Gemayel Criticizes Hariri, Geagea for 'Surrendering, Giving Presidency to March 8'

W460

Kataeb Party chief MP Sami Gemayel hit out Sunday at al-Mustaqbal movement leader ex-PM Saad Hariri and Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea, accusing them of bowing to the March 8 camp and granting it the country's presidency without an electoral battle.

“Geagea and Hariri have committed a mistake by effectively giving the presidency to March 8,” said Gemayel during an interview on al-Jadeed TV.

“The competition is now limited to the March 8 camp and there is no balance. What's strange is that two March 14 leaders have decided to back two March 8 leaders and (Hizbullah chief) Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was right when he said that they have won,” he added.

“Hariri and Geagea have surrendered after 10 years of perseverance and the offering of martyrs. If a March 8 president is elected, it would be a disastrous development, unless the two candidates decide to change their stances,” Gemayel warned.

He was referring to Hariri's proposal of nominating Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh for the presidency and Geagea's surprising endorsement of the presidential bid of Change and Reform bloc chief MP Michel Aoun, his long-time Christian rival.

“I don't understand why we don't try to preserve balance in the country and I call on Geagea and Hariri to explain to the Lebanese what pushed them to cede our decision after 10 years of steadfastness,” Gemayel added, noting that he has not received a “clear answer” from Hariri.

“Everyone is justifying this under the political pragmatism slogan. Had we endorsed this approach in 2005, (ex-minister) Pierre (Gemayel) and (MP) Gebran (Tueni) would have been alive now,” Gemayel went on to say, referring to two vocal March 14 figures who were assassinated in 2005 and 2006.

Asked about Monday's electoral session, Gemayel stressed that Kataeb will not vote for Aoun or Franjieh, noting that the party might vote for its former chief Amin Gemayel or cast blank votes.

“Aoun and Franjieh must accept the democratic game. There are candidates who have declared their nominations and there are parties that have decided to back them, so let them all go to parliament to practice the democratic game,” Gemayel urged.

“What would the response of the Syrian opposition and the terrorists there be if a candidate who supports (Syrian President) Bashar Assad becomes president and if the state's official stance becomes supportive of Bashar Assad? They will respond against all Lebanese,” Kataeb's chief warned.

“If Lebanon officially enters the Syrian equation, bombings might hit anywhere,” he cautioned.

Criticizing Aoun's recent stance on Hizbullah's involvement in the Syrian conflict, Gemayel added: “The president must unify the domestic front and protect it from the outside forces, but Aoun's stance yesterday was supportive of Hizbullah's presence in Syria.”

“What will we tell the Lebanese if entire Lebanon becomes implicated in this stance?” he asked.

“If a candidate who endorses the Syrian regime's stance becomes president, what would we tell the Sunni community and what extremism we would be sending it to? What would we be committing against the Lebanese who are in the Gulf?” Gemayel added, explaining possible repercussions if a pro-Assad candidate is elected.

Turning to Hizbullah's stances, Gemayel said Kataeb is against “Hizbullah's practices.”

“Their biggest mistake is their systematic destruction of the democratic life in Lebanon. A civilized country cannot have two arsenals of weapons and two laws and it cannot contain a group monopolizing the decisions of war and peace,” he explained.

Y.R.

Comments 7
Thumb nickjames 07 February 2016, 23:37

“Their biggest mistake is their systematic destruction of the democratic life in Lebanon. A civilized country cannot have two arsenals of weapons and two laws and it cannot contain a group monopolizing the decisions of war and peace,” he explained.

-- there's only one fallacy in that statement: Lebanon is not a civilized country lol

Thumb chrisrushlau 08 February 2016, 17:27

A civilized country does not reserve half of Parliament for members of one sect, especially not one in a dwindling minority. Article 24 is as systematic a destruction of democracy as you can have.

Thumb nickjames 07 February 2016, 23:38

“Hariri and Geagea have surrendered after 10 years of perseverance and the offering of martyrs. If a March 8 president is elected, it would be a disastrous development, unless the two candidates decide to change their stances,” Gemayel warned.

-- Geagea supporting Aoun is just a move to expose Hezbollah's real stance: that it wants no president.

Missing humble 08 February 2016, 00:10

Fully agree with Sami Gemayel. 100% right.

Thumb lubnani.masi7i 08 February 2016, 08:04

Both Geagea and Hariri are useless and no longer represent the free will of the Lebanese people.

Default-user-icon kazan (Guest) 08 February 2016, 10:17

I don't believe that the Lebanese people, in the coming 50 years and may be longer, will witness a sustainable peace. 2 serious reasons: A) 2 opposing cultures , upbringing, mentality ,norms and values .B) If Lebanon will be divided in 2 countries hostilities will remain, because within each group feudal families struggle for power will continue. Very similar to medieval Europe.

Thumb kayveman 08 February 2016, 12:58

Hariri's move was smart as it exposed Nasrallah as a liar. Same with Gaegae though probably unintentional. In the end, March 14 wins, because the two leading March 8 nominees are now burned and dead. We can now move forward to talking about consensus candidates which benefits March 14 more really. Nasrallah will not allow it to happen though and he sent a message to Harriri yesterday by planting bombs in Tripoli. Luckily they went unexploded this time but next time he will kill as he always does.