In a nutshell

"In addition to the importance of an economic dialogue in itself, it is obvious that the European sponsor has new and profound ideas as well. These ideas that have been abandoned by the economic reformers in Lebanon. Although the Lebanese government have had presented social and development dimensions included in their paper in Paris III, it was dominated by one issue, which is the deteriorating public monetary position.

the European dialogue has passed new horizons towards reform. It tackled "an entire vision for economic and social development" that equally concentrates on economic development, social justice and regional development. On the contrary of the reform program that stressed on development not taking into consideration the limitations of this development to areas and to a lucky segment of citizens.

This also submits us to a political rather than an economic problem, linking between short term and long term worries of the state. This is not what the Europeans need because anyway they were the ones who accepted and supported the current Lebanese cabinet with its political policy, and the economic on e as well. Europe was the main supporter to the cabinet's program that was presented in Paris III. So could the wisdom of the head of the European Union find a way out from this contradiction?"

Bad translation of an article in al hayat by economist Ghassan al Ayyash. In a nutshell:

1. The lebanese government(s) through the ages couldn't have cared less about social equity.
2. The current siniora government epitomizes this trend.
3. The european union wants to teach the lebanese how to care for the poor.
4. But the EU also wants to support the current siniora government.
5. So they will fail- Amen