MP Salim Sayegh lauded Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas for taking unprecedented steps toward reconciliation between Palestinians and Lebanese, saying he deserved “a peace prize” for initiating self-criticism and laying the groundwork for a balanced and transparent dialogue between the two peoples.

“What President Mahmoud Abbas did is something no Lebanese leader at the state level has dared to do,” Sayegh said in an interview on Voice of Lebanon. “He engaged in Palestinian self-reflection to establish a serious and balanced relationship with the Lebanese. The Palestinians issued the ‘Beirut-Palestine Charter,’ a courageous move that should inspire Lebanese political factions to hold a Lebanese-Lebanese conference for similar self-criticism.”

Sayegh lamented that in Lebanon, leaders often present themselves as infallible.

“They appoint themselves as demi-gods, consider their past unblemished, and no one dares to show humility or subject themselves to public or historical accountability, which is essential for national reconciliation,” he said.

The Kataeb MP hailed Abbas's initiative as “a blessed and important step,” noting that Palestinians openly acknowledged their past mistakes and expressed a clear desire to rebuild relations based on respect for Lebanese sovereignty and state legitimacy.

“The Palestinian factions also critically assessed their past resistance strategy in Lebanon prior to the shift in 1987 with the First Intifada, which marked a turning point in the Palestinian cause,” Sayegh said. “They were not passive; they engaged reason in their struggle for statehood, showing intellectual and political maturity.”

Recalling his time as deputy leader of the Kataeb Party, Sayegh said he had personally championed efforts to foster dialogue and truth-telling with Palestinians. On the anniversary of April 13 — marking the start of Lebanon’s civil war — he proposed a commemorative event that would include Palestinian representatives. “

We had excellent ties with then-Palestinian Ambassador Abbas Zaki. With the blessing of former President Amine Gemayel, who immediately endorsed the idea, we convened a landmark meeting. It included Palestinian factions, a representative from the National Movement, and Minister Akram Chehayeb representing Walid Jumblat. Some Christians were displeased with this step, but we believed in creating a positive shock from within the Kataeb headquarters to close this chapter once and for all.”

However, Sayegh deplored the limited impact of such initiatives.

“Due to assassinations, internal instability, and mounting crises, Lebanon never had the chance to expand and deepen the dialogue. No conference has ever been held in any university or forum to thoroughly discuss Lebanese-Palestinian relations. We need a top-down approach; this is not just a matter of history, but an urgent national issue.”

He urged a reassessment of the relationship, especially in light of the ongoing erosion of prospects for a Palestinian state.

“Geopolitically, the Arab world cannot fulfill its interests unless the Palestinian issue is resolved. This region is not just a market. It is a homeland rich with humanitarian causes that must reject any militaristic logic.”

Sayegh stressed that any progress in the Arab region must be accompanied by a solution to the Palestinian issue.

“This is our conviction in the Kataeb Party, and mine personally,” he said. “We must also examine the right of return. Where does UNRWA stand in Lebanon today? What about the weapons and the camps? Aside from the 2006 National Dialogue Conference, where we agreed to collect Palestinian arms outside the camps and regulate them inside under state control as per the Taif Accord and Resolution 1701, nothing has advanced.”

On Abbas's imminent visit to Lebanon, Sayegh said the priority should be Lebanon’s sovereignty.

“There can be no legitimate weapons outside the control of the Lebanese state. This must be clarified so we can approach truth and reconciliation with confidence.”

He noted concerns over the current state of arms within Palestinian camps.

“Frankly, we no longer know whether the weapons are in Hamas’s hands or Fatah’s. After Gaza, Hamas captured the Palestinian public’s imagination, especially given Israel’s disproportionate response that reached the level of genocide. The world sympathized with Gaza’s civilians. Still, the Palestinian Authority remains the stronger player in the camps. President Abbas retains Arab legitimacy and is recognized as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinians. He has a duty to stand by his word, and politically, Palestinian opinion supports his stance on Lebanon.”

Reflecting on the past, Sayegh said previous efforts at reconciliation lacked serious Lebanese political will.

“Before 2016, during the presidential vacuum, I met with the Lebanese-Palestinian Dialogue Committee, which included representatives from various parties. Some Lebanese factions — often Sunni parties or those looking to court foreign sponsorship — granted Palestinians full social and economic rights unilaterally to appear open-minded. But such giveaways were unreasonable. It wasn’t easy to restore balance, and the dysfunction lies in Lebanon, not among the Palestinian leadership.”

He questioned whether late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat could have played the role he did without Lebanese fragmentation.

“Would Abu Ammar have been able to enter the game had there not been contradictions in Lebanon and a lack of central decision-making?”

Commenting on Lebanon’s evolving political environment, Sayegh noted that the change isn’t just in leadership, but in the nature of governance.

“We now have officials elected under conditional agreements — the president's inaugural speech, ministerial statements — and they must commit to implementing Resolution 1701, particularly regarding weapons. There is growing seriousness under international sponsorship in addressing Lebanese sovereignty and security.”

As for dialogue between the presidency and Hezbollah over arms, Sayegh called it foundational.

“This speaks to the very concept of the Lebanese state. As the late Pierre Gemayel said, ‘The path of honor is the smartest and safest route; just be yourself.’ Lebanese interests are defined by the state, represented by President Joseph Aoun, the executive government, and the legislature. Only then can we establish a framework for Lebanese national interests: the extension of state sovereignty across the entire territory, in line with international legitimacy and our constitution.”

“We were the ones who sought international legitimacy and global involvement to end multiple forms of tutelage and occupation. The international community’s demands are not unreasonable, but they are rather in Lebanon’s interest. However, there’s a real risk now that global focus could shift from Lebanon to Syria. The president of the republic has a unique opportunity, and we must act quickly to implement reforms. This window won’t stay open forever," Sayegh concluded.