Najib Mikati Calls for Summoning Iran's Chargé d'Affaires over Qalibaf's Remarks
Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati has requested that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs summon the Chargé d'Affaires of the Iranian Embassy in Beirut to seek an explanation regarding Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf's statements.
Mikati described Qalibaf's remarks about Tehran's readiness to negotiate with France on the implementation of UN Resolution 1701 and Lebanon's future as "an explicit interference" in the country's affairs and an attempt to establish "an unacceptable guardianship" over Lebanon.
This action by Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati indicates a strong dissatisfaction from Lebanon towards the interference of the Islamic Republic of Iran in its internal affairs. Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf’s comments about Tehran's readiness to negotiate with France and its role in Lebanon's matters have been seen as a clear act of interference and an attempt to impose Iran’s opinions on Lebanon's domestic affairs.
Mikati's reaction reflects the Lebanese government's effort to maintain the country's independence and sovereignty against any form of foreign influence. The request to summon Iran's Chargé d'Affaires in Beirut is a diplomatic move aimed at reinforcing this message.
UN Resolution 1701, which addresses the ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel, remains a highly sensitive issue for the Lebanese government, and any foreign intervention in this matter is strongly opposed. Considering the recent events and Prime Minister Najib Mikati's response to the remarks made by Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, it seems that the issue of Iranian interference in Lebanon's internal affairs has entered a new stage of diplomatic tension. Background In his recent statements, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf declared that Tehran is ready to negotiate with France regarding the implementation of UN Resolution 1701 and Lebanon's future.
This resolution, which was adopted in 2006 following the war between Israel and Hezbollah, specifically addresses the ceasefire and the security of Lebanon's borders with Israel. These remarks from the Islamic Republic of Iran implicitly signal Tehran's willingness to play a role in Lebanon's issues and reinforce Hezbollah's position as one of its regional proxies. Najib Mikati's Reaction Najib Mikati took a firm stance against these statements, calling them "explicit interference" in Lebanon's internal affairs and an attempt to impose an unacceptable form of guardianship.
He asked Lebanon’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs to summon the Chargé d'Affaires of the Iranian Embassy in Beirut and demand clarification.
This reaction from the Lebanese Prime Minister was predictable since any indication of foreign interference in the country's internal affairs, especially in matters concerning Lebanon's national sovereignty and the role of internal forces like Hezbollah, has always been met with great sensitivity. Historical and Political Context The relations between Iran and Lebanon have been shaped over the past decades by the Islamic Republic's support for Hezbollah. Hezbollah, as a powerful political and military force in Lebanon, represents a significant part of Iran’s influence in the country.
This influence, sometimes manifested through military and financial aid, and other times through involvement in Lebanon’s political decisions, has frequently drawn criticism from various political groups and Lebanese governments. Therefore, Qalibaf's remarks were interpreted by Mikati as an attempt to indirectly influence Lebanon's internal policies and to strengthen Hezbollah's position against other political forces in the country. Analysis Najib Mikati's reaction highlights Lebanon's determination to preserve its national sovereignty and independence in the face of foreign influences. Lebanon, as a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country, has always faced internal challenges due to the balance of power among various political groups. Hezbollah, as one of these groups, plays a significant role in Lebanon's political and security decisions, supported by the Islamic Republic of Iran.
It appears that Mikati aims to send a clear message to the international community, particularly to Western countries, that Lebanon does not wish to accept foreign interference in its internal affairs and is ready to use diplomatic and international means to counter such threats. Outlook This incident could lead to an escalation of tensions between the Islamic Republic and Lebanon, especially if Beirut decides to take more serious diplomatic measures against Tehran's influence.
On the other hand, this stance might lead to increased pressure on Hezbollah to reduce its dependency on Iran, pushing other Lebanese parties to strengthen their ties with Western countries. Conclusion Iran's interference in Lebanon's internal affairs and the strong reactions from Lebanese officials once again demonstrate that tensions in the Middle East remain high, with any attempt to exert influence in these countries meeting with strong sensitivities and reactions. In this context, Najib Mikati's decisive response as Lebanon's Prime Minister reflects the government's resolve to preserve national sovereignty and counter any foreign interference that seeks to exert control over the country.
SHORESH MOHI
0
0