“Akhbar al-Yawm” agency
In principle, we are ready to discuss, but...
In an interview with the "Akhbar al-Yawm" agency, Geagea asked: why does the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nabih Berri, not call now - as long as the intention exists - to hold an open session with multiple sessions to elect a president of the Republic, instead of holding a dialogue for a maximum of seven days and then heading to that session? He added: regarding what they call "dialogue", it is nothing but a waste of time, outside the Constitution and custom.
In this context, Geagea stated that since the start of the constitutional deadlines for presidential entitlement, all parties and forces in Lebanon have had dialogue with each other, whether at the bilateral or tripartite level, and it can be said that hundreds of meetings have been held between the various parliamentary blocs, and therefore if no result has been reached through these meetings, is it possible to reach an agreement if the dialogue includes more than 50 figures in the House of Representatives, especially since the topic of the dialogue is an attempt to agree on a name for the presidency of the Republic...
Noting that the "Lebanese Forces" had a dialogue with all concerned in closed rooms to try to reach a solution to the presidential dilemma, Geagea said: "the main reason is that the axis of resistance has one candidate only".
He pointed out that the French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian, during his recent visit to Lebanon, made a single proposal to skip the nominations of former ministers Sleiman Frangieh and Jihad Azour and move towards the third option without going into the names. Geagea added that all parties responded positively to this proposal, with the exception of the axis team (Moumanaa), which completely rejected the third option.
Here, Geagea asked: in what sense does the "Moumanaa" team (resistance) call for dialogue, after the rejection of the third option as soon as it was put forward and before reaching the names? He said: what we have been warning about for more than eight months has become clear today... Dialogue is a distraction, and even a tragedy, to waste more time.
You confirmed sticking to Azour's candidacy and urged neutral deputies to support this candidacy, wouldn't it also be considered a rejection of the third option? Geagea replied: We confirmed our support for Jihad Azour after the other team rejected the third option, but if this team realizes that we have reached a dead end and wants to go to the third option, then in principle, we are ready to discuss, but the other team has completely closed the door.
However, Geagea continued: in any case, Azour is the third option because he never belonged to any party and did not have any political position and the specifications of the third option apply to him.
As for whether the "Free Patriotic Movement" also adheres to Azour's candidacy, Geagea said: the problem is that Hezbollah rejects the third option, and as long as this option is not on the table, the "FPM"adheres to Azour based on its public position.
On the other hand, commenting on the accusation directed to the "LF" to strain the situation between Ain Abel and its neighboring villages, Geagea downplayed this accusation, saying: "they have the right, the "LF" are the ones who killed Elias Hasrouni and strain the atmosphere... Revealing that "we have been informed two days ago by the concerned security services that they are unable to continue the investigation... This alone is sufficient to determine the perpetrator, in addition to that, all the evidence, suspicions and clues that exist point to "Hezbollah". He asked: after all this, can we conclude that a foreign Battalion operating in the South came to Ain Abel and killed al-Hasrouni?!... Of course not.
Geagea concluded: those who aggravate the situation not only in the south, but on the area of Lebanon as a whole, are the ones who kill...And recently killed Elias Hasrouni.