Weakness of will

Regarding the problem related to weakness of will.
I’ll repeat it just to make sure we’re talking about the same thing.
You are essentially claiming that when a person sins, he wants to sin, since if it is a matter of surrendering to the instinct, he is forced and does not need repentance. And if it is not forced, the desire to sin outweighs all other desires. In addition, you add, if at the moment of repentance the person wants to change, then this means that he has already changed, and if so, this is a process that seems unnecessary.
I don’t think there is a problem here, and this is for two reasons:
1) First, we can say that the very process of repentance is intended to look at our past and examine where our desires stand and even decide. Let’s put it this way, if the process of repentance did not exist, we would not even try to examine where we stand and it is likely that we would not have changed without the repentance.
2) Inevitably, regardless of the necessity of the process, a person looks at his past and sees a collection of facts. He sees that in all sorts of situations he sinned, that is, his will did not overcome his instinct, or in your terms his hidden desire was to sin. Now, right now, he wants differently. Does this mean that he has changed and does not need the process of repentance? Absolutely not. Where does the confidence come from that he will not sin again? The fact that he wants within his inner mind does not in any way guarantee that he will not sin again. As they say at the end of the High Holy Days prayer, “I should have said again that I would not do it, if only because I had turned away from the evil inclination.” The fulfillment of the repentance process is not meaningless, but rather it is intended to strengthen the desires so that they will overcome the desires the next time. The truth is that during the Temple, when the process was much more external, it is understood that its purpose was to change the desires.
You are right that today the process is much more internal (but there is still the confession). We need to define what this process contributes to, rather than sitting in an armchair and thinking backwards. It is still a different question of defining the process, but in principle the purpose of the process seems quite clear.

I would love to hear if you still claim in light of this that the above problem exists.