Hiyam Al-Qasifi wrote in the Al-Akhbar newspaper:
According to the letter from President of the Republic General Michel Aoun to Parliament, should Lebanon formally declare that it will be declared a failed state by the international community if the criminal investigation is not completed? And does the President of the Republic really understand that Lebanon is not a failed state in the truest sense of the word, in all the economic and financial collapses, drug crises and support crises he is currently going through, leading to the World Bank’s announcement that more than the half of the Lebanese population will become poor next year?
In the academic definition of the concept of a failed state, there are political, economic and social criteria and indicators relating to the details of economic collapse and poverty, inflation and unemployment, debt and production slowdown, legitimacy of power and public services, daily needs for health, medicines, food, human rights, external interventions and other definitions. Each of these criteria has details that identify the failure of a state as an entity and the consequences for its structure. And if a scientific approach is adopted to harmonize Lebanon with the criteria by which a country is described as a failure, then it will inevitably take an advanced level, or the criminal investigation that turned the political forces into a distraction for the people and make it from its true content, takes place or not. Regardless of any demands in earlier stages on the part of Hezbollah’s opponents to declare Lebanon a failed state because of Hezbollah’s weapons, the reality that reached Lebanon within a year does not need a presidential warning to declare it a failed state, but rather to explain the authority itself. It failed to save him due to the persistence of the same mistakes of malpractice, cronyism, corruption, failed economic plans and fatal financial crimes.
The only point where we fail to conform to the descriptions of failed states may be that power is legitimate in the sense that the parliament is elected and the president of the republic is elected from a legitimate parliament. But the norms that controlled power four years ago have transformed it into a model similar to the models of illegal authorities in failed states, through the achievements of the President and former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, and the Free Patriotic Movement took the presidential role. in itself, and the position of speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah in the political comparison, and each party. He lived power and was one of its pillars. Between the message of independence and his message to parliament, the president of the republic acted as if he were still at the beginning of his term, or more specifically, as if he were still against the covenant. It is noteworthy that this complete separation between Baabda and real reality continues, at a time when crises are intensifying and Western and Arab media outlets (for political or humanitarian calculations) the tragedies of Beirut and the Lebanese, especially after the port explosion, a large area of coverage.
It is also noteworthy that Aoun raised the World Bank’s financial situation and the prospects for an increase in the number of poor people at an international conference to provide relief after the economic collapse and the port disaster. How can the President of the Republic continue to seek help from countries exposed to levels of corruption in the political and financial class? How does Aoun justify the Lebanese before the international community stumbles in forming government, and how a collapsed country still lives under a resigned government and an appointed prime minister playing the game of political resentment, and a presidency of the republic that only comes in movement comes when the head of the Free Patriotic Movement is the target of sanctions or political campaigns affecting his role in the constitution of Government? How does he justify the request for help from the financial system, whose officials still visit the Republican Palace, as if there were no suspicions hanging over them? How does Aoun explain the return of the “impossible discharge” that buried the settlement of Hariri and Bassil, with a new look through populist intelligence and arbitrary references to the judiciary, targeting only political forces opposed to the free patriotic movement and liquidation between Aoun and his political and military opponents, to clear the page of power? And why are we witnessing games that have an interest in losing the compass and dazzling and distracting public opinion from the crimes of the authority that destroyed Lebanese social and economic fabric more than the 1975 war?
This is the model of the authority that presents itself to the international community to provide aid to the Lebanese affected by the port explosion, while aid has been stolen and diverted to those who did not need it, and investigations are carried out into the unknown. As with the achievements of the President of the Republic, the Speaker of Parliament acts with the majority of the deputies (and the pillars of their parties succeed them). They receive their full salary and those who want to transfer money abroad within a year of the economic collapse. They discuss electoral law and meet in legislative sessions, as it has recently happened, like a farce, as if the structure of the system is holding up without regard to the warnings for security, economic and social risks, and discuss what is outside. parliament happens as if it were only films on television screens, or pictures and headlines. All this while the forensic audit shows as if it will only return the Lebanese their money and wealth, cut their hospital and food bills, and stabilize the price of the Lebanese pound as it was, and secure electricity. In any case, this continued failed authority, if it had enjoyed any modesty, should no longer be honed in the name of the Lebanese.