Walid Jumblatt called for an internal dialogue in Lebanon based on the principle that the state must hold the exclusivity of weapons. This call for a national conversation is rooted in his belief that the Lebanese state must be the sole authority in possession of military power. He expressed concern regarding the shifting geopolitical balance, noting that the Americans are withdrawing from the region while Israelis occupy the resulting space. "الإسرائيليون يملأون الفراغ الذي خلفه الأميركيون," Jumblatt stated. He emphasized that this withdrawal creates a dangerous power vacuum that is being filled by external forces, further complicating the internal security landscape of the country.
Addressing the potential for domestic conflict, he rejected the prospect of escalation that could lead to internal warfare. Jumblatt questioned the motives behind such pressure, stating, "أتشدّد؟ لكي يؤدي التشدد إلى حرب أهلية، كما يريد بعض الدبلوماسيين أو بعض الأطراف المحلية هنا؟ لا أستطيع أن أقبل بذلك." These comments reflect his assessment of the risks facing the country amidst the current regional instability. He remains firm in his position that political maneuvering should not be used as a tool to incite violence among the populace.
Regional Power Vacuum Concerns
Negotiations between Lebanon and Israel regarding border stability, mediated by the United States, have concluded 7 rounds of talks without reaching a formal decision. These diplomatic efforts remain stalled as regional tensions persist, leaving the status of disputed territories and security arrangements in South Lebanon unresolved. The lack of a concrete agreement after 7 rounds of discussions notes the complexity of the ongoing border issues and the difficulty of reaching a consensus that satisfies all involved parties.
Walid Jumblatt proposed that the disarmament of Hezbollah could be studied through a framework modeled after the experience in Britain and Ireland. By referencing the peace processes and political integration strategies utilized in those territories, he suggested that a similar long-term approach might address the presence of non-state military factions within the Lebanese political system. He believes that by examining historical examples of conflict resolution and the transition of armed groups into political entities, Lebanon might find a path forward that avoids further bloodshed.
Walid Jumblatt warned against the use of the Lebanese Armed Forces against any segment of the population, citing the severe risk of triggering a civil war. He argued that military intervention in domestic political disputes would jeopardize the unity of the state and provide a catalyst for internal conflict. Such a move, he maintained, would undermine the stability of the country rather than resolve the underlying grievances held by various local actors. Jumblatt’s warning shows his apprehension that deploying the national army against a specific part of the people would break the social contract and lead to widespread instability. He insists that the military must remain a neutral force dedicated to the protection of all citizens rather than becoming a participant in internal political struggles that threaten the survival of the state.
