– the broadening of the “Dialogue table”: Hezbollah had proposed a week ago to broaden the dialogue table by integrating sides that are not represented by the “14” Lebanese politicians.
– the efficiency of the “Dialogue table”: the general focus was on the lack of implementation of the past decisions the dialogue table arrived to.
Some journalist were even glad that the new President had (re)convened it and was presiding over it. They saw that as a sign of change because the former President had been completely excluded from it (at the time, no one saw any problem in that, even Emile Lahoud).
Oddly enough, the two questions that the press was obsessing about were not only legitimate, but they had a very obvious answer, why not broaden the dialogue table to the Parliament? If people were worried about the implementation, why not involve the government in it? In other words, if one wants the political dialogue to be inclusive and efficient, why not restrict it to the state institutions instead of bypassing them?!