Beirut -
The Lebanese Forces party headed by its leader, Samir Geagea, is waging its electoral battle on a front parallel to Hezbollah, which declares the forces a central opponent in Lebanon and an extension of its regional opponents.
Between the 2018 and 2022 elections, the "forces" were nourished by events that occurred before this era, and the clash culminated in the events of Tayouneh on October 14, 2021, so the Lebanese relived the scenes of 15 years of civil war that ended in the field, and its repercussions in politics were not erased.
Many believe that the glare of the forces derives from regional relations that are professed and are unique in their quality, so the alliance with them has become for traditional political forces and figures a mandatory passage to engineer their relations with foreign parties, and they meet with a fierce rivalry against Iran after the Syrian regime was its first regional opponent in previous decades.
However, there are transformations that hindered the establishment of the equation of the March 14 forces against the March 8 forces, with the momentum of what Lebanon witnessed in 2005 after the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, as the forces had many fronts other than Hezbollah.
Christian, the forces are seeking to grab the title of the head of the Free Patriotic Movement, Gebran Bassil, as the leader of the largest Christian parliamentary bloc for Geagea to assume. Therefore, there are many goals that reach what will be revealed by the ambitions of Maronite leaders in the presidential elections in October 2022.
In parallel, the forces' animosity with their former ally, the "Future Movement", grew, as the latter suspended its political and electoral work without a truce with the forces, and their battle was called accusations of treachery and betrayal, and an unspoken struggle over the voices of the Sunni street.
The turmoil in their relationship dates back to before former Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced his resignation from Riyadh in 2017, and does not end when the forces refrain from naming Hariri as prime minister-designate, so he lost his position in exchange for the assignment of former President Hassan Diab in December 2019.
In Dbayeh, Al Jazeera Net met with the former Lebanese Forces Minister and candidate in the Mount Lebanon constituency Melhem Riachi, the forces' spokesman, to talk about its approach to electoral, political and regional files.
Riachi - an advisor and expert on negotiation and diplomatic relations - played a prominent role in signing a historic agreement between President Michel Aoun when he was head of the Free Patriotic Movement with Samir Geagea on June 2, 2015, known as the "Maarab" agreement, which included a document of intentions as a conclusion to a Christian conflict. - Christian boat 30 years.
Riachy links the fall of the "Maarab" agreement to the struggle for power, expresses the forces' confidence in winning the majority with their allies, and addresses what he calls the battle to "restore the state" from Hezbollah and its allies, addressing its approach to "Lebanon's active neutrality" and controlling the conflict with Israel and Lebanon's relations with the region.
The forces raise the slogan of liberating the state from Hezbollah (Al-Jazeera)
Troops.. allies and opponents
How do the forces approach the parliamentary elections in 2022?
Our approach to the elections has evolved, because the situation in the past four years has worsened. In 2018, the forces said, “We lead them.” And they followed this policy throughout their presence in Parliament, despite the successive crises.
In the 2022 elections, the "forces" added to its slogan the phrase "we lead it, we want and we can" for Lebanon, because we are leading the battle to restore the state and sovereignty and achieve justice.
The forces today are faced with two options: either to restore the state or withdraw, and of course they will only take the first option to restore the state after it fell at the hands of all those who ruled during this era.
Who are your allies and opponents in this battle?
Our main allies are the Progressive Socialist Party, former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, and other leading and sovereign figures who orbit the March 14 forces with groups of civil society. God is fundamental and central.
For the first time, the Lebanese Forces are running in the elections in the absence of their former ally, the Future Movement, and many accuse you of abandoning him in order to achieve your interests. What is the reason for the deterioration of your relationship?
The forces view al-Mustaqbal's withdrawal from the electoral scene as a major loss for them first and for all of what is historically called the March 14 Forces.
However, their withdrawal does not mean that we stop completing our path, because nature hates a vacuum, and we do not accept that our opponents fill this huge void left by the future, and we work with our strength to fill it, as we cooperate with President Fouad Siniora as a prominent and weighty Sunni figure, as well as with Sunni national leaders, and we will cooperate With them mainly to restore the national balance that we lost in the 2018 elections.
It is said that the "future" will prevent the constituencies in which it has influence over the voters from presenting the "forces" on the basis that it will not give the votes of its popular base a free gift to you, what do you think?
It must be clarified that the negative attitude of the "future" towards us - which is not in his place - does not mean that we have a negative attitude towards them, and let us mention that what happened between the future and the forces began with a difference of views, then we did not name Prime Minister Hariri for nothing but because we demanded the reproduction of power and early elections.
Therefore, the objection was not to the person of Prime Minister Hariri, but to his participation in the re-formation of a political government.
The forces consider the withdrawal of the Future Movement from the electoral scene as a great loss for them (Reuters)
Forces... their addresses and electoral tools
In his conversation with us, Gibran Bassil had previously accused you of fighting him with electoral money and questioned the integrity of his sources, both externally and internally.. Frankly, how do the forces finance their campaign?
These are false accusations to confuse us, we have the most important expatriate apparatus in Lebanon, and all of them contribute to the financing of our campaign, and after the collapse of the lira, the value of the aid in dollars became very high, and allowed us to invest to serve the purpose of our campaign, not to mention that most of the youth and cadres of the forces and their friends - and they are many - contribute the financing process.
We do not exceed the permissible electoral ceiling and scrutinize the movement of our funds, and we have an effective election department and a specialized legal department in this regard.
As for the forces' in-kind and material aid - which is modest - they provide it continuously, regardless of the election season, through the Martyrs and Injured System and the Social Aid System.
Many consider that the forces exaggerate their slogans to gain the largest number of votes. They say, for example, "We in us restore the state, protect the investigation, restore identity and implement decentralization..." And others, how can the forces do all this?
We do not exaggerate with our slogans, and we can achieve what we want and demand with our allies when we win the elections and restore balance, because this country cannot be taken by one knockout blow against the other.
And “we are in us” because when we win a majority, the forces will seek to impose new game conditions through Parliament on the government, and our tools are democratic tools with all its dimensions and details.
We will also refuse to form a government on the basis of consensual democracy, but rather on the basis of the majority ruling and the minority opposing, which is the only way to restore the state and democracy and by seeking to declare Lebanon's active neutrality.
Many consider that the proportional electoral law that you contributed to adopting in 2017, was tailored to Hezbollah, and your ally, President Siniora, described it as an unjust law in his conversation with us. What do you think?
We do not agree with him, because the law was not tailored to Hezbollah, but rather to Christians in particular, so that they could achieve their representation with their votes, as recognized by the Taif Agreement, and when Hezbollah won the elections not because of the law, not because of its strength, but rather our weakness.
If there is a broad national alliance within this law, it will inevitably serve the interest of the March 14 forces, and we adhere to the law because it is the best possible and represents all components of Lebanon, including Hezbollah.
Do you mean that the disagreements of the March 14 forces gave Hezbollah the majority in the 2018 elections?
Yes, and let us remember if there was an agreement between the Future Movement and the Lebanese Forces in the 2018 elections - where the alliance was limited to only two constituencies - we would have obtained a majority in Parliament, given the level of influence that the Sunni voice plays in Lebanon.
The forces are seeking to move from the stage of sectarian voting to a better stage that would allow the voting to mix among the sects, but without negating good representation.
We notice great tension in your relationship with Hezbollah, and many forces hold a large part of the responsibility for pushing the country towards a state of confrontation. What is your view of the type of confrontation with Hezbollah?
There is no confrontational confrontation led by the forces, and it may occur in one case, which is if Hezbollah decides to use its weapons inside, and we do not have weapons, and if the party chooses a confrontational confrontation with us, the army will have the duty to protect us. .
Even the project of neutrality is an essential part of the project to restore the state, because Hezbollah's concept of resistance is defensive, not out of attack, and just by declaring neutrality, the reasons for defense and attack negate.
Today, most of the Lebanese are dealing with the elections as an almost inevitable result in favor of Hezbollah and its allies obtaining a parliamentary majority. What do you think?
This is a great misleading, and we will obtain the majority in cooperation with the Socialist, Sunni leaders and every fan of March 14, and even the real civil society forces intersect with us on the confrontation in the House of Representatives, and we are integrated in the sovereign line, knowing that there are some civil society groups claiming the opposition, but in fact they are loyal to the party God.
How do you expect the results of Hezbollah in the elections, then?
We expect its Christian representation in Parliament and its Sunni representation to decline, as Hezbollah - in our opinion - is betting on compensating for the loss of seats for its Christian allies by winning Sunni seats, and we doubt its ability to do so.
The elections will be decisive between the Lebanese Forces and the Free Patriotic Movement to lead the Christian street (Reuters)
Forces, current and Christian struggles
In his conversation with us, Minister Basil considered that the actual electoral battle is confined to the Christian street and revolves around a number of seats that the forces are trying to extract from it. Do you support your opponent's view at this level?
Never, in the political dimension, our battle is not with the Free Patriotic Movement, but rather with Hezbollah, represented in the Christian street by the Free Patriotic Movement and others.
The goal is not to extract from them a number of Christian seats, but rather to create a public opinion in support of the Lebanese Forces and their allies, and this is what we are working on and growing at the national and Christian levels, and what the forces have been missing for 30 years.
Melhem Riachy previously played a prominent role in 2015 in achieving the most important historical understanding between the Free Patriotic Movement and the forces. What is left of him?
Did he fall forever?
Personally, I am very proud that I played a role in this Christian-Christian reconciliation, especially after 30 years of insults and bloodshed among Christians.. To admit, the Maarab agreement failed completely as a result of the power struggle and mismanagement of the government.
On another level, Christian reconciliation exists and has not fallen, because it achieved its strategic goal. For us, it ended the stage of demonization and demonization of the image of the Lebanese Forces and Samir Geagea, and reconciled the Lebanese resistance, which was militarily embodied in it during the war, with its embracing environment in the Christian street. Also, the real conflict between us has moved. To the neutral Christian basket that makes up a large proportion of Christians.
The evidence is that in the 2018 elections, more than 150,000 citizens of the Lebanese Forces were elected, and they are not all followers of the party, and if the law was a majority, the forces would have won, for example, 500,000 votes and perhaps more.
The importance of this understanding is also that it brought peace to the homes of Christians, and the conflicts after him were confined to the files of the hour, and are no longer conflicts over history.
And let us recall what President Michel Aoun said at the reconciliation in Maarab: We must remember that stage in order to learn from it, not to repeat it.
This strategic achievement can be repeated with the logic of brotherhood, but not with the logic of politics, because our confidence as forces in the Free Patriotic Movement is completely non-existent.
Politically, the importance of this reconciliation is also that the first government under President Michel Aoun after his election was the first and unfortunately the last government that restored the national balance to political power 30 years ago, and it had 15 Christian ministers compared to 15 Muslim ministers (6 Sunnis, 6 Shiites and 3 Druze). ), and made the President of the Republic restore the validity of the first republic, even without a text.
Did not the forces also enter the struggle for power with the Free Patriotic Movement and for the representation of Christians?
And where are the Christians today from the slogan "Oa Khayek"?
This is a legitimate political struggle over who represents the Christians, but the conflict in the authoritarian sense did not enter it, and we oppose restoring the rights of Christians according to the vision of the Free Patriotic Movement, and restoring their rights is to return them to power not in the religious sense, but in the participatory, human and moral sense, and we played this role with internal files.
And the slogan “Aw’a Khaik” was raised during the reconciliation on June 2, 2015 in Rabieh with President Aoun and before the “Maarab” agreement, because the dispute was with Michel Aoun, and we and the current represent about 70% of the Christians in Lebanon as the two largest forces.
Today, we are in favor of expanding the concept of the slogan to include all Lebanese, because no one wants war, and the conflict with the current is political, and we will not allow it to spread to the street.
Lebanon is preparing for presidential elections after the parliamentary elections. Do you find that the second paves the way for the first?
Parliamentary elections are a prelude to changing all the performance of the state and not just for the presidential elections. As for the next president, he is supposed to have representative health on the Christian street, but it is not a sufficient condition, and any president who has Christian popularity is better than a president who is unpopular, but needs other qualities that characterize a statesman. .
The forces consider Geagea a natural candidate for the presidency, but he is not worried about reaching the position (Reuters)
Is Samir Geagea a candidate for this benefit?
Samir Geagea, as a Maronite leader, is a natural candidate for the presidency, but he is not worried about attaining the position. The evidence is that when the settlement necessitated in 2016, Geagea reached the stage of self-denial and named his historical opponent for the presidency (ie, Michel Aoun), and we bear the responsibility of naming him, of course, but we do not bear or in any way Somehow responsible for what he committed.
Could a new settlement in the forces lead to a repetition of the 2016 experience with a candidate orbiting President Aoun?
Certainly not. The circumstances that led to Aoun's nomination will not be repeated and will not be similar, and the president we want, if not Geagea, will at least be a figure that resembles him on the political line.
Many accuse the forces of duplicity, specifically with the judicial file. You raise the slogan of protecting the investigation when addressing the port explosion file, but you accuse the judiciary of politicizing when pursuing the Governor of the Banque du Liban Riad Salameh, and you reject the results of the investigation in the Tayouneh file, why this contradiction?
These are wrong approaches, because our position is further from that, and we support opening all files in parallel and with a capable, just and not politicized judiciary.
When the fateful events of Tayouneh took place in October 2021, Geagea said that he would appear before the investigation if Nasrallah appeared before him, and from here we demand the protection of justice and the investigation.
As for Riad Salameh, we do not defend nor attack anyone, but we want the judiciary to take its course, and we refuse to hold any party haphazardly responsible for all the collapse.
Will the forces support proposals to go to a new founding conference and reconsider the Taif Agreement?
We are against compromising the Taif Agreement as a result of the lack of a real balance between the components of Lebanon, but we are open because Taif is not a home, and the essence of the Taif Agreement that we always strive to protect is the preservation of equality.
The hostility between the forces and Hezbollah was evident in the Tayouneh events, which necessitated the intervention of the Lebanese army to calm the situation (Getty Images)
Troops and Territory Files
How do the forces view the return of the ambassadors of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to Lebanon?
We worked for this return, and I was the first to preach about it. At that time, some idiots accused us of not being sovereign, and we consider that the return of the Gulf and the uprightness of Lebanon's relationship with its Arab and Gulf surroundings are part of Lebanon's sovereignty.
You demand good relations with the Gulf while you do not stop attacking Iran. Don't you contribute to dragging Lebanon into regional conflicts and exacerbating the tension at home?
The equation is completely different.. Simply put, we attack Iran because it has an army in Lebanon represented by Hezbollah and its weapons.
And when Iran withdraws its army from Lebanon after Hezbollah hands its weapons to the state, as others have done, we will work to build the best diplomatic and fraternal relations with Iran, and for this we demand Lebanon’s neutrality, because it removes the Lebanese from all regional conflicts and opens the doors of Lebanon’s “message” to everyone.
Your Christian opponent considers that the conditions for neutrality are not met. Are you talking about neutrality according to the vision of the Patriarch Al-Rahi?
Who protects Lebanon from Israel in your opinion?
Yes, we fully support the vision of the Patriarch. Since 2006 until today, there has been no palm strike against Israel. We in Lebanon have turned to guard its borders, with the difference that we have become a camp community. As for those who protect Lebanon from Israel without Hezbollah, we do not basically agree with this research.
However, the alternative for us is to declare Lebanon’s neutrality with an internal consensus and an international resolution, and when we declare neutrality and it is achieved within an official and international framework, Israel stops attacking Lebanon, and that is not only by handing over Hezbollah’s weapons, but by building a strong army and all the countries of the world finance it.
We in the forces are committed to the Palestinian cause, but not by turning the south into a platform for war with Israel.
Our people are militarizing, while Israel is far ahead of Lebanon on all levels.
Forces demand that Hezbollah hand over weapons before opening normal relations with Iran (Reuters)
Your opponents may accuse you of pushing Lebanon towards normalization. How do the forces distinguish neutrality from the path of normalization?
Neutrality and normalization are two separate matters, and we are in absolute enmity with Israel until a solution is found to the Palestinian issue, and when we reach a solution to it, we support Lebanon to be the last country to enter into a state of peace with Israel. stop.
How do the forces view the French and American roles?
The French role - in our opinion - as well as the Saudi role is essential in the situation of internal balance in order to prevent Lebanon from being singled out and as long as we do not reach our required neutrality.
On the other hand, we frankly hope that Lebanon will obtain the support of the United States in order to achieve effective neutrality, and to prevent it from being an item of bargaining or negotiation on the agenda of the Vienna table.
In light of the rapprochement of some Arab countries with the Syrian regime, how do the forces view the future of the relationship between Damascus and Beirut after the parliamentary elections?
Like any equal relations between two neighboring countries that respect each other's sovereignty in accordance with international laws.
A neutral Lebanon is of the most interest and benefit to the whole world, because it carries a message that is at its core, that is, to live together for cultures, civilizations and peoples, and not an artificial or compounded message of illusions.