أرشيف موقع العهد الإخباري من 1999-2018
ارشيف من : 2005-2008
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: A rule and a ruler are means to establish the loftiest and most sublime goal which is establishing justice
Rweiss
(13/1/2008)
I seek refuge in Allah from the cursed devil. In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. May Allah peace and blessing be on our Prophet and Master, the last of the Prophets, Abu Al Qassem Mohammad and on his pure and cleansed Household and chosen companions. Peace be upon you my lord O Abu Abdullah Al Hussein O son of the Prophet and on the souls that reside by your neighborhood. I send you peace from Allah as long as I live and as long as night follows day. May Allah not doom it the last time in which I visit you. Peace on you O Hussein, Ali the son of Hussein, the companions of Hussein and the children of Hussein. Your Eminence scholars, brothers and sisters peace be upon you all and Allah’s mercy and blessing. In the context of Al Hussein’s movement and Karbala event, many questions and debates are being raised. During such nights and in such councils indeed we are concerned to handle some aspects of the problematic questions that might arouse. one of these controversies that I would like to touch on tonight and in the nights to come is a research on Imam Hussein’s (pbuh) movement which remains some how ambiguous.
Was Al Hussein (pbuh) in his movement seeking rule? Was he seeking authority? Was he seeking holding the reins of authority and controlling the land of Muslims? Was Imam Hussein (pbuh) seeking martyrdom? Had he took action seeking rule or martyrdom or something else? Indeed these issues are forcefully aroused. At times they are being discussed with scrutiny. God willing and in my way in simplifying matters, I will try to explain these issues because at times misunderstanding the issue of ruling and governing or martyrdom might do great harm and lead to great and at times serious mistakes in our conduct as Muslim individuals or communities. I will touch on this point in the second part of my speech when talking about our present time and the current crises related to this point.
First, tonight I will handle the issue of rule and ruling. We don’t have much time to touch on whether Hussein (pbuh) was seeking martyrdom and what it means that a human being seek martyrdom. Tonight I will talk about rule and ruling from the viewpoint of Islam. In the Islamic thought, human life must be subject to order. While Islam was calling for God-fearing, it was also calling for order. Order means that when there is a group of people: two, five, a thousand, a hundred thousand, a million or a hundred million, there would be a need to a chart of rules and laws as well as a need for a supervisor. The small family needs a supervisor; so does a school, a university, a factory, a communication group, an industrial establishment, a village, a town, a city until reaching the nation which needs the superior ruler, the president, his highness, the king or prince, an Imam, caliph, sultan, governor… All of these are names to one named which may differ in some aspects, characteristics, conditions or authorities. So a supervisor is indispensable. The need for order and for someone who supervises this order is natural as is the need for food and drink to remain alive. Allah the Almighty has created man according to an accurate, compact and firm order. If man in his personal life, social life and general life wants to be consistent and harmonious with the rest of existence he needs to submit his life to order. After all, there needs to be a supervisor who assumes responsibility and preserves order, rights and obligations, develop human life, guard security, ward off ordeals, defend people, secure their interests, fulfill their needs and resolve their problems…
The first point which I will start discussing is stressing the need for order and a supervisor. In Prophetic tradition the word Imam is used: people must have an Imam whether pious or obscene. This authority, rule, supervisor, manager, or president is either just or unjust. So a supervisor is needed disregard of his characteristics. Such Prophetic tradition emphasizes an eventual natural need. It does not label as legal the rule of the tyrant, the oppressive and the obscene. No it stresses the natural human need for a ruler as their need for food and drink disregarding of what they eat; unforbidden, forbidden, permissible... The point is that they need food.
So we are talking about the need to have order and a supervisor or president or imam. This is what is referred to in modern terms as a state, political regime, a government… These stand for the supervisor and for order.
The second point is that Islam in fact seeks through its visions, teachings and code to establish justice on all aspects of life; on the individual, family, social, economic, judicial, political and security level. The main aim of Islam and its code, teachings, implementation and education is establishing justice in the life of people justice means equity and putting everything in its right place. Justice means giving everyone his right. This justice is what Islam seeks to establish whether on a limited or a large scale, in all fields and at the end it seeks total true and divine justice on all earth on the hand Imam Mahdi (May Allah make his appear very soon).
So Islam seeks justice and in the Prophetic tradition we find the need of not any regime, ruler and rule to fulfill the needs of people and their interests. It must be a just rule, a just regime, a just ruler. A prophetic Tradition says that countries do not develop with something better than justice. Justice makes security, stability, peace and serenity. People feel reassured about their wealth and investment under a just judicial authority because there would be someone who protect and defend them. This leads to prosperity of nations. Another Prophetic Tradition says that justice is the backbone of the subjects. People’s lives strength, continuity and happiness are based on justice. With justice blessings are multiplied and a just rule leads to very positive results on all living aspects. Allah the Almighty descends His blessings on a community governed by a just rule, just ruler and a jut regime. This is the second point that I wanted to stress.
So what is needed is not mere rule, government or regime. A rule and a ruler are a means to establish the loftiest and most sublime goal which is establishing justice. What does it mean that an individual be in a definite post; a president, a leader, the imam of Muslims… in any of the important posts through which he rules people and their affairs? I need to make some clarifications because religious people – Muslims – have some uncertainties on this point – the issue of ruling: a government, an authority, a regime, a state…
The third point: An hour of justice, an hour in which no oppression is practiced against anyone, in which man is fair to people, in which he defends the oppressed and gives everyone his right… An hour of justice is better than sixty years of worship; praying during their nights and fasting their days. So it’s not any kind of worship. The Prophet may Allah’s peace be upon him and his household says: An hour of justice is better than sixty years of worship. Why is it so? That’s because worshipping benefits the worshipper only while an hour of justice benefits the whole nation especially the weakened, the tortured, the oppressed, the persecuted, the poor and the broken hearted. Establishing justice among these is better than sixty years of worship. With the same Islamic balance in reward and punishment the Prophet carries on saying: an hour of injustice i.e. if an individual practices injustice for an hour and persecutes and tortures people, invests people’s wealth unjustly and rules among them unjustly – an hour of injustice is more serious in Allah’s rule than sixty years of sin. That’s because an individual sin has a negative impact on the very individual whereas unjust rule will cause harm and compulsion to people and in particular the week, the tortured, the oppressed and all of those whom we mentioned above. Here assuming responsibility turns into worship. Even more, when man seeks and is able to let justice prevail, one hour of a just ruling, of justice prevailing and of fair judiciary will be better than sixty years of worship. What about injustice? One might spend years and decades in unjust governing. I will give an example. This issue might take time but truly there are some controversies and misunderstanding in our culture as religious people. The issue here is related to one’s personality and consequently one’s conduct. A small example; in municipal elections, people compete. You want to become a mayor. What’s your intention? Why do you want to become a mayor? Why do you run the elections? Someone might say you are a religious man; you must renounce this world and remain away from the municipality and the authority of the mayor. After all, this is a public post, a public authority even if within a limited geographic borders and of limited authorities. One’s answer might be I want to become a mayor to serve my village. I want to pave roads, install lights, address the problem of water, make a sound civil planning, set the village entrances, address its environmental problems, help the poor in a legal way, reserve the public wealth and prevent anyone from robbing the public wealth. My aim from this post is serving people. I am seeking God, the Almighty in serving them. That’s why I want to run the elections and become a mayor. Another person, deep inside himself, he knows he didn’t run the elections to serve people. He came to secure a salary and perhaps rob some of the municipality’s treasury if the municipalities fund leaves some money to the municipalities. He wants to control and practice power on people and give them orders. He wants to show off: the mayor arrived. The mayor left and the like. If this is the case, he will be longing to this ill-favored world. In the first case, he will be longing to the praised world which Allah made possible for his slaves to obey Him and plant for the Hereafter. Then the issue is related to one’s intention and consequently to one’s conduct. Your intention is not enough. When you became a mayor, how was your conduct? Are you really serving, sacrificing, giving and being humble to people? Or you are controlling and giving orders unjustly and unfairly? Intention is not enough. Intention and conduct together decide whether his post as a mayor is obedience to Allah, renouncing this world, is praised world or ill-favored world. Then the value of authority - whether it was on a limited scale or on a large and great scale like leading the Muslim nation- is that it’s a means to establish justice and equity and serve people with what benefits them. If it’s not as such, authority would be of no value from an Islamic perspective. On the contrary it turns into serious danger on man’s religion, morals, spirit, Hereafter as well on the other people.
The fourth point of controversy is that the issue of assuming power, getting involved in the political milieu, or joining the government or the authority might be seen in the minds of religious people as going against renouncing this world. We know that all prophets – may Allah’s prayers be on them all – called for renouncing this world. They had a clear attitude towards this point. Some might believe that renouncing this world means for example putting on rough clothes, eating raw food, living away from people… Some went even further. They interpreted renouncing this world as never getting married and having children, no buying, no selling, and no planting... This is a wrong understanding. This is not what prophets said about renouncing this world. A look on the prophet’s very way of life is enough to such viewpoints. If some say that renouncing this world means abstaining from all worldly affairs, we say were prophets as such? No, never. When we take a look at the Prophets` lives - whom we look at as our ideal examples which we must follow - we find that this was never the case. The Prophet (pbuh) - like any other prophet or like most other prophets - was married. Perhaps there is one, two or a limited number of prophets- because of their short lives or special living conditions - who didn’t get married. But in general the prophet used to have a house, wife, children, and a means of transportation – indeed in that time it wasn’t a car. Maybe it was a mare, a horse, a camel or any other riding animal. He used to eat, drink, put on decent clothes, meet with people, and walk in markets… Some people used to object. How is it that a prophet walks in markets? He used to be concerned with people’s affairs, judge them, and judge in their conflicts, fight, combat and at times head a government and assume responsibility of leading a community on all levels.
Then this understanding of abstention is wrong. The true understanding of abstention as prophets (pbut) interpreted and as mentioned in the Holy Quran and the Prophetic tradition is not being fond of this world and not making this world the be all and end all of your existence. It doesn’t stand for disowning anything in this world. One saying is: abstention does not mean possessing nothing but rather not being possessed by anything. Not to be owned by the world. Not to be possessed by wealth, title, aurthority, office, post and fame. You might own wealth, a post but you are not possessed by it. It makes no difference to you if you were in this or any other post, if you reached this post or not. This is the true meaning of abstaining from this world; when man’s main goal is the Hereafter and Allah’s content.
This world is nothing but a station as Al Hussein (pbuh) said. It is a stage which you end by death. Death in its turn is a bridge or an archway. This world is your chance to work. This mortal transient world is nothing but a cross point. If this was you vision of this world then you are not possessed by it. Then you are benefiting from its chances, capabilities and all what Allah made available and blessed you with to what is beneficial for you, for the people in this world and for your Hereafter. Then you final goal is the content of Allah and the Hereafter. You do not own this world for the sake of its wrecks. You are not disobeying Allah because sins anger Allah and make you lose your Hereafter. Because this world is not your goal, you do not commit sins. The true abstainer is he who abandons sins and wrongdoing as is related in some Prophetic traditions which I will mention later. This is the true abstainer even if he puts on decent clothes, eats delicious food, owns a spacious house, and has money and a post. This does not go contrary with abstention. In the Holy Quran, there is a verse which was interpreted by the Prophetic tradition as standing for abstention from this world. The Prophetic tradition says that abstention is a word between two: Allah says :( In order that ye may not despair over matters that pass you by, nor exult over favors bestowed upon you). So it’s good if you owned any of these worldly wrecks. Then invest it in showing obedience to Allah and the benefit of people in this world and in the Hereafter. Your true aim is the content of Allah and the Hereafter. You are not possessed by this world. So for not any of this worldly wrecks you disobey Allah because disobedience angers Allah and because disobedience makes you lose the Hereafter. If I do not own any of these worldly wrecks I will not feel sorry. He who has such feelings towards what exists in this world whether wealth, fame, etc is an abstainer.
The Prophet of Allah (pbuh) said: Renouncing this world is not having great hopes. So it’s living while always expecting death, having the Hereafter before your eyes, thanking every blessing and fearing all what Allah forbids. The Prophet (pbuh) also said: The most abstaining among people is he who keeps away from what’s forbidden. So true abstention is keeping away from disobedience, sins and wrongdoing. This is true abstention. As for he who puts on rough clothes and says he renounces this world while he breaks down before any desire and under the least pressure or awe or commits sins and wrongdoings, he is not a true abstainer. He deceives himself and the people around him. So when it comes to rule and ruling, abstaining comes to mean assuming responsibility of rule and ruling. This does not go contrary to abstention at all. Some of the prophets (pbut) were rulers. The Prophet of Allah (pbuh) formed a state in Holy Medina and the Arab Peninsula for ten years. He was a ruler, a leader, a prince, an Imam and a sultan.
So were Dawoud/David (pbuh), Suleiman/Solomon (pbuh) and Joseph (pbuh) on a limited scale in Egypt. So there is no contradiction at all. On the contrary, I want to tell you even more. Assuming responsibility with fidelity and loyalty with the aim of getting closer to Allah, obeying Him and serving people does not only go together with abstention, in fact it is absolute abstention from this world. This is abstention: bearing difficulties and hardships, making sacrifices, working day and night, standing pressure, thinking deeply, taking decisions and facing hardships with the sole aim of serving people and showing obedience to Allah. This is abstention because it’s showing great obedience to Allah. Consider the Prophetic tradition: An hour of justice… It’s not necessarily being the president of the republic or the believers’ commander or the imam of Muslims. No it’s being in any important and crucial post through which you judge people and manage their affairs. The Commander of Muslims Ali (pbuh) is known for his renunciation of this world. On day, Ibn Abbas enters while the Imam was fixing his shoes. The Imam asked Ibn Abbas what the worth of these shoes is. The latter answered that it’s worthless. The Imam (pbuh) said that by Allah it’s dearer to me than being your commander. The worth of leadership, authority and reign is even less than that of a pair of shoes to me unless I make justice or draw away tyranny. So the worth of the post is that it gives a chance for making justice and warding off tyranny. Exterior to this cycle, it is worthless. Yet alas! Some people compete to reach a post or an authority for worldly goals. They run after fame and authority. They want to exploit their posts to gain privileges for their families, kin and relatives. They like to command and give orders. This indeed goes contrary to the Islamic point of view.
Through this presentation I wanted to reformulate the vision, interpretation or idea about rule, ruling and authority, stress that this does not go contrary to being pious and holy and assert that it is in fact absolute piety and holiness. Being pious does not mean isolating one self home and assuming no responsibility. Holiness is assuming responsibility and remaining steadfast in the face of desires and tension without transcending the limits Allah set. This is the pious holy God-fearing man. That’s how prophets (pbut) were. Back to the issue with which I started, I say did Al Hussein (pbuh) set off to gain a worldly post, an authority or a rule that would provide him with fame, wealth, welfare, controlling people, and commanding them? Indeed that’s impossible. We free the pious and the kind from this. What if it was the Master of the people of Heaven who is also one of the Prophet’s Household whom Allah removed all abomination from and cleansed? Indeed this is not the case.
As we said yester night, Imam Hussein wanted to reformulate the Islamic society and restore the mode of life of his grandfather, the Prophet of Allah peace be upon him and his Household. This mode of life covers every aspect of life including ruling. He wanted to reformulate or re-establish the Islamic Prophetic government as Imam Khomeini (May Allah bless his soul) puts it. So it was the Prophetic Islamic government embodying this culture and thought and spirit. If such a government was possible, it goes without saying that the ruler of such a government would have been Al Hussein (pbuh) because in that time he was consensually considered the most fit, capable, competent, knowing and expertise. He was the only one left who can assume the responsibility of leading the nation. Indeed Al Hussein (pbuh) wanted to prevent the deviation of authority and to return it to its first Prophetic, genuine and true origin.
Anyway here I will move to our current time keeping in mind that forming such a government that assumes responsibility of leadership is not a goal in itself but a means to establish justice on its larger conclusive concept which is the overall goal of Islam. This is the true goal of Islam and humanity which does not differ generation after generation and in all times and in all countries. Wherever there is an Islamic movement or followers of Islam – call them whatever you want a group, a party, a faction a current a movement.. – this Islamic group which follows Islam and belong to Islam and says that it is Islamic and in whatever country it is must have one goal which is establishing justice within itself above all. It must also seek to fulfill this goal seriously and faithfully.
Now if the country’s conditions and circumstances and the people’s texture and structure are more likely to form an Islamic government, indeed the model would be more sublime and grand in making justice because they would judge with what Allah revealed and they would appoint pious faithful loyal rulers. This is the most sublime model we might achieve.
In Lebanon and due to its structure, complexities and circumstances, it’s impossible to have an Islamic government. Does that mean that the Islamic movement or group must isolate itself, give up public and political life and label itself unconcerned with the administrative, ruling, social, security, judicial and any other affair related to the state and running this state simply because it’s not an Islamic government? Or only if there is an Islamic government we are ready to assume responsibility. Which case is true? There is more than one viewpoint on this issue. There is much jurisprudence on our modern time on this point among Muslims and Muslim scholars. For example some say in cases like Lebanon or in countries other than Lebanon if conditions were not favorable, if there is no Islamic government, Muslims will assume no responsibility at all. To them Islam would be limited to individual religious conduct and to one’s personal status. They must be isolated from any other issue.
There is another trend which goes against isolating oneself to this limit. They say yes we are not concerned with public affair but we are concerned with the educational and cultural affairs. They say they are not concerned with politics, with the nation’s affairs and the threats that loom over their country. They are not concerned whether there is occupied land, captives, a tyrant ruler, an aggression…
Another trend says no. Even in a country like Lebanon we are concerned and responsible because the aim is justice. If justice was not established on its highest levels, it might be on a lower degree and consequently we must seek to establish any degree of justice and in whatever field. So it’s not either complete and comprehensive justice or nothing. This latter trend does not accept this logic. It says that any Islamic movement even if not under an Islamic rule or constitution, is concerned with reform. It’s concerned with people’s worries and affairs. It enters political public life and practices its responsibilities from the position of the opposition whether from outside or from within the public institutions for example the parliament. This movement might enter the executive power, the government, or it might introduce its cadre into the administration whether the general administration or any lower post. This trend accepts this action within legal and jurisprudential conditions and to a limited not absolute degree. This is possible and at times obligatory and demanded. Imam Khomeini (May Allah bless his soul) who is known as the leader of revolution and the founder of the revolutionary trend at our time says that under such a regime anywhere on earth, if a competent qualified man or woman could assume responsibility in a post which qualifies him or her to make justice, prevent corruption and serve people without being involved in corruption and what’s forbidden and without transcending Allah’s limits, he or she not only might but also must assume this responsibility. Our case is that of a non-Islamic regime. Shall one present himself in the opposition, the parliament, the government and the administration or not? This has to do with the political schedule, the movement’s methods, the country’s circumstances and the public interests. Still there is another trend which says that this is forbidden and prohibited. An Islamic movement in any country disregard of its complexities must seek by all means, even if it has to resort to force, to change the society and the regime. It’s forbidden to enter the political life except if the state was 100% Islamic. Anyway, there is much jurisprudence in this context. But any jurisprudence issued by any Islamic movement around the world must be based on the Holy Quran, the Prophets Sunnah and valid texts and above all on a deep specialized jurisprudence process and not mere speeches and slogans. So not if someone reads a couple of books on Islam or reads some Prophetic narrations or revises some Koranic verses, he may consider himself an Islamic scholar, jurisprudent and intellectual and consequently put new trends.
This is a jurisprudent case which must be resorted to specialized scholars. Consequently when someone takes one of these trends resorting to the specialized scholars who are entrusted with what’s prohibited and what’s not, this person would be acquitted before Allah. There’d be no problem. The problem is when an Islamic trend or current adopts a specific trend and accuse all other Muslims who adopt other trends of unbelief. So he who isolates himself home is an unbeliever who does not assume his responsibilities and leaves his obligations. How come he labels as unbeliever he who contradicts his trend in dealing with issues like political life, authority, government? He might as well accuse of unbelief the whole society and all the official employees, all army soldiers and policemen. Even the policeman who regulates traffic in the morning to prevent accidents becomes an unbeliever. The danger here is so great because he does not only accuse them of unbelief - which might be considered an intellectual and cultural attitude – he would also seek to kill them. In many Islamic countries today like Algeria and Iraq among other places around the world that is taking place. Many Islamic movements’ leaderships, cadres and members are religious. They pray, fast and make hajj. Only because they run parliamentary elections and enter the Parliament and not the government or both the parliament and the government they are accused of unbelief. Many of their leaderships, cadres and members were killed because of this jurisprudence.
This is great danger and unfortunately intelligence bodies around the world, particularly the American and Israeli intelligence, forcefully penetrate this trend to cause ordeal not only between Shiites and Sunnites. In many of the Islamic countries today many of those killed are Sunnites and not Shiites on the hands of such trends as a result of difference in viewpoints and jurisprudence. So there is a true and serious jurisprudence on this issue.
Anyway as for Lebanon and as for us and relying on a true, strong, highly specialized jurisprudence basis, we adopt the trend that says no to isolation and sitting home and no to accusing the society and the people of unbelief. There needs to be a public life. We have a goal which is establishing justice. We must seek by all available, possible and legal means to establish the highest degree of justice in a definite society and on every level in the society. Today for example if the deputies enter the Parliament in any country they can via their vote on the committees and the general body prevent laws that are unfair to people and laws that are prejudiced against the poor. At the same time, they pass laws that help addressing the problem of unemployment, the problem of housing, erasing illiteracy, bettering living conditions. What’s the problem in that? Are we to demolish everything and rebuild things from the very beginning? No reform attempt is allowed. Well there is a jurisprudent view that says no this is demanded. Prophets acted as such. The Prophet acted as such. So did the nation and the senior scholars in history. We are not inventing anything new. Here I am telling you from our experience. We are present since 1992 in the Parliament. The Loyalty to Resistance Bloc for example discusses drafts, opposes, votes with or against…but they never at any time voted on a law that did not agree with the Islamic rules, teachings and code.
His Eminence said. We seek justice. We seek to have justice control our government, political, judicial, military, financial and economic institutions.
He added: We will not behave on the basis of reactions. Some might seek to drag us into that. We have our goal in the Lebanese political life. As in resistance we have a goal to which we are loyal: liberating our country, our territories, our prisoners and securing the dignity and esteem of our country and nation. The same applies to the Lebanese political life. We seek justice and equity. This is the image we want our country to have. This needs great efforts, time and cooperation. For example we are calling for a government of national unity or national partnership because we believe that the participation of the various Lebanese forces establish a degree of justice. It prevents monopoly. These forces interact within the government or parliament and prevent to a degree some oppression that might befall some people. To all those who wage a psychological media campaign during the day and night and exploit local, Arab and international media groups to prevent Hezbollah from assuming its national responsibilities in Lebanon I say: Do whatever you want. We will not give up our national responsibilities no matter what the sacrifices were. This is final and certain. If some like George Bush – and by the way, during this Ashura we are afflicted by this man – accuse Hezbollah of terrorism this makes no difference. I was hearing George Bush today. He had nothing to accuse Iran of in its nuclear program. He went somewhere else: Iran is the basic ground that supports terrorism in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, wherever there is resistance. Iran is accused of supporting resistance movements which are from Bush’s perspective terrorists. Indeed he listed names: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Jihad in Palestine… I am not frightening you. In the contrary I felt proud when Bush was talking about Hezbollah and the resistance movements. That’s because when Pharaoh and the Greater Devil categorize us in the list of enemies for him and his project and his terrorism, this is a source of pride to us. Disgrace is when one is a tool in the hands of this devil and a part of his project. That’s disgraceful and humiliating. Look at Bush when he came to Occupied Palestine. He sent a representative to meet with the families of Israeli prisoners. He was concerned with the Israeli soldiers: the captive in Gaza and the two Israeli prisoners in Lebanon. These have families, wives.. While eleven thousand Palestinian captives and prisoners and scores or Lebanese, Jordanian and Syrian prisoners in Israeli prisons under hard circumstances do not concern or move Bush at all. It’s he who is supporting the state of terrorism, killing, violations and wars. He sees himself as the symbol of civilization. But when a country like Iran or Syria or others support the resistance movements which defend their children, women, territories, holy sites in the face of the most tyrannical force in the Middle East, they’ll be labeled as supporting terrorism and these groups as terrorist groups. This is misguidance.
On the Lebanese level, he says that Iran is crippling the expectations of the Lebanese. Is that true? This is falsity and lying. Many polls were made in Lebanon. Today I call for carrying such polls again and via whatever institution. You will find that the Lebanese expectations are expressed by most Lebanese. Now some people accept the majority when it appeals to them and when it doesn’t they don’t. All polls for the last year and a half till now show that 70% - at times 77% - of the Lebanese want a national unity government in which all Lebanese partake and share to reconstruct reform and develop their country. These are the Lebanese expectations. Who is crippling them? Who is preventing the formation of a true national unity government in Lebanon? Is it Iran and Syria or George Bush, Condoleezza Rice, David Welch and their tools? You come to know the Lebanese expectations through polls which show that in case a national unity government was not possible, most Lebanese go for a transient government that carries on early parliamentary elections. Who is crippling early parliamentary elections? Iran and Syria or America and its men?
His Eminence added: Some forces in the loyalist group -I know and I want to be even with them – if it were to them and if they were not subject to US and exterior pressure, they would have accepted forming a national unity government based on true partnership because their interest and the interest of their currents and parties are in that and not in the persistence of this deadlock. But what stands behind this deadlock is the US government because it considers a national unity government in Lebanon or early elections a defeat and an end for the American mandate or intervention in the Lebanese political resolution on every field. That’s why they prevent that from taking place.
Anyway, our national responsibility is in fact at the core of our Islamic legal responsibility. We do not live dualism between our Islamic affiliation and our national affiliation. On the contrary these affiliations integrate as the religious affiliation is vast enough to embrace the national, factional, or sectarian affiliation.
Adhering to our beliefs, vision, concepts, and religious and legal background, we in Lebanon are practicing our responsibility and will remain doing so. I’m one of those who look at the future optimistically. I am not worried. I’m not afraid. I just tell you that things need time. This is natural. He who wants to save his country from corruption, from being severely torn and from the control of small savage groups on its wealth and economy; he who wants to guard his country in this sensitive region in the world in confronting challenges and great regional struggles needs to exert great efforts, needs time, needs to exert energy and needs the cooperation of all parties. Today in Lebanon this will is available as it was available with the resistance. It is available in you and through you and through the faithful in Lebanon, in all the Lebanese sects who want Lebanon a one country – a country for all its children, a country for freedom, dignity and justice. They want it to be the country of equity to all Lebanese and even non Lebanese who live on the Lebanese territories as is the case with our brethren Palestinians and the like. This is our responsibility. This is our message which we need to convey even if we need to lose our face and be subject to troubles. We are also ready to offer our souls and blood and fall martyrs to achieve this goal which also goes with: At your service here I am O Hussein