The resignation of PM Najib Mikati – caused by the objection of Hezbollah, the Amal movement, and the Free Patriotic Movement to the extension of Maj. Gen. Ashraf Rifi's term at the head of the Internal Security Forces General Directorate – revealed the extent of sectarianism within the security institutions in Lebanon. The objection was depicted as being directed against the Sunni sect. Thus, Mikati had nothing left to do but resign, although he had previously successfully confronted a similar storm following the assassination of Maj. Gen. Wissam al-Hassan. Mikati is also the man that the opposition (the current majority) had used to push Saad al-Hariri away from the cabinet. However, Mikati was unable to resist the present storm because he realized that letting Rifi go now that Wissam al-Hassan has been assassinated, and at a time where a number of Lebanese politicians are receiving threats over their positions concerning the Syrian war, represents a security threat that no prime minister can cover or bear. The sectarianism prevailing over the security services does not necessarily mean that the head of this or that service must belong to a specific sect. It rather means that this head is ready to serve the interests and meet the desires of a specific sect thanks to that sect's overwhelming power and the head's desire to keep his job. This is the reason why many sides have been criticizing the army command and the army's intelligence apparatus (whether rightfully or unjustly) and accusing them of siding by one specific party following every incident or security tension. This had been the case in Akkar, Tripoli, and the town of Ersal in the Bekaa, although the commanders of the army and the army intelligence apparatus are Maronites and do not belong to the two conflicting sects in the above mentioned areas. This is also the reason why the extension of Ashraf Rifi's term turned into a problem while the extension of Army Brigadier Edmond Fadel's term raised no issues despite the similarity of the two cases. In the games of power between the Lebanese conflicting sides, the power excesses of this or that party, rather than the laws, actually control the decisions on the ground. The Lebanese security services' leaders are accused of favoritism and siding with one conflicting party against the other. One of the worst aspects of this favoritism is that it exposes the higher national interests to threats. In addition, it causes the citizens to lose faith in the commanders of the security services. The leaders of the national security services in any country must make no distinction among citizens. They must treat them all with the same amount of determination when applying the rules. But when the security officials allow their sectarian and religious favoritism to triumph over the national interests in an extremely sectarian country such as Lebanon, this becomes more dangerous that the sectarianism of the politicians. When security threats are overlooked in order to serve some political motives, this poses a threat to the entire country. The recent Lebanese events including the assassinations carried under the nose of the security services represent a proof to the seriousness of these threats. The political motives of these security services' leaders at that time caused the security to become a victim in favor of these leaders' political interests and external connections most of the time.
