"so on and centers the response to the occupation the resistance to the occupation as the central challenge to be confronted and so what the Lebanese authorities are doing here is calling on Israel the enemy state according to Lebanese law it is an enemy state has been so for decades to come and help them expunge the resistance from Lebanon it's to disinherit the whole legacy of resistance not just Hezbollah by the way but all resistance what has happened before Hezbollah's emergence and what could potentially arise in the future because it ensures through this agreement that no resistance of any kind will ever arise again and so what we're really looking at here is I would call it like an attempt at first of all depicting Hezbollah's resistance as an insurgency against the state which obviously is like legally very problematic and inaccurate but the attempt through the government's decisions since August 2025 to criminalize Hezbollah's resistance activity and I think in future they will even try and criminalize Hezbollah politically as a party representing you know virtually the entirety of the Shia community in Lebanon maybe 95 percent or so of that community which is a third of the Lebanese population and so we're seeing first of criminalization of Hezbollah of resistance the attempt to depict it as an insurgency as being a movement that kind of is anti-state although it's not Hezbollah is an inherent part of the state not just in terms of its parliamentary representation or governmental representation but in many other ways as well it has historically for decades now coordinated and cooperated with the Lebanese armed forces so there is an attempt to pit the Lebanese armed forces as well against this you know proclaimed criminal group now and to depict it as an insurgency as I said so it's kind of like a counter-insurgency that avails itself to the US and Israel and so I think in a nutshell that is how we should view this current agreement as an attempt to forge an alliance and a treaty and the reason that it's been called a framework by on is because the Americans is because that is their way of trying to circumvent the need for parliamentary approval which any treaty by law requires it has to go through parliament and get a two-thirds majority vote and it also has to go through the council of ministers in the cabinet so by calling it a framework the idea is that they can overstep that which I don't think is going to be they're going to succeed in doing"