Bassil to Salam: We gave you our trust when we nominated you, but today we will not grant it to you
National News Agency
During a session discussing the government’s policy statement, the leader of the “Strong Lebanon” bloc, MP Gebran Bassil, said: “We fully agree with what is stated in the policy statement regarding Resolution 1701, the liberation of all lands, the monopoly of carrying arms, the decision of war and peace, and the defense strategy.”
He asked: “What is the big difference between the previous text ‘the right of the Lebanese to resist occupation’ and the current text ‘the right of Lebanon to defend itself and take all necessary measures to liberate all Lebanese territories from Israeli occupation’? The difference is that ‘the party’ made a huge strategic mistake. The difference is that ‘the party’ lost in the Gaza support war, in the unity of fronts, and we lost with it the deterrence equation against Israel, and it lost national legitimacy in resisting Israel alone, so the word ‘resistance’ was removed from the policy statement, but Lebanon did not lose the legitimacy of ‘resisting’ occupation, nor did ‘the party’ lose its popular legitimacy.”
Bassil also asked: “What is the difference between a ‘defensive strategy’ and a ‘national security strategy,’ or between ‘discussion’ and ‘national dialogue’? There is no difference except for political maneuvering and who said the phrase.”
He added: “We all applaud every oath speech or every government statement, but we are divided over the understanding document. Even if it has the same meaning, let’s see the actions. Today, we all agree on the statement, and ‘the party’ agrees with Resolution 1701 and the agreement, and it is your partner in the government and ministerial solidarity, so go ahead with implementation, and we are with you.”
He said: “The statement talks about rejecting resettlement, but why is the wording shy about ‘the right of the state to exercise its authority over Lebanese territories, including Palestinian camps, while preserving the dignity and human rights of Palestinians’? What is meant by that?”
Bassil continued: “The statement describes the issue of ‘working to solve the Syrian refugee issue, which has existential repercussions on Lebanon if their return to their homeland is not achieved.’ This is something said in 2011, not in 2025. The regime that the Syrian revolution rose against has fallen, and there is no justification for the presence of any refugee. We, in the Free Patriotic Movement, proposed a law calling for the deportation of refugees within six months, and this fully aligns with Lebanese law and international laws. Ministers should determine their stance and actions regarding the Syrian displacement file, as everyone has been lenient with this file.”
He added: “There is no clear reform direction in the statement; it contains vague generalities that fail to address the root causes of the financial collapse, which are: 1- The rentier economy, and we haven’t seen a plan for production. 2- The financial policy based on attracting deposits, and we haven’t seen an alternative policy to attract investment, along with a progressive and effective tax system. 3- Corruption, and we haven’t seen any intention to hold anyone accountable to curb it.”
He continued: “The forensic audit is not a goal; it is a tool to uncover the reality, address it, and hold those responsible accountable. The audit began but was halted, and the government committed to following up on it in its statement, but following up means actions and accountability.”
He said: “Regardless of the reasons for the Beirut port explosion, whether destructive or negligent, the indictment related to it should be issued, and those responsible must be prosecuted. There is negligence on the part of the state and its agencies for leaving the materials in the warehouse, and it must bear responsibility towards the affected people. The government and the presidency are supported internationally and internally, and they must pay the dues, and we will follow up on your promises.”
He added: “The statement mentions the creation of a special reconstruction fund, but we don’t need a new fund; the state has not yet paid all the displaced from the mountain nor the victims of the port explosion.”
He said: “We are in favor of Qulay’at Airport and consider it important after Beirut Airport, but why is Hamet and Ryak airports being ignored?”
He added: “I liked the phrase ‘neutral state’ in the elections and the legitimate political competition between rival forces! But your neutrality, Prime Minister, should not be like your neutrality in forming the government, because your neutrality on the same standards is clear, and more importantly, you neutralized yourself from the commitments you made.”
He concluded: “We gave you our trust when we nominated you, but today we will not grant it to you. We are the positive opposition to your government.”