The state's presence brings the militia closer to extinction

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

What does the denial of an intelligence meeting in Türkiye between Syrian officials and representatives of “Hezbollah Iran/Hezbollah” mean? Why is he exiled? Because it had no results, the two states parties preferred it to remain secret. As for the “party,” it did not deny or confirm it, because it is a militia and not a state, and because it is always thirsty for a state/party to talk to it to suggest that there is someone who recognizes it as a “difficult number” or a party with “some legitimacy,” or that nothing can be changed without its approval/that is, without the approval of Iran.

The Reuters news was not a passing bubble, nor a rumor launched by an electronic fly. Rather, there was a logic in it that the Syrian President had previously explained, that any dialogue must be “in the interest of the two countries” - Syria and Lebanon, and not in the interest of a party or militia. It is mentioned here that the "party" media does not consider that there is a state in Syria, but rather merely an authority, just as its leaders talk about the authority (not the state) in Lebanon. There were details, including that the Syrian side presented what it requested of the “party” under the title of “non-interference,” such as “dismantling its sleeper cells” and stopping weapons and drug smuggling operations, and expected a commitment to implementation, but the “party” confirmed “non-interference,” and this is an evasive and ambiguous pledge. Another detail is that Iran was upset about not being invited to a meeting that would not have taken place if it had not allowed the “party” to participate in it in order to demand a Syrian-Iranian meeting, and the time has not yet come.

It is clear what Damascus wants, but the “party” wants what Tehran wants from Syria, as well as from Lebanon: for them to remain in the “axis of resistance,” under its leadership and guidance, because it is leading the struggle against the greater and lesser devils, and because the latter (the Israeli enemy) occupies lands in both countries with the support and approval of the first (the United States). Occupation is a justification for resistance, there is no doubt about that, but the Iranian project, as it has demonstrated for more than two decades, has proven the opposite. Wherever he took office, the armies of states became weaker, and his militias worked to abolish the state in the interest of the gang (Yemen), or in the interest of a pariah regime (Al-Assad’s Syria), or in the interest of corrupt sectarian mafias (Iraq), or in the interest of a described corruption system (Lebanon). As for the "resistance", it forgot its mission and became limited to facilitating further occupation and destruction. It happened and is happening as if the Tehran regime had long lost someone who had the insight and foresight to see the devastation it had caused in four Arab countries (+ the Gaza Strip), and finally in Iran itself.

After Syria got rid of the regime that turned itself into a militia in the hands of its Iranian protectors, the fate of the militias was settled in Iraq, no matter how much time and conflict it required. And here the Houthi gang in Yemen is writing its own end after it constituted the worst example of the militia’s dealings with the people, failure to manage a country, and stupidity in thwarting political solutions, as well as believing that the world can coexist with a gang that controls the Bab al-Mandab Strait and is in harmony with Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

Lebanon remains suffering from two enemies: Israel, which is obsessed with its extremism and crimes, and its Prime Minister’s pursuit of electoral gain, even from the “Fly Dubai” incident, and Iran, which is drowning in the abyss of sanctions and losses, and its insistence on achieving a “victory” over America and the world. Between these and those, the Lebanese state is trying to remain the point of light at the end of the tunnel. When President Nawaf Salam, along with a number of ministers, brought some hope to Nabatieh, which was threatened by the Israeli enemy, the “Iran Party” tried to thwart his visit, because any state presence would bring the moment of his demise closer.