Thus, it does not recognize the Lebanese-Israeli negotiations or their outcomes, nor does it acknowledge decisions to restrict weapons or the Lebanese and international consensus surrounding them. It also refuses to recognize the loss of its immunity, protection, and preferential advantages, under which it secured and controlled a small state that devoured the state itself, under the deceptive banner of resistance. This banner served to justify its possession of a terrifying arsenal that gave Israel the disastrous pretext to occupy the area south of the Litani River and devastate it. Nor does it recognize that ending its classification as a resistance movement would open the door to pursuing it legally and judicially as a militia intent on transporting explosives and violating security, roads, and civilians through acts that threaten people's lives and the country, while mocking the authority and prestige of the security forces. Although the cumulative evidence of this sweeping denial is too extensive to enumerate, its most striking manifestation, reflecting the degree of disregard, denial, and arrogance in its dealings with the Lebanese state, appears in the phrase "areas with security specificity," which the party introduced to justify the uncontrolled actions of its supporters and their spread through the streets of the southern suburbs to besiege the security forces.
