Afrasianet - Essam Naanan - President Joseph Aoun and his Prime Minister Nawaf Salam have publicly rushed to accept the content of the minutes of the negotiations in Washington, and the "agreements" reached by the delegations of Lebanon, Israel and the United States on June 2 and 3, 2026, which involved national and fateful risks and challenges that require further thought, scrutiny and management, which necessitates asking five key questions:
First Question: Has President Joseph Aoun or his Prime Minister provided the Lebanese negotiating delegation with principles, foundations and conditions that are required to be included in any project A Political and Security Settlement between Lebanon and Israel?
The answer is that they didn't. So why did President Aoun rush to cheer and tell reporters: "The results of the fourth round of negotiations and the statement issued by them, with their very important points in favor of Lebanon, constitute the last chance to enter into a final and comprehensive ceasefire, provided that each side bears responsibility in the event of no response."
The second Question: is whether President Joseph Aoun and his prime minister believe that the content of the minutes of the meetings issued by the delegations of Lebanon, Israel and the United States includes provisions and procedures of a national and fateful nature that require prior approval from the Council of Ministers and the House of Representatives, in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, especially regarding the establishment of "pilot zones" in accordance with the guidelines of the United States, provided that they are under the control of the Lebanese Army, and free from any non-governmental forces, and that this step would consolidate "progress".
The Third Question: "Israel and Lebanon reaffirmed that neither of them has hostile intentions to the other, and that they are committed to pursuing direct negotiations to build confidence, settle all outstanding issues, and work to achieve a comprehensive agreement between the two countries," does President Aoun really believe that there is no hostile intention by Israel towards Lebanon, which it has been waging against Wars and attacks on land, air and sea and occupying large areas of its territory in its south and east?
Did President Aoun provide the Lebanese delegation with directives or instructions to the recent negotiations in Washington that allow or invite the delegation to discuss with the Israeli delegation in order to reach a resolution of hostility and thus "conclude a comprehensive agreement between the two countries"?
Does President Aoun believe that his powers allow him, genuinely or by proxy, to negotiate with Israel alone to end the state of hostility and to conclude a comprehensive agreement with it?
Has President Aoun forgotten that Lebanon is still in a state of war and hostility with Israel, as evidenced by the fact that the armistice agreement between them has been in force since 1949, and that Israel violated it several times in 1978, 1982, 1984 and 2006 and continues to do so repeatedly, especially after its war in 2014 and the issuance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, and that it is waging successive wars against us, all the way to its current war, which targeted all over Lebanon with its air raids, all the way to Hermel in its northernmost part Its occupation of villages and hills in southern Lebanon, from Naqoura in the west to Shabaa in the east?
Has President Aoun forgotten or forgotten that there is a law issued in 1955 that stipulates a boycott of Israel, and that Article 50 of the Lebanese Constitution, which contains the text of the oath of allegiance to the nation and the constitution, which the president of the republic must swear before the parliament, stipulates respect for the nation's constitution and laws and the preservation of the independence and territorial integrity of the country?
In light of all these constitutional and legal procedures and controls, is President Aoun still able to return to the Council of Ministers and the House of Representatives to obtain the necessary approvals from them?
Or did he ignore all these constitutional and legal measures and decided to proceed with the implementation of the conclusions of the negotiations in Washington, despite the opposition of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nabih Berri, who insists that the ceasefire decision is not satisfied with the decision of the ceasefire, and that the resistance forces are obliged to implement it, but that this must be accompanied by obliging Israel to withdraw from the occupied Lebanese territories, in conjunction with a comprehensive ceasefire throughout Lebanon and the return of the displaced people of the south to their cities, villages and homes?
The Fourth Question: Don't Presidents Aoun and Salam realize that the insistence on continuing to implement the conclusions of the recent Washington negotiations, despite President Berri's opposition and Hezbollah's refusal to cease fire before Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories of Lebanon, especially after Israel's "celebration" of the results of the Washington negotiations and its assassination of two Lebanese officers and soldiers near the Khardali Bridge in southern Lebanon, will complicate the current crisis, inflame its interactions, and reactivate the malign factors and motives that push the country into the shafts of new civil strife?
The Fifth Question: Do Presidents Aoun and Salam really believe that the south of Lebanon, which has been and continues to be the scene of Israel's wars and aggressions since the conclusion of the armistice agreement in 1949 until the present, with all the destruction, displacement, razing and occupation that accompanied it, should nevertheless be the motivation of the people of the south to resist the Israeli enemy in implementation of a request from Iran and in honor of its interests, as the defeatists and the supporters claim to love the West and loyalty to America?
After all that Israel and the United States has done to the Lebanese, the Palestinians and Iran, and continues to do so, is it permissible for Presidents Aoun and Salam to attack Iran, as if they want to reject its unconditional stand with Lebanon and its people and to condition it to accept an end to the war waged by the United States and Israel on it together, to include in a document its cessation that strictly obliges Israel to end its war against Lebanon and withdraw without delay from its occupied territories?
Is it possible that it is the short-sightedness of Presidents Aoun and Salam, or something else that is worse, that disrupts their vision and vision to such a sad degree? It occupied southern Syria, with about one-fifth of its total area, and is currently trying to control with fire, destruction and displacement about a quarter of Lebanon's total area as well. How long will most Arab and Muslim rulers remain captives of their interests and enemies of their peoples?
