National Bloc: Who will be held responsible for Wehbe's condemned defamation?

At a time when Lebanon is mired in its worst economic and social crises, from which there is no way out without the backing of the international community, the head of Lebanese diplomacy, Foreign Minister Charbel Wehbe, is undermining what remains of historical ties with fraternal Gulf states. He is dazzling us by tightening the stranglehold on a people who is already suffering from a shortage of foreign currency.

The Lebanese National Bloc Party strongly condemns the defamation by Wehbe, rejects his remarks and actions in form and substance, and calls for appropriate legal measures to be taken against him. The party asks, in light of this unanimous condemnation of the comments stated during the interview, including by Wehbe himself: Who will be held responsible for the irresponsible statements made by this Lebanese official? Who does Wehbe serve in his remarks, which were repudiated by everyone: the political current that he is aligned with, his interior sponsor, or the greatest beneficiary of the regional compromise?

Instead of dedicating himself to fixing, and even strengthening, ties between Lebanon and the international and Arab communities, and of supporting the Lebanese expatriates who are the only remaining source for the resilience of their families amid the dire conditions that the authorities and their defenders are responsible for, the caretaker minister, in his interview, appeared to threaten those ties and the stability of the expatriates as a result of his defamation and irresponsible statements.

The successive inadvertences of the resigned minister prove the failure of the political class and its parties, and their insistence on the quota allocation system and positions above all other considerations, the most important of them being the competence. Does Charbel Wehbe really believe that there is an equation between sovereignty and economy in order to make a choice between them? Should we explain the evident complementarity between the function of the state in maintaining sovereignty and securing stability, and its role in ensuring prosperity?

Citizens feel as if the parties in power are looking for ways to deepen the gap and the tragedy that are a direct result of their failure as politicians in managing the state's affairs and ensuring the minimum level of stability. We are fed up with obstacles and disasters committed by an expired regime. If it had a shred of conscience, its main concern would have been to repair what was damaged by its precarious politics.

There is no doubt that resisting the occupations was the destiny of the Lebanese in the absence of the state. However, by acknowledging that this situation has become the norm, Charbel Wehbe is thus confirming that the party that he is representing, along with all his partners in power, do not want neither a state, nor an army, nor sovereignty, so that they remain tribes fighting over the citizens' bodies and the nation.

After hitting rock bottom due to their actions, we reiterate the priority of forming an independent and sovereign government capable of reconciling Lebanon with the international community, restoring confidence with it, and not engaging it in regional conflicts in the service of external agendas on the one hand, and of rebuilding the Lebanese state on the other hand. We will continue resisting your internal occupation because only the true, free, and independent state in Lebanon is our destiny.