The distinguished Ja'fari Mufti, Ahmad Qablan, stated in a declaration, "I sincerely and honestly say to the Lebanese public: Lebanon, in its inception and continuity, can only be a country of national partnership, far from the notion of 'winner and loser.' In this context, it is unacceptable to undermine the history of the Lebanese family or to work on tearing it apart, dividing it, or influencing its national interests. Political necessity exists, but not at the expense of the country and its national family."
He added, "From here, neutrality in national reconciliation is a grave mistake, and fleeing from national responsibility is a disgrace. The establishment of Lebanon relies on the foundation of its state, and there can be no state without partnership, consensus, and coexistence. Resolving political complexities requires meetings and dialogue. Everyone recognizes that internal complexities are inherent to the Lebanese structure, and the solution cannot be through force, but rather through the strength of partnership and cooperation alone. Political parties and currents are an advanced formation of the Lebanese family that necessitates decisively addressing the presidential issue under the pressures of Lebanese partnership and solidarity. The Parliament is a national representative institution capable of concluding this settlement and rescuing the country from the abyss of rupture and paralysis. Settlement is not a disgrace or shame but rather a pioneering model of Lebanese family unity and the representative political and sectarian value. No one wins by the loss of another; political records are not beneficial, and disputes are a trap of the devil. Reforming relationships is better than much prayer and fasting. The country’s interests outweigh everyone; talk of a national alternative is empty logic. The danger lies in political rupture amid calamities affecting the country, its structure, its demography, and the realities of the region and its fires. Therefore, we assert that the country is a house of national partnership, not a barrack for sectarian conflicts."
He concluded, "Political disagreement is possible, but not at the expense of sovereignty and national interests. The resistance, which is performing the greatest national duty on the southern front, does so out of a sense of national duty, not political interests. The national duo's stance regarding the presidential settlement bears the weight of national representation, away from partisan and sectarian back alleys. Its project is Lebanon and Lebanon only. What is required is for us to win together because Lebanon can only stand through national cooperation and covenant partnership."
