Lebanon: Between the conspiracy of international agreements and the option of liberation through resistance

The phone call between Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf shows that the axis of resistance is consolidating its presence as a key player in shaping the future of Lebanon and the region, in the face of attempts by Washington and Tel Aviv to impose dubious settlements.

Qalibaf stressed that ending the war in Lebanon and restoring full sovereignty are the core of the recent memorandum of understanding, confirming that the Switzerland talks produced a new mechanism called the “Conflict Control Unit” which includes Iran, America and Lebanon, with the goal of ending the aggression and ensuring the return of the displaced and the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation.

This proposal reflects Tehran’s insistence on being a direct partner in any formulation of Lebanon’s future, in a way that preserves its territorial integrity and strengthens the position of the resistance.

For his part, Berri affirmed that the outcomes of the Swiss meeting serve the Lebanese people, but he warned that Washington’s agreement with the occupation is nothing but a “conspiracy and sedition,” indicating that any understanding outside the framework of resistance opens the door to entrenching the occupation and depriving the Lebanese of their rights.

This position is consistent with Hezbollah’s view, which considered the agreement an attempt to annex Lebanese territory to the Zionist entity.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry made it clear that Lebanese sovereignty is a fundamental condition for the sustainability of any understanding with Washington, demanding a timetable for the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories.

This position places Iran in the position of the true guarantor of Lebanon’s rights, and confirms that any agreement that does not impose a complete withdrawal is merely a political maneuver that serves the enemy.

The current scene reveals a conflict between two projects: the first is an American-Israeli project that seeks to impose formal agreements that empty Lebanese sovereignty of its content, and the other is the resistance project that links Lebanon’s security and unity to a broader regional equation, the title of which is the unity of the arenas and the confrontation of Western and Zionist hegemony.

This divergence puts Lebanon before a historic choice: either to engage in settlements that perpetuate the occupation, or to adhere to the path of resistance that preserves dignity and sovereignty and lays the foundation for the complete liberation of the land.

In this context, the axis of resistance emerges as a true bearer of the independence project, and as a guarantor of Lebanon’s future in the face of international conspiracies.