When the United States talks about fighting terrorism, we have the right to ask clearly: Is terrorism fought with bombs, or is its environment created through wars? What is happening today presents a stark contradiction:
states are being destroyed, civilians are falling, and yet it is said that the goal is to achieve stability. What kind of stability is built on such destruction?
In the ongoing escalation between the United States and Iran, and between Israel and Hezbollah, the term “terrorism” is used selectively to serve political balances rather than as a fair standard applied to all. Iran, like other countries, seeks to strengthen its power. Hezbollah operates based on a doctrine it considers self-defense. Some may disagree with this perspective, but reality proves that doctrines cannot be bombed or erased by force.
Meanwhile, Israel continues military operations that cause destruction and displacement inside Lebanon, presented under security justifications. But the clear truth is: no one can erase the other, and every conflict ultimately ends at the negotiation table, no matter how long it takes.
As for nuclear weapons, they have become more of a deterrent and a message of power than an actual war option, confirming that balance is managed politically, not solely militarily.
Domestically, the Lebanese army finds itself in an unfair position: it is required to maintain stability without being granted full capability to do so.
If it is expected to bear responsibility, it is natural that it should be supported without restrictions or double standards.
The more sensitive reality is that Lebanon’s crisis is not only external but also internal. Political division and the alignment of factions with external powers weaken national decision-making and prevent the formation of a unified state. The straightforward question is: Is there any political force that can claim to be completely independent? Reality says no, and this must be acknowledged before seeking a solution.
Ultimately, stability cannot be imposed by force, nor can parties be eliminated through escalation. The real solution begins when the logic of erasure is replaced by the logic of balance, and the logic of war is replaced by the logic of dialogue.
