some type of a “Union” in the Arab world.
Proponents of the “union” idea fail to realize that it is not the “union” by itself that benefited a nation such as the United States, which is a union of 50 states. What is most relevant is the principles upon which the union is founded, and the principles that guide each of the member states.
It is illogical to form a union among failed, corrupt, and dictatorial Arab states and expect them to become prosperous overnight as a result of the “union.” Before more Arabs are killed and before more Arab nations are destroyed, could the radicals and moderates alike provide the laws, constitution, and principles of the “union” they call for? Where is the benefit in killing and destroying for the purpose of a “union” that carries the seed of its own destruction? The alternative is to fortify existing independent states with viable legal and economic principles.
Many Lebanese political leaders and the top clergy — Christian, Muslim, and Druze — are pursuing a regional agenda, by policy and practice. The proof is in their failure to expose the lies and deceptions.
The Arab confrontations (whether political, such as in Lebanon, or military, such as in Syria) are intended to deplete the resources and sovereignty of independent states, to facilitate greater foreign dominance.
The revolution required is for true patriots and nationalists within each Lebanese political party and religious institution to replace the “regionalists“ or “internationalists” in each party’s or institution’s hierarchy.
