In an interview with the website of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations, Seyed Reza Sadr al-Hosseini, referred to the unsuccessful holding of the Paris meeting with the presence of representatives from France, the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Qatar and stated: One of the cases of the involvement of transregional players in the important issues of countries such as Lebanon, which is one of the main players against the Zionist regime, was displayed at the Paris meeting; however, their intervention to elect the president that for four months the Lebanese people have been waiting for his nomination, reached a dead end.

He added: Analysts familiar with Western policies emphasize that transregional players and Westerners in the West Asian region are not at all interested in the quick resolution of cases and issues related to the member countries of the Axis of Resistance. In fact, the ups and downs of recent years also prove this issue; because no matter how much political, economic and social stability is prevalent in countries like Lebanon, Iraq and other countries of the resistance front, it will be more difficult for the Zionist regime to provide security, and in this situation, the Americans should allocate more money and time to the West Asian region.

The expert on West Asia affairs stated that France has evaluated the Paris meeting as a prelude to opening negotiations between foreign players in the Lebanese arena, adding: Although this meeting did not lead to a statement, the countries participating in it finally announced that now it is not the right time to deal with the Lebanon crisis and it does not create problems to keep them waiting for new regional developments! In fact, the intervention meeting in Paris could not reach a conclusion due to many contradictions in the views of the members participating in the meeting.

Sadr al-Hosseini explained the different interests of the countries participating in the Paris meeting and added: Lebanon’s political history has proven that holding meetings similar to the Paris meeting cannot be a way to solve political crises in Lebanon. In fact, instead of providing a solution, the Paris meeting increases the scope and number of problems. In addition, basically the role and position of Lebanon and its people are not considered in such meetings and plans, and no mention is made of the importance of their presence in the meeting. Therefore, such meetings have the color and smell of guardianship over Lebanon.

Pointing to the ineffective holding of consecutive meetings of the Lebanese parliament to prepare for the formation of the government, he said: 46 representatives have boycotted the meetings of the Lebanese parliament until the election of the new president, and in a situation where there is growing concern over the deterioration of the financial, economic and living conditions in Lebanon, irregular activity of various institutions due to the vacancy of the presidency has widened the problems. As the secretary general of Lebanon’s Hezbollah also pointed out, the US is trying to intensify the blockade and economic sanctions in the region.

The analyst of West Asia affairs emphasized: In the current situation, what can take Lebanon out of the current political situation and provide a way out is the non-interference of transregional countries and leaving the election of the president to authentic and internally supported Lebanese movements; because the people of Lebanon have been able to evaluate all the internal movements during at least the past decade, and they have found full faith in the movements that operate with a national perspective and are concerned with providing the general interests of the people, and know them very well.

He said: For this reason, the resistance faction, with the presence of influential Lebanese movements, has been able to prevent excessive intervention of trans-regional countries; in addition, some domestic dependent movements over the past two years have severely weakened the economic conditions of Lebanon with their measures and have put the country in a state of economic collapse. However, the people of Lebanon will not be willing to accept decisions dictated from outside the country due to their independence-seeking history.

Emphasizing that the direct interventions of Riyadh, Washington and Paris have brought Lebanon’s political and economic atmosphere to a standstill and their further pressure will intensify the crises in that country, Sadr al-Husseini referred to the positive role of Hezbollah in facing and solving political and economic crises in Lebanon and noted: According to the declaration of political sources in Lebanon, differences have been created among the foreign interventionist players; Saudi Arabia objects to the role played by other Arab countries such as Qatar, and the US, France and Qatar also have differences with each other.

Saying that the enemies of the Lebanese people know very well that the power of Hezbollah hinders their colonial objectives in the region, he added: One of the most important points about Lebanon is not acknowledging the power of Hezbollah in that country. This issue is stated in different words and in different ways. Although they accept the complete influence of the resistance in Lebanon, they are not willing to admit it. Therefore, they have to wait for developments with words such as “disagreement among the members participating in the Paris meeting” or “looking to the future against the developments”.

The expert on West Asia affairs continued: It seems that the transregional countries are unable to solve the issue called the political crisis in Lebanon, but they do not want to admit it; rather, they are trying to cover up their inability with various diplomatic and media methods. However, certainly the developments that they are waiting for will not go in their favor.