Tony Franjieh: That’s why we missed the meeting in Bkerke, and the position of the forces is surprising

Imad Marmal wrote in Al-Jumhuriya: The absence of the Marada Movement from the meeting in Christian Bkerke left questions about the motives for its abstention from attending and its tweeting outside the flock of participants belonging to several political spectrums… So how does Representative Tony Franjieh explain the position taken? What is his interpretation of it?

Representative Franjieh told Al-Jumhuriya, “There are reasons in form and content that prevented the Marada from participating in the meeting of Christian forces under the auspices of the Maronite Patriarchate regarding what was known as the ‘Bkerke Document,’ pointing out that the level of representation of the invited parties is inappropriate for the position and status of Bkerke, and reflects a lack of seriousness. It is surprising that none of the representatives of the participating parties are at a leadership level, with all the implications that this reflects. He added: We preferred not to attend the meetings rather than be part of a formal participation that neither advances nor delays. Franjieh wonders: Does anyone believe that such meetings are qualified to determine the fate of Christians in general and Maronites in particular? He points out that the head of the Lebanese Forces Party, Samir Geagea himself, downplayed the importance of the Bkerke meeting and admitted that he was not convinced by it, so how can we be blamed for refusing to participate in it out of respect for the patriarchate and for ourselves?
As for the political essence, Franjieh points out that what is before us is a canned proposal and we reject this matter, stressing that the principles require letting the discussion take its natural course without prior rulings until it leads to the production of the required document, and not the other way around, that is, the supposed statement must be the result of the dialogue. Not that the dialogue is the result of the statement.
He stresses that the future of Christians and their role cannot be studied with the lightness that some do, but rather they need an in-depth discussion with the highest level of national responsibility. He points out that the attempt of some to start from our absence from the meeting in Bkerke to suggest that Suleiman Franjieh has become isolated will certainly not succeed, no matter how far they go. In deception, considering that narrow presidential calculations are behind such weak attempts.

He points out that it is a manifestation of misleading the promotion that Suleiman Franjieh is the candidate of the Shiite duo, while he was the candidate of Bkerke in 2014 and then the candidate of Saad Hariri in 2016, before he became the candidate supported by the “duo” and several parliamentary interpretations that were clearly reflected in the numbers of the last election session.
The position of the Lebanese Forces is strange, as they claim that their objection to the option of electing my father is due to the fact that his reign will be an extension of the era of Michel Aoun, ignoring that they were the ones who contributed to the election of Aoun, who was the Hezbollah candidate at the time, while we were his opponents.
Commenting on the tension caused by the debate over the situation in the town of Rmeish, Franjieh warns that the stage is very delicate and calls for acting wisely and with self-control on the part of both sides, and avoiding everything that might lead to sectarian tension and absurd strife. They confirm that our internal unity is among our most important weapons in confronting the Israeli enemy, which has a historical problem with the Lebanese counter-model in its diversity, and therefore what is required of us as Lebanese is to fortify our ranks on the basis of mutual understanding to enhance our national immunity.