While Moawad’s “credit” came, like the white paper, shy and modest at the limits of 39 votes, no more, which is considered far from the ambition of the absolute majority, and even from the 50-vote barrier, which seemed to have become his “maximum ambition”, despite his saying that it is “in the pocket.” This time, attention was fixed firmly on the “camp” of the white paper, and not the opposition forces, to examine the “repercussions” of the resulting crisis between the “party” and the “mainstream” on the presidential election, even if in a preliminary way.
And if there are those who believe that the “tie” that was registered constituted a “first warning” in this regard, and a “formal” first step in the possible positioning of the “movement”, if the “party” neglects its alliance with it, then the two statements issued by “Hezbollah” and The “Free Patriotic Movement” dominated the rest of them, so what is the “secret” of “Hezbollah” changing its tactics for the first time, and its departure from the “silence” that it is accustomed to in such stations? And where can the “current” go, after the response statement, which some “Aounists” described as “polite”?!
A “gentle” but “expressive” attack
Although the leaders and officials of the “Free Patriotic Movement” have taken turns since the beginning of the week to directly attack the only ally, reaching the point of talking about “treachery and betrayal”, which was translated in one way or another in the conference of the head of the “movement”, former Minister Gebran Bassil, when he talked about a problem with The “honest” people who said what it means were “not honest.” All expectations indicated that the “party” would, as usual, remain silent, waiting for an “ice-washing” meeting that would restore matters to normal.
However, the “surprise” came Thursday morning with a “lengthy” statement issued by the media relations in “Hezbollah”, in its content it constituted the first “public response” on the part of the party to the “movement” since the signing of the Mar Mikhael understanding, and despite all the “tests” it was subjected to. On more than one occasion and occasion, bearing in mind that what the statement tried to say simply, in a gentle and polite manner, was nothing but that Basil was “lying,” or that, at best, the matter might be “confused” on him according to what was stated in the statement.
And while the “party” went further in its “gentle” attack on the “current”, which removed it from the rank of “ally” to “friend”, according to what many read, in a “paradox” that may in turn require a lot of attention, speaking of “unwise and inappropriate behavior.” And about “illusions with illusions”, it seems that he will be content with this statement until further notice, which was evident through the party’s deputies refusing to answer any question about the file, and the reluctance of those close to “Hezbollah” to add any comment on what was stated in the statement. .
The “current” is blackmailing “Hezbollah”?!
There is no doubt that Hezbollah’s statement constituted a “shock” for the “Free Patriotic Movement”, which took many hours before issuing a response statement. More polite than necessary”, at least compared to what the “movement” officials have been saying in the media since Monday, before its pace declined in an unprecedented way on Friday, after the statement of media relations in “Hezbollah”, despite some “violations”.
However, the “current” that reproduced the term “ambiguity” from the “Hezbollah” statement, while changing the identity of those who fell into its “trap”, was never “ambiguous” when it decided to respond “practically” to the “party” in the presidential election session, whether By leaking information about his intention to “smuggle” votes for Michel Moawad, even if he later disavowed them, or through some canceled papers that carried “essential messages”, such as “Michel” without Moawad, or “Moawad” without Michel, as well as “Moawad Badri Daher.” .
Although the movement of the “mainstream” has been subjected to a lot of criticism, as it contributed to “flattening” the presidential election more, and turned it into a mere “box” for exchanging messages and settling scores, it is sympathetic to the “movement” hinting at the words “more explaining about the enormity of what happened.” For Minister Bassil, it was read in some circles as tantamount to “blackmail” of the party, but rather a “veiled threat” with a “plot of spite”, so to speak, that may amount to support for those who are not satisfied with the latter in the presidency.
What is certain is that the new dispute between “Hezbollah” and the “Free Patriotic Movement” is not just a “misunderstanding”, nor even a “summer cloud”, even if it came in the fall season, as evidenced by its transformation into public, by the party’s decision, contrary to the norm. There are those who say that the latter wanted this, in order to refute the charge of “insincere promise.” However, there are those who say that the matter is greater than that, bearing in mind that the government session is only “the tip of the iceberg” of the differences between the two sides, which may be summed up by talking about Basil as a “friend.” No Ally!