Kaag Says Resolution 1701 Banned Arms Outside State Control
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Sigird Kaag reminded on Monday that U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 had called for the "disarmament of all armed groups."
"Recalling SCR 1701 (is) vital for Lebanon's stability-security. Resolution calls for disarmament (of) all armed groups. No arms outside control of state," said Kaag in a tweet on Monday.
Kaag's tweet comes two days after President Michel Aoun told Egypt's CBC TV that Hizbullah's weapons "do not contradict with the State."
“As long as there is Israeli-occupied land and as long as the army is not strong enough to fight Israel, we sense that there is a need for the presence of the resistance's arms so that they complete the army's weapons,” Aoun said.
But in remarks to LBCI television broadcast on Monday evening, Kaag said her tweet was not in response to Aoun's statement.
"I actually wasn't commenting to the president's speech of course," Kaag told LBCI.
"But there is a lot of discussion in Lebanon at the moment, in the media, on Resolution 1701, so for myself, representing the (U.N.) ) secretary-general and being also responsible for the follow-up... on the implementation of 1701, it's always healthy to remind the general Lebanese audience that the resolution is very clear and very specific," she added.
"It's a very facts-based statement on the resolution itself; it's not a comment to anybody, but there's a lot of debate in the Lebanese media amongst Lebanese political leaders, and of course the good thing is the government of Lebanon and President Aoun are very committed to Security Council Resolution 1701," Kaag went on to say.
She pointed out that "an element in that resolution is very clear: it speaks about the fact that all armed groups in Lebanon should disarm... and the monopoly on violence is with the Lebanese armed forces."
"It's always healthy to go back to the facts and what the resolution actually asks for," Kaag added.
In a telephone call with An Nahar daily, Kaag had said that “the U.N. resolution is unquestionable and it calls for strengthening the Lebanese Army in order to carry out its defense errands."
“According to periodic reports on the implementation of the resolution, it pointed to progress in this area. This is what we constantly do with the Lebanese state,” Kaag concluded.
13 February 2017, 14:49
38
“UN resolution 1701 is vital for Lebanon's stability and security. The resolution calls for disarmament of all armed groups. No arms outside control of state,” said Kaag in a tweet on Monday.
Thank you for educating our president.
13 February 2017, 16:02
92
she is not in a position to educate anyone, and less our president, the president of all Lebanese, rather she needs education.... shame on you!
13 February 2017, 16:05
29
UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon Sigird Kaag needs to be educated by Southern.... on what UN Resolution 1701 means.
13 February 2017, 16:55
61
How can Kaag decide what armaments are in the states control?
The President of Lebanon says the opposite.
13 February 2017, 17:04
61
What the President said is simple, that whomever attacks Lebanon will have to face an Army and Resistance.
13 February 2017, 14:58
92
And for recognizing that Hezbullah, as the voice of the Shia majority, is the legitimate armed force of Lebanon, serving valorously in that role in its assistance to Syria against the GCC/NATO-sponsored Takfiri insurgency now and when it expelled Israeli invaders from Lebanon in 2006
13 February 2017, 15:09
82
Lebanon is not a sect, its a country.
The day you stop speaking in sects is the day it might move forward.
13 February 2017, 15:10
37
"when it expelled Israeli invaders from Lebanon in 2006"
Check again. At the end of the 33 day war in 2006, the Israelis were inside Lebanon on the banks of the Litani River. It was the UN resolution 1701 that Lebanon agreed to that called for Israeli withdrawal and for " No arms outside control of state".
13 February 2017, 15:51
82
Mrs. Kaag with due respect, the resistance is not an armed group! take note and don't make ridiculous of yourself... because you're forcing us to educate you.
13 February 2017, 18:24
51
in a sectarian country where the army is a hostage to that sectarian division, there is no chance to depend only on the LAF untill the political / sectarian / division is solved... just follow the govt disputes concerning how to provide weapons to the army which never happen...
13 February 2017, 19:05
61
so, what you mean is that the LAF would be able to drive the Israelis and the state would do all what's in its hand to do so!!?... false. btw, the Israeli lobby wouldn't allow that to happen, arming properly with heavy weapons....Iran is the only country that can do that but the govt refused to do so. .. sectarian fear.
13 February 2017, 20:53
50
when a gap is left uncovered, someone has to fill the gap or placing a cover.... the south was a free zone for the zionists since Palestine's occupation, the LAF due to its limited capacity and the disinterest of the state by what was going on durring the 50/60/70 and the occupation, drove the eruption of the resistance.... there is no guarantee that the Israel would remain quiet.. if the resistance hands its weapons... or is under the army control, since the army depends on political decisions.
regarding the arming the LAF through neutral countries, you need money, too much money for that, because we are not talking about guns and rifles but heavy weapons incluiding anti air defence systems.. till that to happen, we may have time to discuss the situation again..
who knows!
13 February 2017, 22:11
50
i'm stating facts and realities... if they convince you or not it's a different question... btw, yours are easy words.
13 February 2017, 17:26
00
i wonder why M8 people always evade the question of hezbollah being under state's control?
they all say the army is weak yet they do not want it to be reinforced by hezbollah's expertise and weaponry...
so:
- is it because they do not want hezbollah to be under the state's control thus meaning they do not want a state controlling every party?
- is it because they want only one sect to rule lebanon and not a state?
- is it because they agree that hezbollah pledged allegiance to iran, are armed by iran, financed by iran thus they agree to be under iran's thumb?
but i believe i will never have any answers as M8 always deviate the question...
why can't hezbollah be under the army's command? simple question no?
13 February 2017, 19:02
11
Lebanon's response should be that it accepts responsibility for Hezz's actions, unlike in 2006 when Lebanon claimed it was not responsible for what Hezz was doing.
13 February 2017, 19:27
04
Mr. blablablabla has earned my respect for providing a smooth and cohesive analysis to the matter.
14 February 2017, 04:54
03
(بين عون "سلاح حزب الله خطر" وعون "سلاح الحزب ضروري"... (فيديو
عون 2005: "سلاح حزب الله لم يعالج بعد"
"ان مجرد وجود السلاح في المجتمع اذا ما كان لديك نزعة للسيطرة عليه، يوحي للناس بالخضوع. وهذا هو المجتمع اللبناني. السيطرة على المجتمع من خلال تواجد السلاح مع فئة معينة نتيجة طبيعية وليست نتيجة تتعلق بارادتك ان لم تستخدمه، بل ستكون محوراً سلطوياً شئت ام أبيت، وهذا ما يعيق الحرية المطلقة للناس التي نريد ان نمارسها بالتوازي والتساوي في مختلف المناطق اللبنانية". بهذه العبارة اختصر عون موقفه من "حزب الله" في حديثٍ تلفزيوني لصالح برنامج "العين الثالثة" عام 2004.
http://www.annahar.com/article/538994-بين-عون-سلاح-حزب-الله-خطر-وعون-سلاح-الحزب-ضروري-12-سنة-فيديو
