November 11, A Day to Honor, Preserve the Blood Drops of Every Martyr

November 11, 202

By Mohammad Youssef

Every year, at the eleventh of November, we, at the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon observe Hezbollah’s Martyr Day. This day commemorates the anniversary of our great martyrs who had offered the most generous sacrifice when they with all homage and devotion had given their lives to the cause and the country. Their sacred blood and elevated souls have been serving to ensure Lebanon’s liberation, independence, dignity and sovereignty.

What should be really said and read here is that we need to spread the culture of our martyrs. We need to teach their principles and consolidate them within the consciousness of the present generation and the coming generations. The martyrs’ heritage is so great, immense and sublime. This heritage serves as a guarantee that this umma [community] will continue their path and pledge sincerity and loyalty for their faith and sacrifice.

The importance and greatness of the divine victory that was made by our martyrs is not only because of the liberation that was brought to us, but first, because of the exemplary model that it has brought to the whole region. And second, because of the hope that it has implemented within the umma that we are capable of achieving the final victory by eliminating the occupation from all over the region, particularly Palestine.

It is the responsibility of the umma to preserve the heritage of those great martyrs. Had not it been for them, we would not have been able by anyway to enjoy the liberation and live in safety.

Their sacrifices continue to act as safety valves and represent guarantee to the continuation of the path of the resistance, and thus to achieve victory and liberation.

It is shameful that our state is not up to the level of martyrs’ heritage preservation, that is why it is mandatory that people’s initiative should be encouraged and supported.

This kind of official negligence and indifference about the martyrs should be compensated by fostering the initiatives to commemorate their anniversaries. Moreover, it falls upon the shoulder of the leaders of the Axis of Resistance stretching from Gaza to Tehran to initiate a full coordination and invent a complimentary mechanism to ensure the strength of the front’s steadfastness.

The enemies are fighting us in a unified front, they coordinate their efforts and carry out their conspiracies and aggressions against us in very organized and systematic scheme. That is why, the Axis of Resistance with all its different countries, fronts and organizations, should have a comprehensive plan with specified tasks and missions that should be pursued and accomplished by every individual part of this axis.

This is very important to consolidate the deep sense of faith that our martyrs have planted within the umma.

New chapters of glory and victory will surely be always written by the umma as long as it continues to pursue the footsteps of the martyrs and preserve their heritage.

Do Foreign Powers Want a Government in Lebanon Today? هل يريد الخارج حكومة في لبنان اليوم؟

Do Foreign Powers Want a Government in Lebanon Today?

July 28, 2021

Source: Al-Mayadeen

Ghassan Saoud

Reliable sources have confirmed that France wants a government as soon as possible, one that can guarantee three principle things for it.

The primary obstacle that prevented Hariri from forming the government is non-existent for Mikati.

Many wind up believing the lies they tell, ignoring, in terms of forming the Lebanese government (or impeding its formation), all internal and external talk of the Saudis’ refusal of a government presided by Saad Hariri. Instead, they continue to talk of internal obstacles and of swapping ministers here or there, which impeded the formation of a government for nine months.

When studying the odds of formation as far as the PM-designate is concerned, we need to dust off the many lies that have piled over the primary reason that has prevented Hariri from forming the government: France, Egypt, and Turkey have all asked Hariri to go ahead and pushed him in that direction, and at the same time, the President and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) made one concession after the other. It even got to the point where they made ten concessions to help him form; yet, he did not, for the sole reason that he received no Saudi signal that would allow him to do so.

This primary obstacle that has prevented Hariri from forming is non-existent for the new PM-designate. Mikati is not Hariri – the hated in the eyes of Saudi Arabia – and neither is the latter the great power Mikati cannot breathe without. 

Mikati is considerate to Saudi Arabia, tries not to displease it, and would never do anything to provoke it. However, (in contrast to Hariri) he never waited for its signals in his political career. On the other hand, the Kingdom has no veto against “a Mikati government” as it did with Hariri in terms of possible cooperation and finds nothing provoking about Mikati as it did with Hariri, which leads us to say that the first and primary reason that prevented Hariri from forming the government is non-existent today.

The second obstacle that worried Hariri was the removal of subsidies and the severe basket of procedures, which the international community calls reforms, that would have a huge impact on the regular citizen. Most of these procedures are now a fait-accompli, and the Mikati government must work on reducing their severity.

As for the traditional obstacles, such as ministerial quotas and the form of Hezbollah’s representation , these are all minor details that Mikati can find speedy settlements for, should an international decision to form a government exist. These settlements were never a reason to delay the formation or veto it, but they were mere tools used by the local forces waiting for external signals. Most importantly, Mikati is more capable here than anyone else in resolving issues and finding a middle ground that can please everyone, again if there is a definite international decision to form.

The question here is, do foreign powers want a government in Lebanon today? 

Diplomatic and political intel from multiple reliable sources confirms that France wants a government as soon as possible, one that can guarantee three principle things for it:

1- Quick cash for its companies: the French President is late in delivering on the promises he made for major companies benefiting from the “Cedre” finances, which the Lebanese people are borrowing, only for the money to be rerouted to French companies for projects (that no one knows if they are truly necessary). It should be noted that the French Foreign Ministry has for years been reduced to no more than a PR employee looking for projects for French companies.

2- An attempt to close in on Russia’s advances in the region: France and Germany notice that the US is withdrawing from the region and that Russia is investing heavily in Iraqi oil, coupled with its exceptional military presence in Syria and a unique drive towards Lebanon, the first of its kind.

3- Stop the security collapse because of its dangerous political repercussions in terms of Hezbollah’s endurance, the collapse of all other forces, and the loss of the West’s substantial financial investments in the army and security forces.

An additional explanation is necessary here: The French and their international partners do not want a security collapse, but they do want the financial and services collapse to continue, at least until the next parliamentary elections. The US allies’ electoral program consists of only one thing: “hunger, poverty, and humiliation.” They are working hard to pin this on Hezbollah and the FPM so that they can reap its electoral benefits in the FPM’s areas. If they lose this one thing, they have nothing to base their coming elections on. 

The unavailability of raw materials in the Lebanese market, under the direct, close supervision of the Central Bank, will definitely continue, with or without a government. Moreover, not giving depositors their money back, with or without a government, will also continue, and so will the surge in living expenses closely tied to the dollar exchange rate. The cries over the unavailability of medicines need to grow louder now that the pictures of children, the ill, and the elderly have become prime election material.

As such, they want the government to sign deals with them that would allow their companies to get their hands on money for long-term projects that add nothing to people’s lives or living conditions (more useless roads and bridges and dysfunctional treatment plants). They want a government that can put an end to the feeble attempts of some ministers to secure alternative solutions for the unavailability of medicine, electricity, and some foodstuffs. They want a government that can put an end to the Russian ambitions in the port, refineries, and oil. They want a government that would borrow more money to spend on futile projects without any serious work in accounting books, quality of execution, or economic feasibility studies, whilst threatening those who try to impede or modify these dangerous goals behind the formation with silly European sanctions.

In the end, the government will likely be formed: the foreign powers want a government. Hezbollah and its allies (except for the Strong Lebanon Bloc) have all supported designating Mikati and voted for him. The President respects the constitution in terms of cooperating with the person designated by the parliamentary majority, whomever that may be.

Both the President and the FPM will not shoulder the responsibility of standing in the way of all the aforementioned. However, they will prepare for the elections, in their own way, letting the majority that named Mikati shoulder the responsibility for everything his government might do, taking advantage of the opportunity that enables them to finally show that they do not have a parliamentary majority, nor a cabinet majority, nor a power majority. The President and the FPM had some suspicions, but their conviction today is definite and firm: we cannot turn the table, so the least we can do is not sit at it.

هل يريد الخارج حكومة في لبنان اليوم؟

28 تموز 2021

غسان سعود

المعلومات الدبلوماسية والسياسية من مصادر موثوقة متعددة تؤكد أن الفرنسيّ يريد حكومة بأسرع وقت ممكن تضمن له 3 أمور رئيسية.

العقبة الأولى التي منعت الحريري من التشكيل غير موجودة بالنسبة إلى ميقاتي.

غالباً ما ينتهي كثيرون إلى تكذيب الكذبة وتصديقها، فيتجاهلون في موضوع تشكيل الحكومة اللبنانية وتعطيلها مثلاً كلّ ما صدر من الداخل والخارج عن عدم القبول السعودي بتشكيل حكومة برئاسة سعد الحريري، ويواصلون الحديث عن عراقيل داخلية ووزير بالزائد أو بالناقص يمكن أن يوقف تشكيل الحكومة 9 أشهر.

ولا بدّ بالتالي عند البحث في احتمالات التشكيل بالنسبة إلى الرئيس المكلف من نفض الأكاذيب الكثيرة المتراكمة فوق السبب الأول الذي منع الحريري من التشكيل: طلب كلّ من الفرنسي والمصري والتركي من الحريري أن يُشكل، وضغطوا بهذا الاتجاه، في ظل تقديم رئيس الجمهورية و”التيار الوطني الحرّ” التنازل تلو التنازل، حتى بلغت 10 تنازلات لحثِّه على تدوير الزوايا والتشكيل، إلا أنَّه لم يشكّل لسبب وحيد أوحد هو عدم تلقّيه إشارة سعودية تسمح له بالتّشكيل. 

هذه العقبة الأولى التي منعت الحريري من التشكيل غير موجودة بالنسبة إلى الرئيس المكلّف الجديد؛ لا نجيب ميقاتي هو سعد الحريري (المغضوب عليه) بالنسبة إلى السعودية، ولا السعودية هي تلك القوة العظمى التي لا يمكن التنفس من دون إشارة منها بالنسبة إلى ميقاتي. 

ميقاتي يراعي السعودية، ويقف على خاطرها، ولا يمكن أن يفعل من قريب أو بعيد ما من شأنه استفزازها، لكنه (بعكس الحريري) لم ينتظر منها الإشارات يوماً في محطات مسيرته السياسية. في المقابل، إن السعودية لا تضع فيتو على “حكومة برئاسة ميقاتي”، كما كانت تضع فيتو على “حكومة برئاسة الحريري” لجهة التعاون المحتمل، ولا تجد في ميقاتي أي استفزاز لها كما كانت تجد في الحريري، وهو ما يدفع إلى القول إن السبب الأول والرئيسي الذي حال دون تشكيل الحريري للحكومة غير موجود اليوم. 

أما العقبة الثانية التي كانت تُقلق الحريري، فهي رفع الدعم وسلة الإجراءات القاسية بحق المواطنين العاديين، والتي يصفها المجتمع الدوليّ بالإصلاحات، وهي في غالبيتها باتت أمراً واقعاً يفترض بحكومة ميقاتي أن تتمكّن من الحدِّ من قسوته قليلاً. 

أما العقبات التقليدية، كالحصص الوزارية وشكل تمثيل “حزب الله”، فهذه جميعها تفاصيل صغيرة يمكن لميقاتي إيجاد حلول تسووية سريعة لها في حال وجود قرار دولي بالتكليف، وهي لم تكن بالمناسبة يوماً سبباً بحد ذاتها لتأخير حكومة أو تطييرها، إنما مجرد وسائل تعتمدها القوى المحلية في انتظار الإشارات الخارجية. والأهم هنا أن ميقاتي يتمتع أكثر من أي شخص آخر بالقدرة على تدوير الزوايا وإيجاد حلول وسطى ترضي الجميع، إذا كان ثمة قرار دولي حاسم بالتشكيل. 

والمؤكد في هذا السياق أن نجيب ميقاتي ما هو في نهاية الأمر إلا نجيب ميقاتي: إذا أشار إليه المجتمع الدولي ممثلاً بالولايات المتحدة وفرنسا بالتشكيل سيُشكل، وإذا طلب منه المجتمع الدولي التريث سيتريث، وإذا لفتوا نظره إلى وجوب عدم الترشح أو رفض التكليف أو الاعتذار عن التكليف فسيفعل قبل صياح الديك. مصالحه في الخارج، وثرواته الموزعة في عواصم العالم، وعدم امتلاكه وريثاً سياسياً يخشى على مستقبله السياسيّ، يدفعه كله إلى الالتزام الحرفي بتوصيات الخارج، مهما كانت الحالة في الداخل.

وعليه، هل يريد الخارج حكومة في لبنان اليوم؟ المعلومات الدبلوماسية والسياسية من مصادر موثوقة متعددة تؤكد أن الفرنسيّ يريد حكومة بأسرع وقت ممكن تضمن له 3 أمور رئيسية:

1. أموال سريعة لشركاته، بعد تأخّر الرئيس الفرنسي كثيراً في تحقيق وعوده للشركات الكبرى باستفادتها من أموال “سيدر” التي يستدينها الشعب اللبناني لتذهب إلى الشركات الفرنسية من أجل بناء مشاريع (لا أحد يعلم ما إذا كانت ضرورية فعلاً)، مع العلم أنَّ الخارجية الفرنسية تحوّلت منذ سنوات إلى موظف علاقات عامة يبحث عن مشاريع للشركات الفرنسية الكبرى لا أكثر.

2. محاولة مزاحمة معجلة مكررة لروسيا في المنطقة بعدما لاحظ الفرنسي والألماني أن الأميركيّ ينسحب من المنطقة تزامناً مع استثمار روسي كبير في النفط العراقي، وحضور عسكري استثنائي في سوريا، واندفاع جدي أول من نوعه نحو لبنان.

3. إيقاف الانهيار الأمني، نظراً إلى تداعياته السياسية الخطيرة لجهة صمود “حزب الله”، وانهيار جميع الأفرقاء السياسيين الآخرين، وضياع الاستثمارات الغربية الكبيرة في الجيش والقوى الأمنية.

وهنا، لا بدّ من شرح إضافي: لا يريد الفرنسيون وشركاؤهم الدوليون انهياراً أمنياً، لكنهم يريدون استمرار الانهيار المالي والخدماتي، أقلّه حتى موعد الانتخابات النيابية المقبلة، حيث يتألّف البرنامج الانتخابي لحلفاء الولايات المتحدة في لبنان من بند وحيد أوحد هو “الجوع والفقر والذل”، الذي يعملون جاهدين لتحميل “حزب الله” و”التيار الوطني الحر” مسؤولياته، ويذهبون إلى الانتخابات في مناطق نفوذ “التيار” تحديداً على هذا الأساس، وهم إذ يخسرون هذا البند، فإنهم لا يملكون أي عنوان آخر يخوضون الانتخابات على أساسه؛ فانقطاع المواد الأولية من السوق اللبناني بإدارة مباشرة ودقيقة من حاكم مصرف لبنان رياض سلامة سيتواصل حكماً، مع حكومة أو من دون حكومة، وعدم دفع المصارف مستحقات المودعين سيتواصل هو الآخر، مع حكومة أو من دون حكومة، والغلاء المعيشي المربوط بسعر الصرف سيبقى على حالته السيئة. ولا بدّ من أن يتعاظم البكاء من انقطاع الدواء بعدما باتت صور الأطفال والمرضى والمسنين هي المادة الانتخابية الرئيسية. 

وعليه، هم يريدون من الحكومة أن توقّع معهم الاتفاقيات التي تسمح لشركاتهم بالحصول على الأموال للبدء بمشاريع طويلة الأمد لا تؤثر من قريب أو بعيد في حياة المواطنين والظروف القاهرة (المزيد من الطرقات والجسور ومحطات التكرير التي لا تعمل)؛ حكومة تقطع الطريق على المحاولات الخجولة جداً لبعض الوزراء في حكومة تصريف الأعمال لتأمين حلول بديلة لانقطاع الدواء والكهرباء وبعض المواد الغذائية، حكومة تقطع الطريق أيضاً على الطموحات الروسية في المرفأ والمصافي والنفط، حكومة تستدين المزيد من الأموال لصرفها على المزيد من المشاريع العبثية من دون تدقيق جديّ بالحسابات ونوعية التنفيذ والجدوى الاقتصادية، مع تسليط سيف العقوبات الأوروبية السخيفة على كل من يحاول إعاقة التشكيل أو تعديل هذه الأهداف الخبيثة للتشكيل.

وفي النتيجة، احتمال التشكيل كبير جداً: الخارج يريد حكومة. “حزب الله” وحلفاؤه (باستثناء تكتل لبنان القوي) دفعوا باتجاه تكليف ميقاتي وسمّوه. رئيس الجمهورية يحترم الدستور لجهة التعاون مع من كلَّفته الأكثرية النيابية، أياً كان اسمه، وهو و”التيار الوطني الحر” لن يأخذا على عاتقهما من قريب أو بعيد مسؤولية الوقوف بوجه كل ما سبق تعداده، إنما سيستعدون على طريقتهم للانتخابات، تاركين للأكثرية التي كلّفت ميقاتي أن تتحمّل مسؤوليّة كلّ ما يمكن أن تفعله حكومته، بعدما سنحت الفرصة أخيراً لتظهير أنهم لا يملكون أكثرية نيابية، ولا أكثرية وزارية، ولا أكثرية سلطوية. كان لدى رئيس الجمهورية و”التيار الوطني الحرّ” بعض الشكوك، لكنَّ قناعتهما اليوم راسخة وحاسمة: لا قدرة لنا على قلب الطاولة. أقل ما يمكن أن نفعله هو عدم الجلوس عليها.

ماذا يعني تكليف ميقاتي في المقاربة الدوليّة والإقليميّة للبنان؟

ناصر قنديل

–

يقاطع نواب القوات اللبنانيّة تسمية رئيس مكلف لتشكيل الحكومة انطلاقاً من نظرية أن الرئيس ميشال عون هو واجهة لسيطرة حزب الله على البلد وأن أية حكومة هي تكريس لهذه السيطرة، طبعاً لا تنهمك «القوات» في الإجابة عن سؤال حول ما الذي سيتغير مع الانتخابات المقبلة حتى تصير المشاركة ممكنة، لكن السؤال الذي يتجاوز مزحة «القوات»، هو المعنى الذي يحمله تكليف الرئيس نجيب ميقاتي حول المقاربة الدولية الإقليمية للوضع في لبنان، وهي طبعاً عكس مقاربة «القوات» التي تورطت بموقف حتى صارت عبئاً على مرجعيتها الدولية والإقليمية، بمثل ما كان إصرار الرئيس سعد الحريري على الاحتفاظ بالتكليف تسعة شهور وهو يعلم أنه لن يستطيع تذليل الفيتو السعودي، حتى صار مَن يفترض أنهم رعاته من الفرنسيين والأميركيين والمصريين والإماراتيين، يخرجون يدعونه للمسارعة في الاعتذار لأن لا أفق أمامهم لتشكيل حكومة، وما كاد يعتذر حتى شدّدوا على دعوته ليفسح المجال لسواه بمباركة هذا الخارج، ويتولى مساعدته في نيل تكليف مناسب والسير بتأليف مماثل.https://www.al-binaa.com/archives/306558

–

تكليف ميقاتي والحظوظ الكبرى لنجاحه في تأليف حكومة، يحول نظرية دولة حزب الله الى مزحة سمجة، ويظهر الحديث عن هامشية موقع لبنان في النظرة الدولية والإقليمية مزحة مشابهة، فالاجتماع الثلاثي الأميركي الفرنسي السعودي على مستوى وزراء الخارجية، حسم القرار بعدم التساهل مع احتمالات انهيار لبنان، للأسباب ذاتها التي يُصرّح بها قادة كيان الاحتلال، وجوهرها أن الانهيار سيضع لبنان أمام خيارات مصيريّة كبرى أهمها منح المشروعية لقيام حزب الله بترجمة تهديداته باتخاذ إجراءات منفردة لتأمين المحروقات من إيران بالليرة اللبنانية، وما سيليها من فتح الأسواق اللبنانية والسورية على بعضها خصوصاً غذائياً أو دوائياً، ووفقاً لقواعد الاقتصاد فإن مجاري المياه التي تسلك لمرة واحدة ستصير دائمة، وستخلق لها منطقها ومصالحها وتداعياتها، وهذا سيعني أكثر من مجرد ظهور حزب الله كمخلص، لجهة نقل لبنان اقتصادياً من ضفة الى ضفة ستتبعها العروض الصينيّة والروسيّة التي سبق للدبلوماسي الأميركي جيفري فيلتمان أن حذر منها في تعقيبه على انتفاضة 17 تشرين.

–

الأكيد أن الرئيس ميقاتي ما كان ليقبل تولي رئاسة الحكومة لو كان عنده أية اشارة بوجود قرار دولي بدفع الأمور نحو الانهيار، وهو رجل أعمال وصاحب استثمارات خارجية وعلاقات دولية وقال مراراً إنه لن يخاطر باستعداء الخارج الغربي والعربي، بل إنه وضع شرطاً هذه المرة لقبول التكليف وهو أن يسمع تأكيداً من هذا الخارج لتمكينه من التأليف ومن الحصول على مساعدات مالية تمنع الانهيار، فيصير أمراً شكلياً معرفة أيهما قبل طرح ميقاتي لشروط قبول التكليف، وتجاوب الخارج معها، تأكيداً لرفض الانهيار، أم انطلاق هذا الخارج من قرار رفض الانهيار والبحث عن تسمية مناسبة للتكليف رست على اسم الرئيس ميقاتي، لأن المهم هو أن الانهيار لم يعد خياراً غربياً وعربياً، طلباً لإسقاط السقف على رأس حزب الله، ولو لم يكن هذا الخارج مهتماً بمنع الانهيار لما كانت لتقبل شروط ميقاتي، لترؤس حكومة تمتد عملياً لما بعد الانتخابات النيابية وحتى نهاية العهد، وبمساعدته على حلحلة عقد التأليف وتأمين تمويل مناسب لمنع الانهيار، ومساعدته في ضبط إيقاع الكتل بسرعة مناسبة لضمان تسمية بعدد مناسب من النواب، وتغطية وازنة في طائفته.

–

النقاش حول التسمية من موقع إصلاحيّ كما يحاول البعض إثارتها لا تتناسب مع حقيقة الوضع في لبنان. فبالتأكيد لا يشكل طرح اسم السفير السابق نواف سلام بوجه تسمية الرئيس ميقاتي خياراً إصلاحياً لسبب بسيط، هو ان كل النقاش داخل التسميات وخارجها بما في ذلك التيارات التي تلبس لبوس الثورة، حول نص واحد «حكومة تحظى برضا الخارج وثقته تفاوض صندوق النقد الدولي»، فأين الرؤية الإصلاحيّة في ذلك، وطالما يجري التسابق على مَن يُرضي هذا الخارج فدعوا هذا الخارج يقول، وقد قال وسيقول بصوت مرتفع بعد التكليف، فالإصلاح بمفهومه الصحيح يرتبط بتغير بنيوي اقتصادي وسياسي، يقوم على التوجه شرقاً من البوابة السورية، وبالسير بعيداً عن التنظيم الطائفي للدولة والمجتمع، وكلاهما لا يتوافر نصابه في الموازين الحاكمة للحياة السياسية وقواها السائدة.

–

تستطيع المقاومة القول إنها صاحبة الفضل بإسقاط نظرية دفع لبنان نحو الانهيار عبر التلويح بما يمكن أن يحدث إذا اقتراب الانهيار.

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

• ميقاتي رئيساً مكلّفاً بعتبة الـ 70 صوتاً… بعد اجتماعات مع الكتل وترشيح الرؤساء السابقين / مسودة الـ24 وزيراً أساس الحكومة… والوزيران المسيحيان مقابل وزيرَيْ اللقاء التشاوريّ
• التيار يحذّر من «النوايا الخبيثة» وراء التسمية: لا مشاركة ولا ثقة | تكليف ميقاتي اليوم… والتأليف مفتوح؟
• عون لميقاتي: التزام التدقيق الجنائي ولكَ كل التسهيل
• التكليف بلا برنامج: «شيك على بياض»
• «المجتمع الدولي» يكتب البيان الوزاري للحكومة الجديدة: لا قروض قبل تطبيق هذه الشروط

لماذا إيران معادلة ضروريّة في الشرق الأوسط؟

د.وفيق إبراهيم

تتضاعف الأسباب التي تجعل من إيران جزءاً أساسياً من معادلة الدفاع عن الشرق الأوسط. وتؤكد على دورها المحوري والمركزي فيه.

هذا استنتاج واقعيّ بعد زمن عاصف تجتازه الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران منذ انتصار ثورتها في 1979، متواصلاً حتى الآن على شكل صراع إيرانيّ مع كل من الأميركيين والإسرائيليين في سورية والعراق ولبنان، والخليج وسط حصار أميركي مضروب عليها، اقتصادياً وسياسياً، تنتابه اعتداءات عسكرية أميركية وإسرائيلية ومحاولات خنق باستعمال النفوذ الأميركي العالمي لمنع معظم الدول من إقامة علاقات اقتصادية معها، وكل أنواع العلاقات.

ابتدأ هذا الصراع الإيراني ـ الأميركي بعد نجاح الإمام الخميني بإسقاط شاه إيران رأس المعادلة الأميركية في الشرق الأوسط وشرطي الخليج في 1979 .

لقد كان واضحاً أن برنامج عمل هذه الثورة يستهدف النفوذ الأميركي في إيران على قاعدة إسلامية، وبما ان الإسلام دين أممي، فكان طبيعياً ان ينتقل صدى النجاح الإيراني الى الإقليم العربي المجاور وآسيا الوسطى..

وهذه معاقل أميركية اساسية خصوصاً في انحائها التركية والإسرائيلية والمصرية والسعودية ـ الخليجية، وهي كبرى المعاقل في المنطقة.

هناك نقطتان اضافيتان تجب الإشارة اليهما، وهما تزامن الثورة الإيرانية، مع استسلام السادات الرئيس المصري السابق لـ”إسرائيل” في اتفاقية كمب ـ دايفيد 1979، وما أدت إليه من انسحاب مصر من الصراع العربي ـ الإسرائيلي وتحوّلها حليفاً كاملاً لـ”إسرائيل” وآلية أميركية.

أما النقطة الثانية فهي تراجع أهمية الاتحاد السوفياتي بسبب خسارة حرب افغانستان وإصابته بإرهاق بنيوي في حروب الايديولوجيا والتسلح بمواجهة الأميركيين والأوروبيين، ما جعل إيران وحيدة في صراعها مع الأميركيين واعوانهم الشرق الأوسطيين، هؤلاء الذين استعملوا ضدها كل قواهم لإسقاط دولتها، من تحشيد طائفي ومذهبي الى تمويل وتدريب لبعض المجموعات الإيرانية الداخلية وصولاً إلى شنّ حرب عليها بلبوس عراقي من صدام حسين مدعوم أميركياً وخليجياً وأوروبياً وإسرائيلياً، كان المطلوب استئصال إيران الإسلامية للاستفراد بعملية تفتيت الشرق الأوسط على نحو يبقى فيه تحت النفوذ الأميركي ـ الغربي قروناً طويلة.

إن انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي في 1989 وتفرّغ الصين لتطوير امبراطوريتها الاقتصادية جعلا الأميركيين يستعجلون في عملية الأطباق على الشرق الاوسط، مدمّرين العراق منذ تسعينيات القرن الماضي الى أن احتلوه في 2003 بعد سيطرتهم على افغانستان في 2001، فركبوا على عجل مشروع الشرق الأوسط الجديد الذي يهدف إلى إعادة تقسيم دوله إلى كانتونات مذهبية وعرقية تسحب حيويتها ومصادر قواها.

لتنفيذ الخطة، استعمل الأميركيون طريقة الاحتلال المباشر والتدخلات العسكرية ومئات آلاف الإرهابيين، مكلفين بإدارتهم وتأمين ما يحتاجون اليه من سلاح وتدريب واعمال لوجيستية، كلاً من قطر والسعودية وتركيا والإمارات باعتراف وزير قطر السابق حمد بن تميم.

هنا، كانت إيران بمفردها بالمرصاد وسط غياب روسي، وصل إلى حدود التواطؤ في مرحلة الرئيس الروسي السابق يلتسين، فعملت على رعاية حزب الله تسليحاً وتدريباً وتمويلاً وربما أكثر، حتى نجح في تحرير جنوب لبنان رادعاً “إسرائيل” في أكثر من مرحلة.

كما جابهت الثورة الإيرانية المشروع الأميركي في سورية والعراق بدعم مفتوح للدولة السورية والحشد الشعبي في العراق اللذين انتصرا على المنظمات الإرهابية المحشدة لمئات ألاف العناصر.

هؤلاء استعملوا الحدود التركية والأردنية لاحتلال ثلاثة أرباع سورية والعراق، ولولا التحالف الذي جمع حزب الله والحشد الشعبي العراقي والدولة السورية مع إيران، لكان معظم الشرق الاوسط تحت سيطرة داعش والنصرة. هناك ثلاث نقاط اضافية أسهمت بنيوياً في حماية الشرق الاوسط وأولها الدعم الإيراني للقضية الفلسطينية في الداخل المحتل وبين اللاجئين الفلسطينيين في الدول المحيطة.

ها هو قائد منظمة حماس إسماعيل هنية يعترف بأن دعم إيران لمنظمته في غزة أدّى إلى صمود القطاع ومنع انهيار القضية، خصوصاً بعد انهيار سلطة محمود عباس في الضفة الغربية المحتلة، وتخليها عن تحرير فلسطين مقابل كانتون صغير.

أما الثانية فهي اليمن الذي تسانده إيران تسليحاً وتدريباً وتمويلاً في وجه حرب مستمرّة تشنها عليه السعودية والإمارات والاخوان المسلمون بتأييد أميركي ـ غربي إسرائيلي تركي منذ خمس سنوات متواصلة ومستمرة.

هذا اليمن اليوم يسجل النصر تلو الآخر ساحقاً القوات المهاجمة المغطاة بمقاتلات أميركية وإسرائيلية، بما يؤكد هزيمة المشروع الأميركي في اليمن والعراق.

أما النقطة الثالثة فهي في آسيا الوسطى حيث حاول الأميركيون استخدامها للنيل من إيران، فعلى جبهة البلوتش تلك الأقلية الموجودة على الحدود الباكستانية الإيرانية، فقد تمكّن الإيرانيون من إجهاض الاستعمال الأميركي ـ الخليجي لأدوار تخريبية لها داخل إيران بالصدام المباشر معها أو بالتنسيق مع باكستان.

كما أجهضت إيران المشروع السعودي ـ الإماراتي بتحريض طالبان الأفغانية عليها، وتمكنت من بناء خطوط اتصال وتأثير على القيادة الأفغانية، حتى أصبح لطهران نفوذ في باكستان أقوى من الاحتلال الأميركي فيها.

وهو نفوذ يجمع بين علاقات مع قيادات في الدولة الأفغانية ومنظمة طالبان والهزارة الأفغان المقيمين غرب حدودها.

بذلك تكون إيران قد تمكنت من تأمين حدودها مع العراق وتركيا وباكستان وأفغانستان بشكل كامل، ونجحت في دعم الخط اللبناني السوري العراقي اليمني، ما أدّى إلى فشل المشروع الأميركي بشرق أوسط كبير يواليها لقرون مقبلة.

ألا تكفي هذه الأدوار لاعتبار إيران قوة شرق أوسطية أولى، مقابل تراجع وظائف “إسرائيل” ومصر وتركيا والسعودية؟

لذلك فإن تطور الدور الإيراني أنما يتأسس على حساب تراجع النفوذ الأميركي عبر انحسار ادوار وكلائها وحروبها المباشرة.

وهذا يفسر اسباب الجنون الأميركي الذي يريد تفجير الدولية الإيرانية بأي وسيلة ممكنة.

فهل هذا ممكن؟ لم تتمكن أميركا من تحقيق هذه الأمنية في ال41 سنة الماضية، ما يؤكد أن حلف المقاومة ذاهب نحو المزيد من محاصرة النفوذ الأميركي حتى تحرير كامل الشرق الأوسط لمصلحة شعوبه وتاريخه وحضاراته.

Soleimani: The Resistance Flag-Bearer

By Staff

Martyr Lieutenant Qassem Soleimani has always supported the Resistance and attended to its needs. He is an ultimate partner to both, the liberation of Lebanon on May 25^th, 2000 and the defeat of the Wahhabi Daesh [Arabic acronym for “ISIS” / “ISIL”] group form vast parts of the region.  

هل يملك الحريري تقديم تفسير وطني لاستقالته؟

 

ديسمبر 16, 2019

ناصر قنديل

–

رمى الرئيس سعد الحريري في سوق الاستهلاك الإعلامي كلاماً كثيراً خلال شهرين منذ بدء الانتفاضة الشعبية، كما استهلك أسماء كثيرة لمرشحين لرئاسة الحكومة. وشكلت استقالته مشفوعة بقراره صرف النظر عن قبول رئاسة الحكومة، تحت شعار “ليس أنا بل أحد آخر” الحدث الأبرز في قلب هذا السياق. وها هو اليوم يسمّي نفسه لرئاسة الحكومة ويطلب من الحلفاء تسميته ويُجري فريقه الاتصالات لحشد النواب وتجميع الأصوات، وهو يدرك أن الحصول على رقم يزيد عن نصف أعضاء مجلس النواب ناتج عن تسميته من كتلة التنمية والتحرير، التي تخالفه ورئيسها، رئيس مجلس النواب، التصوّر لتشكيل الحكومة، كما خالفته في استقالته، وفي تعامله مع حرق الأسماء التي طرحها في التداول. والنتيجة معلومة أن الرئيس الحريري يسعى للحصول على حجز مقعد الرئيس المكلف رغم معرفته أن دون تأليف الحكومة تفاهم لم يسعَ إليه مع الكتلة التي سينال التسمية المشرّفة بفضلها. وهو يعلم أنه تفاهم سيرفع لو حصل مؤيدي الحكومة إلى ما فوق المئة نائب بانضمام نواب حزب الله والتيار الوطني الحر والكتل الحليفة. فيصير السؤال الذي يعود للبنانيين حق سماع جواب صريح حوله، لماذا استقال الرئيس الحريري؟

–

قال الحريري إنه استقال تلبية لنداء الشارع، وها هو اليوم يسمع عالياً الأصوات التي تندد بعودته، كما يسمع ما جرى في احتفال الميلاد في الجامعة الأميركية مع الرئيس فؤاد السنيورة، ويعلم أن مناورة الترسمل بالاستقالة للعودة لم تفلح رغم نجاحها المؤقت في استعادة بعض الرضى في شارعه، وتلبية بعض الجماعات المشاركة في الحراك سياسياً لطلب تلميع صورته كمستجيب لنداء الحراك. وبحساب التنافس الذي فتحه مع رئيس التيار الوطني الحر جبران باسيل بتظهير باسيل طالب سلطة وظهور الحريري زاهداً بها، تنقلب الصورة مع السعي الحريري المحموم للحصول على تسميتة رغم الثقة باستحالة التأليف بشروط الحريري التي وضعها كطريق خلفي لتبرير العودة إلى رئاسة الحكومة ولم تلقَ القبول، وبالمقابل ظهور باسيل زاهداً بالمشاركة في الحكومة، رابحاً بالنقاط على الحريري، مانحاً السؤال عن تفسير الاستقالة بأسباب وطنية قابلة للإقناع مشروعية، يبدو الحريري عاجزاً عن تلبيتها.

–

قال الحريري في البيان اللاحق للاستقالة الذي أعلن فيه العزوف عن قبول تسميته، إن الشارع قال كلمته وهو يريد المحاسبة وإن في طليعة الذين يجب أن يُحاسَبوا هو رئيس الحكومة، ووضع ذلك سبباً لتفسير عزوفه عن قبول التسمية، فما الذي تغيّر الآن حتى يتخطى الحريري العزوف ويسعى للتسمية، دون أن يُعرَض عليه لبن العصفور، الذي لم يتبقّ منه إلا تسمية مشروطة من كتلة التنمية والتحرير بشكل الحكومة، يقول الحريري إنه لا يرضاها، والمنطقي أن يلجأ أي مسؤول جدي تطرح عليه رئاسة الحكومة إلى رفض التسمية طالما يعلم أن شروط الجزء الوازن منها لا تناسبه لتشكيل الحكومة، وأن النتيجة ستكون لا تأليف، وبدلاً من أن يقول إن على من يسمّيه أن يعلم سلفاً شروطه لتشكيل الحكومة، أن يعترف بكونه يعلم مسبقاً بشروط التسمية ويقبل بالتسمية المشروطة ولو كانت النتيجة عدم قيام حكومة. – بكشف حساب بسيط، سيكون الحريري بالحصيلة رئيساً مكلفاً بتشكيل حكومة لن تبصر النور في شهور، ورئيساً لحكومة تصريف أعمال، لشهور، سيعمل خلالها عبر التشكيلة الحكومية التي قام بفرط عقدها بداعي عدم الرضى، وبعدما أضاع بالاستقالة شهرين من الفوضى والتراجع الاقتصادي والفراغ السياسي، ولن يمنح اللبنانيين جواباً مقنعاً على السؤال المحيّر: مادمت تعلم أنك سترضى بهذه الوضعية، فهل تتفضّل يادولة الرئيس وتشرح لنا أيّهما أفضل، لو بقيت رئيساً لحكومة تعمل بكامل طاقتها وتسمع عندها صوت الشارع بمطالبه وأوجاعه وآماله، أم أن تعمل مع الحكومة نفسها لشهور ولكن في تصريف أعمال، وتبقى رئيساً مكلفاً لشهور أضاع على بلده شهرين بلا فائدة، بل مليئة بالأضرار والخسائر؟

قرار الفوضى

–

لا يستطيع أي مراقب محايد وصف التكرار المبرمج للتصادم العنيف الذي يبادر إليه عدد من المتظاهرين المنظّمين مع القوى الأمنية في وسط بيروت بأنه نتيجة وجود مندسّين أو نتيجة سوء فهم. فمن يرى مشاهد الخوذ البيضاء والكمامات المعدّة لمواجهة الغاز المسيل للدموع ويعرف حكاية الباصات التي يتم نقل المئات عبرها من الشمال إلى وسط بيروت، ودورها في إشعال الصدامات مع أول ساعات الليل، يعرف أن هناك قراراً متخذاً بجعل المرحلة التالية من الحراك تحت عنوان الفوضى والتخريب.

–

سقطت مراحل القدرة على الحشود الضخمة وسقطت القدرة على قطع الطرقات، وسيكون البديل هو التصادم مع القوى الأمنية ومحاولة احتلال مؤسسات رسمية ولاحقاً مصارف ومنشآت استهلاكية وفتحها للنهب والحرق، بالإضافة إلى حرق محال تجارية في وسط بيروت بعد نهبها وحرق سيارات في الشوارع وتشكيل مجموعات منظمة لهذه الغاية. وهذا نموذج مشهود في ساحات الثورات الملوّنة التي بدأت بمئات آلاف الغاضبين وانتهت بمجموعات الشغب والصدامات مع القوى الأمنية.

–

القوى الأمنية تعرف بالأسماء المنظّمين والمدبّرين، ومَن يديرون هذه الجماعات، ومن تلقى منهم تدريبات في الخارج، خصوصاً في ألبانيا وأوكرانيا وكرواتيا على كيفية الاشتباك مع القوى الأمنية وكيفية تمثيل مشاهد وتصويرها لإصابات كاذبة تنتشر على وسائل التواصل وشاشات التلفزة، كما تعلم القوى الأمنية بالأسماء الجماعات المنظمة للمعارضة السورية التي تحضر تحت اسم مجموعات الشمال بالباصات والخوذ البيضاء ليست مجرد اسم لخوذة، بل لجماعة لبنانية سورية إدارتها واحدة.

–

الطريق لمنع الفوضى يستدعي قراراً أمنياً قضائياً بحجم يتخذه المجلس الأعلى للدفاع ويتمّ رسمياً وضع آلية لكيفية التصرف مع هذه الجماعات التي تتقاضى رواتب منتظمة وتعد بالآلاف ورؤوسها المدبّرة بالعشرات، ولم يعد هناك ما هو مستور، وتكفي متابعة بعض البرامج التلفزيونية وإحصاء الأسماء الجوالة على شاشاتها وسحب ملفات سفرها خلال الأعوام الثلاثة الماضية لمعرفة الجواب.

التعليق السياسي

فيديوات مشابهة

مقالات مشابهة

• عون دعا أمير قطر لزيارة لبنان باسيل من الدوحة: نسعى لتكوين حكومة إصلاحية
• المأزق السعودي في اليمن 
النفط مقابل العرش…!
• أقل من 60 صوتاً للحريري… والتأليف شبه مستحيل
• الحريري يُكلّف اليوم بأغلبية منخفضة.. وأمر عمليات بتفجير الشارع معركة تأليف طويلة ستدخِل البلاد في فوضى سياسية ومالية وأمنية
• أزمة لبنان بين الذهب الوطني و«التنك» الأميركي
• مراد: لعدم السماح بتدخّل جهات خارجية بالحراك
• المشهد السياسي اللبناني أمام تحدّيين:
الشراكة في السلطة… أو الشراكة في الفوضى
• وصفة صندوق النقد الدولي: TVA وضريبة على البنزين وزيادة سـعر الكهرباء

لعنة التطبيع: مغامر ضد التاريخ

استنكار علمائي وشعبي لمشاركة المعمم علي الامين في مؤتمر في البحرين بمشاركة حاخام صهيوني

ديسمبر 13, 2019

سماحة العلامة الشيخ عفيف النابلسي

لا شك عندي في أنّ لعبة رفع الأسعار هي التي قادت السيد علي الأمين إلى هذا النشاط الإيحائي المثير الجديد. وأظنّه بارعاً في مسلكه هذا. عاش عمره في الأوهام، يحاول أن يقترب من التاريخ لكن لم يجد في آخر العمر إلا لعنة التطبيع مع كيان يَعبر إلى زواله.

لمشاركته في مؤتمر البحرين أكثر من سبب ودافع، وعادة هو يجد أهميته القصوى في هذا النوع من الاقتحامات الإعلامية والدينية، والتي بالطبع يجد لها مبرراتها في عقله، حيث يجاور فيه السرابُ الحقائقَ.

هل يا سيد علي، ترى أنّ فلسطين لن تعود، والقدس ستغدو يهودية، وأن التاريخ يتراجع أمام خرافات نتنياهو، والدين سيتحوّل إلى أساطير؟

هل يُغريك هذا الملك الذي يُحيط نفسه بهالة المنتصر على شعبه الأعزل، لتقف هذه الوقفة الملعونة؟

إنّ السياسة قد تسمح بتفوّق شخصٍ على شخصٍ، وبلدٍ على بلدٍ، ولكن ليس إلى الأبد.

يمكن لها أن تغيّر في موازين القوى، ولكنها أبداً لن تبدل الباطل إلى حق، والحق إلى باطل.

كنت أتمنى أن تنزع الغشاوة عن عينيك، خصوصاً بعد إنجاز التحرير عام 2000، فتقف من جديد على جادة المقاومة مع أخوةٍ شاركتهم الدرس والتوعية والتبليغ الديني بين بيروت والجنوب.

أتدري، يا سيّد علي، أي منزلقٍ انزلقت إليه بعمامتك السوداء؟

أتدري أي ضرر ألحقته بهذه العمّة التي تمثل في يومنا رمزاً للمقاومة والحق في وجه الصهاينة الإرهابيين العنصريين الدمويين؟

أتدري أي إساءةٍ أسأت للجنوبيين الذين كانوا يرمون الزيت المغلي

 على جنود الاحتلال ويرشقونه بالحجارة ويردّدون مقولة شيخ الشهداء: “الموقف سلاح والمصافحة اعتراف”!

أتدري أي عمّةٍ شوّهت، وأي إيحاءٍ أُريد أن ينتشر من صورتك واقفاً إلى جانب هذا الصهيوني المتطرف؟

أذهلتني صورتك حقاً، في وقت كنا نتمنى أن تعود رفيقاً وأخاً كما كنّا في النجف الأشرف، نرتاح إلى العلم والإيمان الذي لا يُقاس به مجد.

نجح العرب المنبطحون والصهاينة الأشرار في جرّك إلى أهدافهم. زيّنوا لك المناصب والأماكن والولائم وهي من حطام الدنيا. غامروا بك في تاريخهم لكن تاريخ المقاومة لن يتغيّرَ أبداً!

فإن ما توهّمته مخرجاً لعزلتك ما هو في الحقيقة إلا مأزق جديد، ما كنتُ أتمنى أن تقع فيه.

فهذاالكيان الذي فشل أن يأخذ حقا لله في هذه الأرض المقدسة بالعدوان والدم والاحتلال، لن يأخذه بالتطبيع ولو كانت تلك التي تغطي الرأس، بيضاءأو خضراءأ وسوداء!

علي الأمين من الملتقى السنوي السادس لمنتدى تعزيز السلم في أبوظبي

–

فيديوات متعلقة

أبيات للشاعر السوري الدمشقي نزار قباني يتحدث عن سبد المقاومه السيد حسن نصرالله قبل عام(2000)

مواضيع متعلقة

• حزب الله يدين المؤتمر التطبيعي مع العدو الإسرائيلي في البحرين بمشاركة صهيونية بارزة
• السيد علي الأمين الى جانب حاخام “إسرائيل” السابق
• Lebanese Cleric “Shaihk” Saleh Hamed Attends Arab anti-Boycott Meeting in London: ‘Israel’ Has Right to Exist
• Hezbollah MP: Soft War We’re Witnessing Now Equal to July War, We’ll Emerge Victorious
• لمتحف إسرائيلي…. رجل أعمال لبناني الأصل يتبرع بمقتنيات هتلر!
• Haaretz: Hezbollah Commandos Are Back on Border, They’re Armed with the Element of Surprise

 

The Lebanese Color Revolution Is a Defining Moment for the Resistance

By Andrew Korybko

Global Research, November 21, 2019

What originally began as an expression of legitimate outrage at the Mideast country’s dysfunctional government and endemic corruption quickly transformed into a Color Revolution aimed at carrying out regime change in Lebanon through the removal of Hezbollah from its government, the threat of which makes this a defining moment for the Resistance because its supporters’ loyalty is being tested to the core.

Lebanon is undoubtedly in the throes of an ongoing Color Revolution that’s already succeeded in securing the resignation of Prime Minister Hariri in response to large-scale protests against the Mideast country’s dysfunctional government and endemic corruption, sparked as they were by a proposed tax on WhatsApp calls that served as the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. The unrest has been condemned by two key members of the Resistance, Ayatollah Khamenei and Hezbollah leader Nasrallah, who warned against the participants becoming useful idiots in the US, “Israel“, and the GCC’s plot against their homeland. The first-mentioned tweeted that “I recommend those who care in #Iraq and #Lebanon remedy the insecurity and turmoil created in their countries by the U.S., the Zionist regime, some western countries, and the money of some reactionary countries. The people have justifiable demands, but they should know their demands can only be fulfilled within the legal structure and framework of their country. When the legal structure is disrupted in a country, no action can be carried out”, while the second urged his supporters to stay away from the scene of the disturbances and emphasized how much the government’s fall could destabilize their fragile country.

Nevertheless, the situation still remains unresolved despite Hariri’s resignation, and ever-louder demands have made within Lebanon and through some Alt-Media outlets that Hezbollah should leave the government in order to resolve the crisis. The Resistance group, which functions as a socio-political and military force, had nothing to do with the trigger event that sparked this explosion of unrest, though the very fact that it’s now increasingly being targeted for removal from its elected positions in the government proves that there are forces that had intended for this to be the outcome all along when they encouraged the unfolding of events there. It shouldn’t be forgotten that US Secretary of State Pompeo ominously hinted at an ultimatum being made to Lebanon during his visit there in March when he thundered that “Lebanon faces a choice; bravely move forward as an independent and proud nation or allow the dark ambitions of Iran and Hezbollah to dictate your future”, which strongly suggests that the US at the very least tacitly has a hand in guiding developments to that aforementioned end. What’s so disturbing about the latest narrative twist is that it appears to have the support of a critical mass of protesters, including those who have outwardly supported Hezbollah prior to this moment but evidently harbored deep feelings of antipathy towards it that are only now being publicly expressed through this “anti-corruption” “populist” pretext.

It’s impossible to accurately generalize every one of these supposed Resistance supporters feels this way, though sharing some plausible explanations could nevertheless still help to make sense of this previously unexpected trend. Hezbollah’s military might is appreciated by most patriotic Lebanese after it liberated their country from “Israeli” occupation in 2000 and prevented a second such occupation in 2006, though some look suspiciously upon its social activities because they wrongly interpret them through a sectarian lense. In addition, the group’s involvement in fighting terrorism in Syria side-by-side with the IRGC reinforced the weaponzied fake news perception among some that Hezbollah is just an “Iranian proxy”. These growing doubts about the group’s long-term strategic intentions might not have been able to be publicly expressed in such a direct way without risk of receiving accusations that the person voicing such views is unpatriotic, hence why they may have hitherto been outwardly supportive of Hezbollah despite internally cultivating hatred towards the organization and waiting for the “opportune” moment to express it in a way that couldn’t be as easily framed as part of a self-serving sectarian agenda on their part. That chance arrived when the proposed WhatsApp tax served as the catalyst for large-scale protests against the government as a whole, during which time it became “acceptable” among some to attack Hezbollah for its supposedly “corrupt” alliance with certain political forces.

It should be said at this point that Hezbollah is a responsible stakeholder in Lebanon’s stability and therefore understands the need to make tactical decisions in pursuit of the larger strategic end of preventing external forces from driving wedges between the country’s cosmopolitan socio-religious groups, hence why it’s entered into the certain political partnerships that it’s had out of its interest in working within the legal system to carry out responsible reforms to the best of its ability. These noble intentions have been deliberately misportrayed by those who have wanted to remove Hezbollah from the government for some time already as part of their never-ending campaign to delegitimize it, after which they believe that it’ll become more susceptible to the joint US-“Israeli”-GCC Hybrid War against it. A similar modus operandi is being pursued in nearby Iraq, where Resistance forces also hold considerable sway within the government but are plagued by the same accusations of allying themselves with corrupt figures, which is being used by agenda-driven forces to misportray them as “guilty by association” despite the reason for these tactical partnerships being the same as Hezbollah’s. Even worse, the similar events in both countries are being described by Mainstream Media as a “new Arab Spring“.

There’s no question at this point that legitimate anti-corruption protests have been hijacked for regime change ends aimed at removing Resistance forces from power in those countries, especially since both the Ayatollah and Nasrallah touched upon this in their recent statements on this topic, though there are still those who outwardly profess to support the Resistance’s broader mission but refuse to stop participating in the unrest there. This represents a true moment of reckoning for the Resistance that will ultimately separate its true supporters who have faith in this movement’s leaders from the opportunistically fraudulent ones who betrayed the cause as soon as they “conveniently” saw the “publicly plausible pretext” to do so. It doesn’t help any either that many Alt-Media outlets that used to have Resistance-friendly editorial lines are portraying the protests in a positive light despite the Iranian and Hezbollah leaders warning against the credible risk that they could spiral out of control and end up advancing the strategic goals of the Resistance’s enemies, which further confuses the audience at large who can’t countenance how or why this is happening, preferring instead to put their faith in those media forces instead of the leaders whose movement they had previously professed to support. As the situation remains unresolved, it’s anyone’s guess what will happen next, but it certainly doesn’t look good.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Is Lebanon Next On The Chopping Block? Recent Saudi, GCC, Turk Moves Suggest That It Is

The original source of this article is Global Research

Copyright © Andrew Korybko, Global Research, 2019

Related Articles

• Lebanon and Iraq Protesters, the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia Are Fed Up with Iran
• Is There a Color Revolution in the Making in Lebanon?
• Can the US Starve Hezbollah of Funds?

What Is A Sovereign Government?

By Staff

Beirut – In his speech on the commemoration of Martyr’s Day, Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah urged the formation of a government which takes into consideration the Lebanese interests and is independent from the US. 

 

“The Lost Lesson from the Arab-Israeli Struggle” by Dr. Rizk Elias…

Source

Tuesday, 05 November 2019

==The October Liberation War confirmed the validity of the theory that the late President Hafez al-Assad adopted in preparing for the war…

==President Bashar al-Assad has placed the issue of the liberation of Golan at the forefront of the national priorities.

A 525 page long and eight chapter book titled “The Lost Lesson from the Arab-Israeli Struggle, written by Dr. Rizk Elias” has been recently published by the Syrian Ministry of Culture – the Syrian General Book Organization.

Through his field participation in the Arab-Israeli wars and his history as an army officer, the author tries to summarize the events of this struggle during the last century, using the wars that took place from 1948 to 1982 to explain lessons of both sides in each of these wars, as well as the reasons for the failure of the peace process which began in Madrid in 1991, stressing that the lesson of a just and comprehensive peace is still missing. For those reasons, Dr. Rizk Elias’ book could be considered as an important source to politicians and military men who are interested in the Arab-Israeli struggle from its inception to date. The writer dedicated his book to all those who have worked and still work to achieve a just and comprehensive peace and to find an end to the Arab-Israeli struggle, which has passed over a century.

Introduction:

Introducing his book which includes all about the Arab-Israeli wars and the negotiations between Syria and Israel, Dr. Rizk Elias said that he tries to show the influence of geography and politics in the decisions of wars and peace, the impact of the process of building power and the theory of its use, as well as the military balance between the two sides and the attempts of both  parties to evaluate the results of each round of  the conflict and to learn lessons from it in order to prepare for a coming war or to resort to a peaceful settlement. Therefore, “I resorted in the first chapter of the book to describe the  geographical and topographical characterizations of the theater of the war, while in the subsequent chapters, I tried to deal with  the successive wars which took place from 1948 to  1982” Dr. Elias added. In the last chapter, I talked about the peace process between Syria and Israel, which began at the Madrid conference in 1991 and the reasons for its failure, only to help the reader to form a comprehensive idea about the Arab-Israeli struggle which has not been ended yet, neither in war or peace. “My previous position as a staff officer in the General Command of the Syrian Army and Armed Forces, and then an adviser to the Minister of Defense as well as my participations in the Arab – Israeli wars from the 1967 war and my experience as a teacher of these subjects at the Higher Military Academy in Damascus, and my contribution as a member of the peace process between Syria and Syria have all helped me in the delicate job to write this book” he said.

Dr. Elias confirmed that the Zionist ideology which was based on immigration and settlement has begun to decline after the October war, the 1973 Lebanon war, the Palestinian uprising in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and the liberation of the Lebanese resistance to south Lebanon in 2000 and the Second Lebanon War in 2006. Israel was forced to dismantle its settlements in the Sinai and the Gaza Strip. It also was forced to withdraw its forces from Lebanon after its arrival to the outskirts of Beirut as well as that Its scheme to establish a Palestinian state in Jordan has finally fell. The Israelis have resorted during the past few years to the idea of strategic defense and to build fortified walls in Gaza, the West Bank, the Lebanese borders and the occupied Golan Heights.

According to the writer, «Israel» now believes that arming the forces of the resistance axis consisting of Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and Palestinian organizations poses an existential danger to its existence, because such an armament can cause precise injuries in all vital targets in the depth of Israel as it has the powers and the means that enable them to break in through the barriers and walls built by Israel along the borders.

Chapters of the book:

The first chapter deals with some of the geographical characteristics of the theater of war in Palestine and the occupied Syrian Golan Heights including the boundaries of the Mandate and the armistice lines, and the topographical landmarks in Palestine and the Syrian Golan Heights.

The second chapter talks about the Arab-Israeli war in 1948, while the third talks about the tripartite aggression «British, French and Israeli» on Egypt in 1956.  In the fourth chapter, the writer explained all about the Israeli aggression against Egypt, Jordan and Syria in 1967. In the fifth chapter, the writer discussed the process that occurred in Syria to rebuild the Syrian armed forces before the liberation 1973 war and the first war of attrition (1968-1973).

In the sixth chapter, the writer talks about the October liberation war on the Syrian and Egyptian fronts, and the second war of attrition on the Syrian front (1973-1974), while Chapter seven deals with Syria’s approach to build a strategic balance with Israel and to confront the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. The last chapter of the book deals with the peace process between Syria and Israel and the reasons for its failure.

The mission of liberation:

In the fifth chapter, the author talks about the features of the theory of the late President Hafez al-Assad to liberate the occupied Golan Heights and the rest of other occupied Arab territories.

“Anyone who reads the speech of president Hafez al-Assad at the tenth extraordinary National Congress of the Arab Socialist Baath Party, which was held in early November 1970, touches the concern he had had to liberate the territories occupied by Israel in its aggression in 1967; a concern that remained his concern for a long time.” The writer said. People who were close to him knew that on the anniversary of the occupation of the Golan, which occurs on the tenth of June of each year, president Assad devoted all his day to evaluate what Syria had achieved on the road to liberate the Golan.

Also in his speech at the conference which was held several days before the establishment of the Corrective Movement in 1970, president Hafez al-Assad laid out his vision on how to liberate the Golan and the occupied Arab territories. He had worked according to this vision for thirty years until his death, that vision which is still valid to rationalize our steps in the struggle to liberate our territoriy.

The writer reviewed the clear and integrated vision of the late president Hafez al-Assad, explaining how it was interrelated in the domestic, Arab and international politics and also in the field of the battle for the accomplishment of the liberation mission.

The October War of Liberation

After examining the details of the October liberation war, Dr. Rizk Elias listed in the sixth chapter the most important positive results of this war in 1973, including the moral victory not only of the fighters who participated in it, but also of the Arab Man who suffered frustration as a result of the June 1967 defeat. To liberate part of the occupied territories, this war showed the importance of Arab solidarity and its effectiveness and forced the enemy to treat the Palestinian issue as an issue of people rather than refugees. The October war also caused a major jolt in the psycho-political structure of the Israeli society, and strengthened the position of Arabs in the field of the international political action.

This war has also confirmed through practical experience the validity of the theory on which President Hafez al-Assad had based to prepare for the war and to conduct it.  It proved that Arab soldiers had appeared during the battle in their true image; brave and able to use modern war machines, love their nation and sacrifice for it, showing moral energy in the war. There was scientific evidence of unity of the Arab nation in the will, feelings, desires, hopes and goals, and its enormous military, human and economic energy capable of achieving victory if used correctly. There was great importance of incorporating the political and military battles. Late President Hafez al-Assad stressed that fact by saying: « we cannot, in any way, separate our political battle from our military battle, because the first came as a result of the second, and is associated with it. “We have achieved with our steadfastness in the military battle glorious results which shattered all the myths woven by the enemy around him” he concluded. “We are also able with steadfastness, self-confidence and strong cohesion at the home front, along with our solid cohesion with the Arab nation, to achieve success in the political battle either to achieve the goals for which we fought, or by saying a big “NO” if we were faced by manipulation or evasive or evasion of the implementation of the Security Council resolution as we understand. »

The Peace Process:

Dr. Rizk Elias revealed in Chapter eight which talks about the “peace process and the reasons for its failure”, the statement of late President Hafez al-Assad on 9 September 1992 in a meeting with a delegation of citizens of the Golan who came to visit Damascus: «In the past we have said that we want peace, and today we are saying that we want a comprehensive peace that preserves our dignity and is accepted by our people, and does not require any retreat from our national rights, and will in no way harm the dignity and pride of our nation. If others agree, this kind of peace can then be achieved.”

On August 1, 1993, on the occasion of the Syrian Arab Army Day, the late President al-Assad gave a clear indication of how serious Syria is in its attempts to achieve peace: “We are in the battle of peace and we are fighting it as seriously as we are in the military wars.

The book also reviewed President Bashar al-Assad’s position on the peace process. The president placed the question of the occupied land in the Golan Heights at the forefront of the national priorities. “Our main concern is to liberate our occupied land. “Land and sovereignty are an issue of dignity” he said. We have been clear in our positions since the beginning of the peace process in Madrid in 1991, contrary to the Israeli policy, which was characterized by fluctuation at times, and putting obstacles”, president Bashar al-Assad said in his Constitutional oath speech in front of the People’s Assembly (the parliament) on July, 17, 2000.

In the same speech, President al-Assad stressed that we must work as quickly as possible to liberate the Golan without compromising the land. “We are in a hurry for peace because it is our choice, and the Syrian Arab people a peace-loving people throughout history, but we are not ready, by any means, to abandon any part of our land, or to let our sovereignty to be touched » he said.

President al-Assad called on the United States of America to play a neutral, impartial and effective role to implement the resolutions of international legitimacy. In a later speech, President Bashar al-Assad called on Russia and the European Union to play a more active role.

In another speech, President al-Assad referred to the peace-loving nature of the Syrian people by saying: Peace is an ideology for the Syrian people and not just a political act. If you go back to the history of Syria for hundreds and thousands of years, you will find that it has no history of aggression. The real struggle between us and the Israelis is between those who start wars and those who prevent it ».

President al-Assad also explained the contrast between the terms “Syria’s conditions” and “Syria’s rights” by saying: “There is no such a thing as” Syria’s conditions” but there is something called” “Syria’s rights”. “There are international conditions that correspond to the Syrian and Arab rights in general. Israel stands in the face of restoration of the Syrian rights and, at the same time, in the face of the international conditions ».

Referring to Syria’s strategy of steadfastness and liberation and its ability to confront the Israeli aggression, President al-Assad said: «Syria does not seek to ignite the war, but if imposed a war on Syria, will defend itself, and is able to do so. It may be able for anyone to control the beginning of the war, but he will never be able to control its end or its results. The Arab side, and we are at the forefront of it, who possess the decision to end the war; how, where and what how it ends ».

The decisions of the tenth regional conference of the Arab Socialist Baath Party which was held between June 6 and 9, 2005, underlined the peaceful approach taken by the President in his official statements and positions. The first recommendation taken by that conference stressed the need of liberating the occupied Syrian Golan to the line of the fourth of June 1967».

Also, The Charter of the National Progressive Front issued on 12 October 2004 affirmed the commitment of the Front to a peaceful approach in its international policy according to the principles of the international legitimacy and the UN decisions relating to the Arab – Israeli struggle on the basis of justice, rights, international law and finding peaceful resolutions to conflicts.»

 

Adapted by Haifaa Mafalani

The full text of Khamenei.ir’s interview with Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah

Source

October 03, 2019

Masseer Especial Journal, which belongs to Khamenei.ir, has conducted an interview with Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary-General of Lebanon’s Hezbollah, which is published for the first time. The following is part one of the interview:

I would like to start the interview by asking you how the situation in the region was, at the time when the Islamic Revolution became victorious. How was the situation in the West Asian region? Particularly given that one of the important dimensions of the Islamic Revolution is its regional and international implications, what changes occurred in the regional equations following the Islamic Revolution and what events have we witnessed? With the Islamic Revolution gaining victory, what took place in the region in general and in Lebanon in particular?

In the name of God the Beneficent, the Merciful. First, I would like to welcome you. If we go back to the past and observe the developments, we will find that, very shortly before the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, a very significant incident took place in the region, namely the withdrawal of the Arab Republic of Egypt from the Arab-Israeli conflict and the signing of the Camp David Treaty. This event—due to the important and effective role of Egypt in the aforementioned conflict—had a very dangerous impact on the region as well as on the Arab-Israeli confrontation over the issue of Palestine and the future of Palestine.

After that incident, in the first place, it seemed that the confrontation was going on largely in favor of Israel. This was mainly because other Arab countries and Palestinian resistance groups were not able to confront major powers without the help of Egypt at that time. So, firstly, the occurrence of such an incident led to the emergence of a deep division among Arab countries.

Secondly, you remember that at the time, there was a US-led Western bloc opposing the USSR. Therefore, there existed a split in our region: the gap between the countries associated with the Soviet Union—that is, the Eastern bloc—and the countries depending on the United States, the Western bloc. Accordingly, we could see a deep divide among the Arab countries in the region, and this gap had devastating consequences for the nations and of course, also had an impact on the Arab-Israeli conflict. At the time, the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States essentially affected our region and its developments.

In the case of Lebanon, it should be said that Lebanon is also part of this region, and thus, it has been severely affected by its developments, including Israeli actions, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and the divisions in the region. At that time, Lebanon faced domestic problems as well, and was suffering from the civil war. The Israeli enemy occupied parts of southern Lebanon in 1978, that is one year before the Islamic Revolution, and then created a security zone called the “border strip” on the Lebanese-Palestinian borders. The Israeli enemy, through this security zone, continued its daily aggression against Lebanon, its cities, villages and people. Indeed, we faced a very serious problem: the Israeli occupation in parts of southern Lebanon and its daily aggressions. Israeli warplanes and their artillery bombed southern Lebanon; abduction operations and multiple explosions by the Zionist regime continued in its worst form, and people were displaced following these brutal acts. These events also took place between 1977 and 1979; that is, not long before the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

Did they use the Palestinian presence in Lebanon as the pretext?

Yes; the Israelis objected the existence of Palestinian resistance and operations carried out by Palestinians. However, this was just an excuse because Israeli’s runs of aggressions in southern Lebanon began in 1948, when Palestinian resistance was not present in southern Lebanon. Palestinian resistance set base in southern Lebanon in the late 60s and early 1970s, especially after the events in Jordan and the arrival of Palestinian groups from Jordan in Lebanon.

It was in those circumstances that the Islamic Revolution of Iran gained victory. This victory came at a time when an atmosphere of despair was dominant in the Arab and Muslim world and concern for the future was widespread. Egypt’s withdrawal from the Arab-Israeli conflict and the signature of the Camp David Treaty, the imposition of a humiliating political process on the Palestinians and Arabs, as well as the weakness of the rulers of the Arab countries all provoked the despair, grief, hopelessness, disappointment, and worry for the future at that time. Therefore, the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran in such an environment, revived the lost hopes in the region and among the nations to begin with, particularly the Palestinian and Lebanese people.

This victory (the victory of the Islamic Revolution) also brought about the resurgence of the hopes of a nation that had been cornered by the existence of Israel. Because the position of Imam Khomeini (Q.S. – May his spirit be blessed) regarding the Zionist project, the necessity of the liberation of Palestine, and standing shoulder to shoulder with Palestinian resistance groups was clear from the beginning. Imam Khomeini (r.a) believed in supporting the people of Palestine, liberating every inch of the land, and obliteration of the Israeli entity as a usurping regime in the region. Therefore, the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran created a growing hope for the future and increased a hundred fold the moral and motivation of the supporters of the resistance as well as the resistance groups in the region.

The victory of the Islamic Revolution also created a balance of power in the region. Egypt fled the fight against Israel and the Islamic Republic of Iran entered. Therefore, the balance of power in the Arab-Israeli conflict was restored, and for this reason, the resistance project in the region entered a new historical phase. This was the starting point for the Islamic movement and jihad in the Arab and Muslim world and among Shi’as and Sunnis alike.

Imam Khomeini (Q.S.) introduced several mottos regarding various subjects such as the question of Palestine, Islamic unity, Resistance, facing and confronting the United States of America, stability and sustainability, trust and confidence of nations in God and in themselves, revival of faith in one’s own power when confronting the arrogant powers and towards the realization of victory. Undoubtedly, these mottos had a very positive and direct impact on the situation in the region at that time.

In addition to the general atmosphere created by the Islamic Revolution and the new spirit that Imam [Khomeini (r.a)] inspired in the hearts of the people of the region, resurrecting the resistance, what memory do you specifically have of Imam Khomeini and his stances regarding the resistance in Lebanon and by Hezbollah?

Yes, in the year 1982. If we want to talk about it, we should consider the liberation of Khorramshahr in Iran. The Israelis were deeply concerned about the war between Iran and Iraq, or Saddam’s imposed war against Iran. For this reason, after the liberation of Khorramshahr, the Israelis decided to attack Lebanon. Of course, this action had its own root causes, and there was a profound connection between the victories in the Iranian front and the Israeli aggression against Lebanon. This was how the Israelis entered Lebanon, Beqaa region, Mount Lebanon Governorate, and Beirut suburbs. At that time, a group of scholars, brothers and fighters had decided to form the Islamic Resistance and establish the Islamic-Jihadi foundation of [the movement of] Resistance, corresponding to the aftermath of Israeli invasion.

By then, Israel had not penetrated in all of Lebanon and had only reached about half of Lebanon—that is 40% of Lebanon’s total area. 100,000 Israeli soldiers entered Lebanon. They brought with them American, French, English and Italian multinational forces on the pretext of maintaining peace. Meanwhile, there were militias in Lebanon who were involved with and collaborated with the Israelis. By pointing to these facts, I mean to picture how very, very bad the situation was at that time.

Subsequently, a group of scholars (ulema), believers, and Mujahid brothers decided to launch a new movement for Jihad in the name of Islamic Resistance, which shortly afterwards was renamed “Hezbollah.” The formation of this front coincided with the decision of Imam Khomeini (Q.S.) to send Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) forces to Syria and Lebanon to oppose and confront Israeli aggression. Initially, the intention was for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps troops to fight alongside Syrian forces as well as Lebanese and Palestinian resistance groups. But after some time the scope of Israeli attacks became limited, so this was no longer a classic battlefield, and the need for resistance operations by popular groups was felt more than ever.

It was at that time that Imam Khomeini (QS) replaced the mission of direct confrontation by the IRGC and Iranian forces, who had come to Syria and Lebanon, by offering help and providing military training to Lebanese youth, so that they—i.e. the Lebanese youth themselves—would be able to deal with the occupiers and carry out resistance operations. This is the first [of Imam Khomeini’s positions].

Therefore, the mission of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces in Syria, as well as the Lebanese Beqaa region—in Baalbek, Hermel and Janta, that is, where there were training bases—was changed to providing military training to the Lebanese youth. They taught the Lebanese youths the methods of warfare and provided them with logistic support. The mere presence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Lebanon at that time gave the Lebanese youth and Resistance groups a purpose and a high spirit to stand up to Israel.

As I said earlier, it was decided that a large group would be formed and nine representatives were selected on behalf of the pro-resistance brothers, including the martyr Sayyid Abbas al Moussawi (r.a), to pursue this important issue. Naturally, I was not among these nine people, because at that time I was young, about 22 or 23 years old. These 9 people travelled to Iran and met with the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran. They also had a meeting with Imam Khomeini (QS). During their meeting with Imam Khomeini (r.a), while offering him a report on the latest developments in Lebanon and the region, they presented their proposal for the formation of an Islamic resistance front. They said to Imam Khomeini (r.a): “We believe in your guidance, your authority (wilayah) and your leadership. Tell us what we need to do.”

In return, Imam Khomeini (r.a) insisted that their duty was to resist and stand against the enemy in full force, even if you have limited means and are in smaller numbers. This is while Hezbollah had a smaller number of members then. He said: “Start from scratch: trust in the Almighty God, and do not wait for anyone in the world to help you. Rely on yourself and know that God helps you. I see you victorious.” It was an amazing thing. Imam Khomeini (r.a) regarded this path as auspicious, and thus, the meeting during which our brothers met with him, laid the foundation stone for the formation of the Islamic resistance front, under the auspicious title of ‘Hezbollah’, in Lebanon.

At that time, our brothers told Imam: “We believe in your guidance, authority and leadership, but in any case, you are very busy, and you are at an old age, and we cannot allow ourselves to continuously disturb you about different issues and problems. For this reason, we are asking you to name a representative to whom we can refer on various issues.” Then he introduced Imam Khamenei (May God continue his oversight), who was the president at the time, and said: “Mr. Khamenei is my representative.” Consequently, the relationship between Hezbollah and Ayatollah Khamenei (May God protect him) began from the very early hours of the establishment and foundation of this group; we were always in contact with him in different times, we met with him frequently and gave him reports on the latest developments and he always praised the resistance.

I remember the issue of several Hezbollah martyrdom-seeking members. You know that the first experience of a martyrdom-seeking operation took place in Lebanon, and was conducted by our brothers. The brothers sent a video file—before publicizing it in the media—containing oral testaments of those fighters seeking martyrdom, who had carried out a major martyrdom operation in Lebanon, and had shaken the invaders to their core. This video was played for Imam Khomeini, and he watched it and discussed it. The testaments were very beautiful and full of enthusiasm, mysticism and love. After watching the testaments, Imam Khomeini (r.a) said: “These are young [chivalrous] people. All of them were young.” He then said: “These are the true mystics.” The fact is that the Imam was strongly affected by the testaments.

Imam Khomeini’s collaboration, support for, and attention to the resistance and Hezbollah of Lebanon continued until the very last day of his auspicious life. I remember about one or two months before the passing of Imam Khomeini (r.a), when he was ill and rarely met with domestic officials and even less with foreign officials, I went to Iran as a member and an executive official of the Hezbollah council and met with Ayatollah Khamenei, late Ayatollah Rafsanjani and other Iranian officials, and asked if I could have a meeting with Imam Khomeini. I was told that he is ill and does not meet with anyone. I asked them to try and they agreed to do their best. Then I went to the office of Imam Khomeini (r.a) and put in a request for an appointment. At the time, one of our friends among Imam Khomeini’s household, Sheikh Rahimian (May God protect him)—who paid particular attention to the Lebanese—shared the matter with the late Sayed Ahmad Khomeini (r.a), and I was informed on the second day to get ready for a meeting. Naturally, we were all surprised. I went to meet Imam Khomeini (r.a) and nobody else was there, not even Sayed Ahmad; not even any of the Foreign Ministry’s officials or IRGC staff, who would usually attend the meetings, were there. Sheikh Rahimian accompanied me to Imam’s room but then went and left me alone with Imam. I was overwhelmed and awed by his presence.

Imam Khomeini was sitting on a high chair and I sat down on the floor. Awestruck by his grandeur, I could not say a word. Imam asked me to get closer. I went closer and sat next to him. We spoke and I handed to him a letter I had brought with me. Imam answered the questions I had shared with him regarding the developments of that time in Lebanon, then smiled and said: “Tell all our brothers not to worry. My brothers and I in the Islamic Republic of Iran are all with you. We will always be with you “. This was my last meeting with Imam Khomeini (r.a).

 I wish we had time to hear more extensively from you about that time. Thanks again for the opportunity you gave us. You said that, Hezbollah was formed and began its activities during a very difficult time. You correctly mentioned that Iran itself was dealing with an invasion of its borders. In Lebanon, the Zionist regime periodically attacked the people and committed murder and plunder, and in any case, Hezbollah began its work in such a difficult situation. You also said that Imam Khomeini referred you to Ayatollah Khamenei to be in touch with him. I would like to ask you to point out some of the important pieces of advice that Ayatollah Khamenei (May God continue his oversight) gave you after the passing of Imam Khomeini, and let us know the measures that he guided you to take during his presidency. What we mean to make clear, when we reach the time of Imam Khamenei’s leadership, is the history of why Hezbollah was very pleased and reassured with his election as the leader of the Islamic Republic. What has happened that made you feel that way?

From the very first moment of our relationship with Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei, I call him, in my own words, Mr. Leader (السید القائد). So let me use the same word, the Leader, to refer to him. My brothers had a Hezbollah Council within Hezbollah, with 7-10 members—changing at each stage. The members of this council always met with the Leader during his presidency. What I wish to say about that time, almost 7 years of Ayatollah Khamenei’s presidency before the passing of Imam Khomeini…

Was there a specific person to go between Hezbollah and Ayatollah Khamenei?

I get back to this point. The fact is that the Leader particularly valued Lebanese groups and provided them with sufficient time. I remember meetings that sometimes lasted for 2, 3 or even 4 hours. He listened carefully to what we had to say. Our friends and brothers also described the issues for him in details. As you know, at the time, they were not all on the same wavelength, and our brothers had different views. The Leader listened to all the comments, views, and opinions. Naturally, there was no Arabic language problem either, because he was fluent in Arabic and spoke it well. He spoke Arabic beautifully.

Nonetheless, he preferred to be accompanied by an Arabic translator; He usually spoke in Persian, but had no need for translation when the Lebanese spoke in Arabic. His full mastery of Arabic language contributed greatly to his deep understanding of the problems and the views of our Lebanese brothers. The important point is that, despite having full authority from Imam Khomeini, the Leader tried to play the role of a guide, and helped us make the decisions ourselves. I always remember that in every meeting, at that time and after being appointed as the Leader, whenever he wanted to comment, he would indicate ‘my suggestion is’. For example, he had reached a conclusion, but he would ask us to “sit down, consult with each other, and make the correct decision.

Indeed, the Leader at that critical stage managed to play an important role guiding the group in cultivating Hezbollah leaders and commanders intellectually, scientifically, and mentally, so that our brothers could make decisions confidently and by relying on their own capabilities even during the most difficult situations. He would make comments but he would refer to a Persian proverb that said: the expediency of a country is recognized by its owners. His Eminence would say: you are from Lebanon and thus have a better command of your affairs. We can only make a few comments and you can apply them, but it is you who will make the final decision. Do not wait for anyone to make decisions on your behalf. Therefore, the role of the Leader in the training, growth and swift development of Hezbollah was very significant.

In the first years, our brothers went to Iran two or three times a year—that is, they would travel to Iran about every 6 months—to learn about the Iranian officials’ viewpoints regarding the developments in the region, as at that time, developments in the region were taking place very rapidly. Naturally, at that time there was also the war; the 8-year imposed war against Iran and its implications for the region. Therefore, our brothers constantly needed to exchange information, consult with and get support from Iran. At that time, if our brothers were faced with an immediate and urgent problem, they would send me to Iran. Because I was younger than the others, and there was no systematic protection, or anything similar in place for me. I was alone, carrying a bag with me. This means that my trips to Iran, since I was not well known, were not complicated and there was no security threat around me.

On the other hand, I was acquainted with Persian language more than my other brothers in Hezbollah, and for this reason, they preferred me to travel to Iran. From the very beginning, there was compassion and affection between me and my Iranian brothers. My brothers in Hezbollah would tell me: you like Iranians and the Iranians like you too. So you should travel to Iran. On behalf of my brothers in Lebanon, I met with the Leader for one to two hours. Even when all issues had been discussed and I was prepared to leave, he would say: “Why are you in a hurry? Stay, and if there’s anything left, let’s discuss it”. That stage was very important for Hezbollah, because Hezbollah had focused on fundamental issues, fundamental approaches and fundamental goals. They made a collection of varying opinions, but we eventually managed to compile a single united book. Now I can say that we have a unified viewpoint in Hezbollah. Different perspectives have been unified and consolidated due to the events and experiences that we have gone through, and thanks to the guidance, advice, and leadership of Imam Khomeini (r.a) while he was alive and of the Leader after the passing of Imam Khomeini.

I wish there was more time to listen to your memories at length…

You will at some point say ‘I wish’… [laughs]

Anyways, our time is very limited. Putting that period a side, now let’s talk about 1989, when Imam Khomeini passed away to the mercy of Allah, and our people and every devotee of the Islamic Revolution were mourning. Those moments were naturally critical moments for both our country and the devotees of the Islamic Revolution. Please explain briefly what the state of your affairs was, at the time when Ayatollah Khamenei was chosen as the successor to Imam Khomeini? Also tell us more about the events that you encountered at that time, after Imam Khomeini’s passing away, in the regional and international arena.

We had a very critical period at that time, because that era coincided with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the beginning of American unilateralism and the end of the Cold War. At the same time, we saw that the Zionist regime started talking about peace negotiations, and on the other hand, the Islamic Revolution was in a particular situation. Obviously, the Americans had plans for the post-Imam Khomeini (r.a) era. We would like you to talk about those circumstances and describe them to us, and about how the Leader responded to the important developments that took place at regional and international levels?

As you know, during the lifetime of Imam Khomeini, members of Hezbollah of Lebanon and the supporters of the resistance, had close ties with him, both intellectually and culturally. However, Hezbollah members were also emotionally and passionately dependent on Imam Khomeini. Like many Iranians who fought against Saddam’s war on Iran, they really loved Imam Khomeini (r.a). Members of Hezbollah of Lebanon regarded him as an Imam, a leader, a guide, a Marja’, and a father. I have never seen the Lebanese love anyone so much. Consequently, the demise of Imam Khomeini on that day brought about a mountain of sadness and grief to the Lebanese; a feeling definitely not less intense than the sadness and grief of the Iranians. This was the emotional connection between the Lebanese and Imam Khomeini (r.a).

But on the other hand, there was a major concern at that time, and it was that the Western media were constantly talking about the post-Imam Khomeini era (r.a), claiming that the main problem was this man and that Iran would collapse after him and a civil war would break out; that there would be no substitute for the leadership of the country. In this regard, a very intense psychological warfare had started in those years, in the last year of the glorious life of Imam Khomeini (r.a), [particularly in the light of other incidents including the dismissal of Late Ayatollah Montazeri and other issues]. For this reason, there were concerns. At that time, we were being told that your source of support—i.e. the Islamic Republic of Iran, upon which you rely and in which have faith—will start a downfall and collapse after the passing of Imam Khomeini. That was for the second issue.

The third issue, regardless of the psychological warfare, was our lack of information about the situation after the passing of Imam Khomeini (r.a). We did not know what was going to happen after him, and what turn the events were going to take; so we were worried. We were following up on the events after the death of Imam Khomeini (r.a) on television, and when we saw national security and the calm in Iran as well as the glorious presence of the Iranian people at his funeral, we regained some confidence and peace of mind.

We were reassured that Iran would not go towards a civil war, nor would it collapse, and eventually the Iranians would choose a suitable leader in a reasonable and sincere atmosphere. We, like all Iranians, were waiting for the decision of the Assembly of Experts on this matter. The fact is that the election of Ayatollah Khamenei as the Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Assembly of Experts was unpredictable for the Lebanese. Because we did not know Iranian figures properly and we did not know if there was a better, more knowledgably and more competent person to replace the Leadership. We only knew the Iranian officials that we were in touch with. Electing Ayatollah Khamenei for this responsibility, surprisingly and unusually, made us feel happy, fortunate and confident.

In any case, we passed through this stage. We started our relationship and this relationship continued. After a short time, we traveled to Iran and offered our condolences for the passing away of Imam Khomeini (r.a) and we met with the Leader. He was still at the Presidential office and received people there. We pledged allegiance to him in person and directly. Our brothers told him: “During the lifetime of Imam Khomeini (r.a) you were his representative in the affairs of Lebanon, Palestine and the region as well as the President of Iran, so you had time [for us]. But now you are the leader of the Islamic Republic and all Muslims, and therefore, perhaps you do not have enough time as before. So, we would like to ask you to appoint a representative, so that we do not disturb you continuously.” At this moment, the Leader smiled and said: “I am still young and I have time, God willing. I pay special attention to the issues of the region and the resistance and therefore we will remain in direct contact with each other. “

Since then, unlike Imam Khomeini (r.a), he has not appointed any representative to refer to about our issues. Naturally, we did not want to bother much, and did not require much of his time. Especially because in the first years, the early years of the establishment of the movement, he was involved in everything. The principles, goals, foundations, criteria, and guidelines that we had, provided a solution to every issue. All of this was a divine blessing; the blessing of guidance was quite clear and we did not need to constantly refer to him. So, we continued to do the same as the Leader had told. This should answer that part of your question about our relationship with Ayatollah Khamenei after his election as the Leader and the authority for Muslims [wali amr al muslimin] after the passing of Imam Khomeini (r.a).

But regarding the events that happened, it should be noted that the events after the passing of Imam Khomeini (r.a) were, naturally, very critical and dangerous. At that time, the important issue for us was to continue the path of resistance in Lebanon, an issue that the Leader had emphasized from the outset. The Leader provided the officials of the Islamic Republic with many recommendations and words of advice, to attend to the Resistance in Lebanon and the region, saying that, just as during the lifetime of Imam Khomeini (r.a), when we followed this path with the thoughts, methods, principles and culture of Imam Khomeini (r.a) on our agenda; today I persist on this path and insist on the need for it to continue.

Therefore, as a blessing from the Almighty God, there was no change in the position of the Islamic Republic in its support for the resistance in the region, especially in Lebanon, not even in the face of changes within ministries and official entities in Iran as well as some differences in their political policies. Therefore, not only such a change did not happened, rather things went on in a better way; because these stances were strengthened after each president’s and each official’s term and this happened as a result of direct attention by the Leader to Hezbollah of Lebanon and the resistance in the region.

Now we can enter the discussion on the events that took place. Where would you like me to start from? I am ready. I mean, we can now address the political events; because we have already elaborated on our relationship with the Leader and how we kept working with him after the passing of Imam Khomeini (r.a.).

The most important issue for us at that time, i.e. during the leadership of Ayatollah Khamenei, was the issue of domestic problems of Lebanon. At that stage, as you know well, there were some problems between Hezbollah and the Amal movement, and the Leader paid special attention to this matter. Hence, the most important thing that happened to us during the early years of Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership was the resolution of discords between Hezbollah and the Amal Movement. This blessed resolution, was brought about as a result of special guidance and advice by the Leader, as well as contacts between the authorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the leaders of Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, including the current chairman of the Lebanese parliament Mr. Nabih Berri and Syrian officials. Subsequently, Resistance groups in Lebanon got united and this was accomplished thanks to the Leader and his strong emphasis [on unity].

The Leader opposed any issue, any conflict or dispute among Lebanese groups and constantly stressed the need for extensive relations between them as well as achieving peace by any means necessary among them. These efforts took years to bear fruit. That is to say, it took 2 or 3 years for us to pass through that stage. The foundation of the close relations between Hezbollah and Amal that we see today were laid by the guidelines of the Leader, and today the relationship between Hezbollah and Amal is not strategic, but beyond strategic. Through the resolving of the problems between Hezbollah and the Amal Movement and the cooperation between the two, we were able to continue the resistance and attend to defending Lebanon and the south of Lebanon. The achievement and the great victory of 2000 against the Zionist regime were realized as a result of this unity. In 2006 and during the 33-day war of the Zionist regime on southern Lebanon, this unity helped us again, and we were able to resist during the “Tammūz War” and impose a defeat on the enemy. Today, political victories in Lebanon and the region continue to be achieved. One of the fundamental factors of Hezbollah’s political, national, and military power is this coherence, unity and friendly relations.

I recall that at that time, after the martyrdom of Sayyid Abbas al-Musawi (r.a), our brothers chose me as the secretary-general. Later, we met with the Leader. He brought up some issues, saying: “If you want to make the heart of Imam Mahdi (May Almighty Allah Speed His Reappearance) and also the hearts of all the believers happy, you have to work hard to preserve the calm in your country. You have work with each other, especially Hezbollah, Amal, Allama [scholar] Fadlallah and Sheikh Shams al-Din.” At that time, Sheikh Fadlallah and Sheikh Shams al-Din were both alive and the Leader strongly stressed reinforcing internal unity in Lebanon. His emphasis was on maintaining unity among the Shi’as, as well as between Shi’as and Sunnis and other Muslims. He also emphasized on the necessity of unity among Muslims and Christians and would insist on it during internal meetings; that is [he promoted] an open door policy for all Lebanese. This was the second issue. The primary issue was the relationship between Hezbollah, Amal and the domestic situation of the Shias. Another important issue that he emphasized was the open door strategy of Hezbollah towards other Lebanese political groups, despite religious, political, and ideological differences. The realization of this important project was also on account of his wise leadership.

There was an emphasis on continuing the resistance, confronting belligerence and determination to liberate southern Lebanon. That’s why the Leader also focused on the issue of resistance and its progress. He always insisted that resistance should progress, grow, and ultimately take back occupied lands. Hence, he always diligently encouraged the Resistance to persist on the path it had taken. You know that at that time there was a problem that some resistance groups, other than Hezbollah, had got entangled with internal political affairs, and thus, they had been gradually distracted from the mission of resistance. This would make the resistance limited to Hezbollah and the Amal Movement—chiefly Hezbollah. Even inside Hezbollah, there were some of our brothers who were inclined to get involved with domestic politics. But the Leader always emphasized the need to give priority to the mission of resistance and Jihadi tasks.

Part 2

Imam Khamenei’s prediction of Oslo Accord and Netanyahu’s error

One of the important events that took place in the region at that time was the formation of a process of reconciliation through Arab-Israeli negotiations, which is referred to as the “peace process”. This trend was shaped after Arab-Israeli negotiations. Recall that in 1993 an agreement was reached between Mr. Yasser Arafat and the Israelis, represented by Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres; an agreement that was finalized under the auspices of the United States. This agreement was eventually named the “Oslo Accords”. This was naturally a very dangerous issue, and had a negative impact on the Arab-Israeli conflict. The danger was that, according to the agreement, the PLO recognized Israel and thus effectively a Palestinian group—not an Egyptian one like Anwar Sadat—abandoned the lands of 1948, the lands occupied by the Zionist regime during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. Also, in that agreement it was mentioned that the topic of the negotiations would be East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and the issue of other parts of Palestine is already done. This was a major fault.

On the other hand, the agreement opened the way for many other Arab countries to begin negotiations and reach an agreement with Israel, eventually normalizing relations with Tel Aviv. This was a very dangerous issue. At that time, the Leader, and the Palestinian resistance groups including Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine opposed the Oslo Accords. The Commander in Chief and some Palestinian groups opposed the deal. So did Hezbollah and the Lebanese groups. We rallied against this agreement, but were shot, and we had martyrs for the cause in Beirut’s Southern Dahieh.

In any case, it was a turning point and a very dangerous period. We pondered over what reaction to adopt against the Oslo accord. Should we deal with it politically and through the media, and call on the Palestinians to resist and insist on their rights? The emergence of this issue (the Oslo Accords and the ensuing phase) led to the expansion and consolidation of relations between Hezbollah and Palestinian groups, including Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, and also strengthened the path of resistance in the occupied territories of Palestine. Remember that at that time, a major martyrdom-seeking operation was carried out by Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants in the heart of Tel Aviv and Quds, and shook the Zionist authorities to their core. It was after that operation, that an extraordinary meeting took place in the Egyptian city of Sharm El Sheikh with Clinton and Yeltsin, the then Russian president in attendance. Many countries in the world also attended this meeting. Meanwhile, the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad rejected participating in the meeting.

The fact is that the meeting finally declared war on three groups: first Hezbollah, second Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, and third Islamic Republic of Iran due to its support for resistance in the region. Despite its large sphere, the meeting did not manage to introduce fear in the ranks of Hezbollah and other resistance groups in the region, especially since at that time, the position of the Leader regarding the resistance—that is continuing the Resistance and persisting on the path— was absolutely straightforward and resolute. Therefore the Oslo accord brought about a series of events; events that were very crucial and hazardous for this procedure.

We also had the Madrid conference.

The Madrid conference was before the Oslo Accord. It was then that the talks started. The important point here is that the Leader has a deep insight and exact understanding of the future. I believe that his accurate perception of the future is part of his unique abilities, derived from his deep faith in, submission to, and relationship with the Almighty God, rather than having an only rational aspect.

At that time, certain talks started called the Israeli-Syrian negotiations. The Syrian President of the time was Hafez al-Assad and the Israeli Prime Minister was Yitzhak Rabin. The talks between them were initially secret and later made public. They would meet in the United States and under Clinton’s supervision. Representatives of President Assad and Rabin’s cabinet met with each other in the United States, and they were about to come to an agreement. At that time, it was said that Yitzhak Rabin had agreed to return the occupied Golan to Hafez al-Assad.

Accordingly, there was an assumption in the region that Israel and Syria were coming to an agreement. This atmosphere existed in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and the entire region. I remember that at that time some would ask us “if an Israeli-Syrian agreement is reached, what will you—that is Hezbollah—do? If Syria and Israel come to an agreement, what stance will Hezbollah take? If such an agreement is made, what will be the fate of Hezbollah and the Islamic Resistance groups?” We organized several meetings to discuss the matter, and plan for the future. We thought then that an agreement was already made between Assad and Rabin. It was not only Hezbollah but all Lebanese, Syrians and Palestinians assumed that the agreement had been finalized. We organized internal meetings to discuss the future. We talked about political, military, artillery issues and even the name of the group. Some raised the question whether or not to keep the name “Hezbollah”? Or if we should adopt a new name to fit the new phase? Some of our brothers were on the U.S.’s black list and there was this debate whether to keep them in Lebanon or make it for them to leave Lebanon? For example, Martyr Hajj Imad Mughniyah was on that list.  So we compiled a collection of various suggestions.

Did Hezbollah not have a communication channel with Hafez al-Assad to be informed of his decision?

The point is that all the available data and information assured us that the Israeli-Syrian negotiations would result in an agreement. At that time, Hafez al-Assad’s main demand was to take back the Golan, and that would withdraw from the June 4, 1967 borders; and Rabin had agreed to meet those demands. Eventually we went to see the Leader. He was very patient with us, because during this visit, we mentioned all the issues raised and the suggestions offered by different people. He listened to all of our words in that meeting which was held with some Iranian officials in attendance, and while all Iranian officials—and all officials unanimously and with no exception—believed that the Syrian-Israeli talks were over, His Eminence said: “It is good that you consider the worst-case scenarios and probabilities and plan to face them; but I tell you this will not happen, and there will be no peace treaty between Syria and Israel, so discard whatever you have written and prepared. You should continue to resist, and double your efforts to increase your weapons, facilities and human resources. Do not worry; because there will be no peace treaty between Syria and Israel.” All those present in the meeting, including the Iranians and the Lebanese, were astonished by the firm remarks of Ayatollah Khamenei. His Eminence did not say that, “I consider it unlikely” or that, “there might be other possibilities”. Not at all. He resolutely declared this will not happen. He said strongly and firmly: “Forget it and put it away; continue to do what you were doing in a better and stronger way than before.”

Anyway, we were surprised. We returned to Lebanon, and we continued to work based on the Leader’s point of view. Only two weeks after our visit to the Leader, a big ceremony with more than 100,000 people was held in Tel Aviv, wherein Yitzhak Rabin was giving a speech, when someone from among extremist Jews opened fire at and murdered Rabin. After Rabin, Shimon Peres was elected prime minister of the Zionist Regime. He had a weak personality, because he was not perceived by Israelis, in terms of historical and military background as well as trustworthiness, as competent as Rabin.

Subsequently, large operations were carried out inside occupied territories, namely Tel Aviv and occupied Quds, which shook the foundations of the Zionist Regime’s power. After that, the Sharm El-Sheikh summit—that I mentioned—was held. Then, in 1996, Israel attacked Lebanon in an operation called Operation Grapes of Wrath and marked the unprecedented genocide in Qana—a tragedy later known as Qana Massacre. In response, we resisted against the Israelis and became victorious. Shortly thereafter, that is in 2 or 3 weeks, elections were held in the Zionist Regime, during which Shimon Peres was defeated and the Likud party replaced the Labor party as the dominant party, and Benjamin Netanyahu became the Prime Minister of Israel. After coming to power, he said “I do not adhere to any of Yitzhak Rabin’s and Shimon Peres’s commitments with regard to Syria and the negotiations with Hafez al-Assad”. Therefore, the Israeli-Syrian negotiations ended. We are talking about the year 1996 and now in 2019, where does the peace process stand? It is in its worst status.

As you pointed out, in that atmosphere, there was a feeling that an impending compromise was going on, and meanwhile, the Palestinian people were being slaughtered. Did other countries contact you to encourage Hezbollah to follow the movement? Did the countries which favored this compromise contact you in this regard? Did they send a message to encourage you to accept to compromise with Israel?

There was no direct contact with Hezbollah. They had no hopes in us; because they knew about our wisdom, willpower, faith and determination. But in general, some Arab countries pressured Lebanon. They pressured the Lebanese government and people to compromise with Israel. They threatened that Israel would destroy Lebanon if they did not accept to compromise, and the Arab world would turn away from Beirut. There were such pressures, but there was no significant contact; because they knew what our stance was and we saw how they have absolutely no hopes in us. This was God’s blessing for us.

Some raise the question why the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon cannot accept any of the projects offered by the US and the Zionist Regime for compromise–from Oslo to the Deal of Century? The question is raised why Iran and Hezbollah do not provide the prerequisites to end these conflicts? Another point about Palestine is that some imply that the Palestinians themselves are interested in some form of compromise. What is your opinion about these questions? On the other hand, we see that some Arab rulers and figures are pretentious in their support for the Palestinian cause and standing for the Palestinian aspirations. What are the indicators for identifying the true representatives of this movement and thinking?

Regarding the first part of the question, I would say all the offered projects for the Palestinian cause violated the rights and the interests of the Palestinians. They say, according to the Oslo Accord, the lands usurped in 1948 are not included in the negotiations. That means two-third of Palestine is to be regarded outside the negotiations. Well, this is a major act of oppression; that is, in its basis and foundation, it is a major form of oppression. Then, they do not even give them the remaining one-third of Palestine. They do not even say that they would give the West Bank to the Palestinians and only negotiate on East Quds. At that time, even as for the Gaza Strip, the Zionists acted passively on the issue of Gaza. Shimon Peres said “I dream of a day when I wake up and I am told that Gaza has gone under water”. This was their territorial viewpoint.

In the case of Quds, in all the offered proposals, the Americans and Israelis never agreed to give back East Quds to the Palestinians. Even during the last negotiations in Camp David between Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak, the matter of Quds [Jerusalem] was brought up, and the Israelis said: “Of Jerusalem, whatever is on the ground, for you; but what remains underground of Jerusalem is for us”. As for the Palestinians who were expelled from their homes, the Israelis have explicitly stated that they would not allow them to return to their lands. This is while millions of displaced Palestinians were living in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and other countries of the world dispersedly. Would any wise man accept such a thing?

Even if we accept the above-mentioned proposals which are based on the two-state solution, a question is raised: which Palestinian state? A state with no national sovereignty, no borders, no sky or coast, no airport, etc. What kind of a state is this? Thus, the proposals that have been presented on the question of Palestine since long ago—from the Madrid negotiations to the bilateral talks and the Deal of the Century—indicate that the situation has become worse day after day. Let’s talk about the Deal of the Century. Recently, Jared Kushner spoke about the Deal of the Century, and explicitly said that according to this plan, Jerusalem (Quds) is for Israel. He announced that major Zionist settlements in the West Bank would be part of the occupied territories. Therefore, there is basically no discussion of a two-state solution; that is, one that includes a true Palestinian state. Even the Palestinians themselves do not accept such plans.

Accordingly, we gradually come to the conclusion that, firstly, if you see that the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hezbollah of Lebanon and other resistance groups do not agree with the proposals on the Palestinian question, it is because all these proposals are very oppressive to the Palestinian nation as well as to the Islamic Ummah, overall. Secondly, the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people won’t accept these plans. Today, it is absolutely clear that there is a complete consensus among the various Palestinian groups and parties in response to the Deal of the Century. It is not that some of them accept and others reject the proposal. The Fatah and Hamas as well as other movements, despite their disagreements, have no doubts about rejecting the Deal of the Century, and are on the same page with this regard. The Palestinian nation, both inside and outside the borders of the country, reject the Deal of the Century. Thus, opposition to this plan is not confined to Iran and the resistance groups in the region. Rather, Palestinians themselves oppose the Deal of the Century.

On the other hand, we must have a thorough understanding of the positions of Imam Khomeini (r.a.), the Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Lebanese Hezbollah and the resistance groups against the Zionist regime. The fact is that Israel is not a problem only for the Palestinians; rather, the stabilization of the sovereignty of Israel is a threat not only to the Palestinians, but also to all Arab and Islamic countries. The stabilization of this regime is a big threat to Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, and even the Islamic Republic of Iran. Israel has nuclear weapons and more than 200 nuclear warheads. The regime has always sought to expand its dominance over the whole region. There is another important point that we have learned from Imam Khomeini (r.a.) and also Ayatollah Khamenei, which is the fact that Israel is not a regime independent from the US; rather, it is regarded as a U.S. arm in the region. Who is after warmongering in the region? Who conducts invasion and aggression? Who meddles into other countries’ affairs? Hence, the existence, survival, power and promotion of Israel—either through peaceful or non-peaceful means— is a major security threat for all the countries in the region, from Iran to Pakistan, and even for the countries of Central Asia and Turkey.

Therefore, those resisting Israel today, are in fact defending the Palestinian people and their rights, of which they have been divested, and they are also defending themselves, the sanctities and defending Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and other countries. Israel will not withdraw from the ‘Nile-to-Euphrates’ goal and this goal has always been presented as a Torah dream Israel has been trying to realize. Israel is a military base in the region that serves the interests of the United States. We all know that the United States wants Iran to return to the pre-revolutionary times, i.e. a monarchy, just like Saudi Arabia, so that whenever it demands oil, Iran would give oil and whenever it demands oil prices be dropped, it gets realized. You saw that Trump personally declared that he took $450 billion from Riyadh. Trump openly announced that receiving this $450 billion was much easier for him than receiving $100 from an illegitimate booth somewhere in New York. He wants Iran to be like Saudi Arabia; in fact he wants all countries in the region to be just like Saudi Arabia. Who is Saudi Arabia relying on? On the monarchists in the region as well as the Israeli entity that possesses nuclear weapons and threatens countries of the region.

Accordingly, the important strategy emphasized by Imam Khomeini (r.a.) was that if we want to have a safe region, live in permanent peace, defend our national sovereignty and integrity of lands, and if we want all countries of the region to enjoy national sovereignty and true freedom, none of them is possible to achieve as long as there is an Israeli entity. They seek to fixate the Israeli entity by means of peace treaties.

Today, who is the vanguard of supporting the aspiration of a Palestinian government and leading it?

Today, there is no question that Ayatollah Khamenei (May God Continue His Oversight) bears the flag of the Palestinian cause. Today, no one doubts that the Islamic Republic of Iran, with its determination, will and power, is the vanguard and the main nucleus and main pivot that steers the Resistance movement.

Israel and its authorities announced in 2000 that they would leave southern Lebanon and tried to pretend it was voluntary. Did they voluntarily leave or were they forced to leave Southern Lebanon?

The Israelis wanted to retreat from southern Lebanon due to the significant financial and human forces’ damage imposed on them by the Resistance. There is no doubt that it was the Resistance and their operations that forced Israel to leave southern Lebanon. In Lebanon, no one has any doubt about it; that is to say, everyone acknowledges it. Had it not been for the Resistance’s daily operations, Israel would have remained in southern Lebanon; there is no doubt about it. Of course, the Israelis, even when they were under the most extreme pressure from the Resistance, tried to gain a concession from the opponents and to impose their prerequisites on Syria and Lebanon. At that time, Lebanon as well as Syria—whose president was Hafez Al-Assad—rejected granting any concession to Israel. This helped the Lebanese government a lot, since Syria had a significant influence on the Lebanese government and helped it to reject Israel’s conditions. Here, I would like to add a point about the talks between Yitzhak Rabin and Hafez Al-Assad: one of the factors contributing to the discontinuation of the Israeli-Syrian negotiations process at that time was the stance Hafez al-Assad’s took; because when the Israelis came to the June 4 borders, Hafez Assad insisted to take back the Lake Tiberia. He said that it belonged to Syria and had to be returned to Syria. This was one of the factors that led to the discontinuation of Syrian-Israeli negotiations after the death of Yitzhak Rabin and under the rule of Shimon Peres.

Now let’s go back to the issue of southern Lebanon. We were saying that the Israelis tried to receive concessions from Syria and Lebanon and impose their prerequisites on them. The Syrian and Lebanese governments also expressed their opposition to this issue. Hezbollah and the Resistance in Lebanon also rejected it. On the other hand, Hezbollah Resistance continued its operations until the Israelis came to the conclusion that their remaining in Lebanon was costly and they could not gain any concessions from Lebanon. So they decided to leave Southern Lebanon without any prerequisites. Also note that at that time, there were domestic pressures in the occupied lands on the part of settlers on the Israeli regime to leave Syria, especially because the families of the Israeli military and the families of the dead were demanding Israel not to stay in Lebanon. More interestingly, they had set July 2000 as the date for leaving Lebanon, but the intensity of the operations of the Resistance forced Tel Aviv to withdraw from Lebanon and thus, with complete humiliation and precipitation, the regime’s military forces left southern Lebanon. This occurred by God’s grace.

I’d like to ask another question and I’m willing to close this discussion here. Ayatollah Khamenei said a few years ago, that Israel won’t survive to see the next 25 years.

Before coming to that, we need to finish the topic of the year 2000 victory. I remember a very important memory of Ayatollah Khamenei. You remember I said that in 1996 his Eminence had said no peace treaty would be achieved between Syria and Israel. In 2000, a few months before Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon, and in accordance with our plans, we traveled to Tehran to meet with Ayatollah Khamenei and the Iranian officials. We—that is the Hezbollah council—traveled to Iran. On that trip, we also were accompanied by the military commanders of the Resistance for the first time. Nearly 50 commanders of the Resistance traveled with us.

At that time, we thought that Israel would not retreat from Lebanon in 2000. We were not sure, but we assumed it was unlikely that Israel would retreat in 2000, because we believed that Israel would not accept to retreat without imposing some prerequisites. We said to the Leader: “It is unlikely that Israel will withdraw from southern Lebanon. It seems that Israel will stay longer in Lebanon and we will need more time and more operations to make Israel withdraw with no preconditions.” Then he asked: “Why do you think this is unlikely?” We responded: “Because this measure would be a major threat to Israel. Israel withdrawing from south Lebanon with no preconditions represents obvious resistance and this will be considered the first obvious victory of Resistance, naturally affecting Palestine and Palestinian nation’s domestic developments; something that would pose a strategic threat to Israel and would signal to Palestinians the message that the main path is that of resistance and not negotiations. A message that told them: negotiations took your lands and sanctities away from you, but resistance liberated Lebanon and south Lebanon.” It was then that the Leader stated: “I recommend you to seriously assume that Israel will leave Lebanon and you will be victorious. You continue your activities and plan for the future based on this assumption. Plan on how to face Israel’s retreat from Lebanon on military, field work, media and political aspects.” We were surprised to hear these words, because we all believed that Ehud Barak—who had just won the election— would not act on his promise of retreat, because his conditions had not been met and particularly that he had not achieved security commitments either. That is to say, neither the Lebanese government, nor the Syrian government and nor Hezbollah of Lebanon had made security commitments to Israel. Thus the question was that, how would it be possible that Israel would retreat? This seemed unwise and illogical.

Even more important than that, following the meeting, in the evening, we went to the Leader’s home with our brothers from the Resistance, including the late Hajj Imad Mughniyah. Our brothers were those from the resistance, fighting on the front lines of the battle and could be martyred at any moment. After entering the Leader’s house, we and our brothers went to a great hall where prayers were performed. At the time, our brothers were wearing military uniforms, with keffiyehs worn around their necks, and looked a lot like the Basijis on the Iranian fronts. We were only supposed to perform congregational prayers with the Leader, and to offer our greetings before ending the ceremony. The Leader performed the prayers and after finishing Isha, he rose to greet his Lebanese brothers.

Then the Leader told his companions to move away. Then he said to me: “I am here to listen to you”. At this moment, one of our brothers came and kissed the Leader’s hand. Some of the brothers began to cry, and some of them were so impressed that could no longer stand on their feet. They slowly came forward. One of the brothers kissed the Leader’s hand, and when the second one bent down to kiss his feet, he did not allow it. He went back and told me: “Tell them to sit down and calm down so we can talk.” A speech was not planned for that ceremony. I asked my brothers to keep calm and I started translating the Leader’s speech for them. Among the issues he addressed—which I believe emerged from his spiritual vision and not simply from political analysis, rather from something deeper— was that he said: “You will be victorious by the grace of God. Your victory is much closer than what some people think. “He pointed to me because we had said that Israel’s withdrawal in such manner was unlikely. Pointing with his left hand, like this, he said: “Each and every one of you will see with your own eyes that you will be victorious.”

After that we returned to Lebanon. At that time, we carried out large operations and, of course, many members of the Resistance were martyred. May 25 came, and Israel’s surprising, unexpected and undignified retreat from southern Lebanon began. Also several were martyred during our progress towards the border. It was here that both predictions of the Leader of the Revolution were realized. First, the victory of the Resistance happened very soon, only a few months after that meeting; and second, all the people who were present at the meeting with the Leader and participated in the frontline operations, lived on to witness the great victory with their own eyes.

The question I wanted to ask before was that Ayatollah Khamenei said a few years ago that Israel would not see 25 years from now. [Meaning, there will be no Zionist Regime in 25 years.] There were interpretations of this sentence. Some people considered it to be definitive, and they started counting the days until it comes true. On the other hand, the front of Arrogance began to scoff at some of the interpretations of the statement. You have stood against the Zionist regime at different times and experienced various battles against this regime. Given your experiences, when you heard this statement from Ayatollah Khamenei, what was your perception and feelings about it?

First, I was not personally surprised by the remarks made by Ayatollah Khamenei, because we had heard similar statements in our private meetings in the previous years, especially in 2000, after the victory over the Zionist regime. We paid a visit to Ayatollah Khamenei a few months after the victory, and he was very delighted of the victory. We spoke about the future. At that time, he said: “If the Palestinian people, the Resistance in Lebanon, and the nations of the region perform their duties appropriately, and we continue this path, then certainly Israel cannot last for a long time in the region.” At that time, he mentioned something less than 25 years.

So when I heard the Leader’s 25 years remark, I concluded that he has given Israel extra time. That’s why I was not surprised. On the other hand, it should be mentioned that the Leader’s statement on Israel is absolutely serious. According to our experiences, some of which I already mentioned, we believe that the Leader is a person endorsed by Allah, the Almighty, and that what His Eminence states sometimes emerge from some other source–as it happened in the 33-day war. It should be noted that all data, investigations and information show that such an event (the elimination of Israel) will occur, but the realization of this matter is not unconditional, and it would happen under certain conditions. Therefore, if we resist and continue on the path we have taken, factual and field conditions indicate that Israel will not be able to remain in the region in the next 25 years.

We have done a lot of research and studies on the Israeli regime; trying to find answers for the following questions: what are the foundations of this regime? What are the hidden factors that have led to the existence of this regime? What are the strengths and weaknesses of this regime? Therefore, this shows that the Resistance has always exploited research as well as the power of logic and thinking based on existing facts.

Although there has been a revolutionary spirit in the fight against Zionism, this does not mean that the fight lacked research and rationality. I do not know the hidden dimensions of the Leader’s words. Based on field studies and real investigations, we can clearly say that Israel cannot survive, because the existence of Israel in the region is not a natural existence; rather, its existence does not match the nature of the region. This entity has been imposed on the region cannot and hence cannot become normalized and turn into a normal issue.

Moreover, even if the Arab monarchs, emirs and rulers want it, all the nations of the region oppose the existence of Israel and firmly reject this illegitimate entity [against their rulers’ will]. The elements of weakness are ample in the Israeli entity, so the likelihood of the collapse of this regime is very high. I refer to two examples of Israel’s apparent weakness: first, Israel’s power is now heavily dependent on the power of the United States. Consequently, if anything happens to the United States of America—like what happened to the USSR, from the collapse of its economy to internal problems and discords and natural disasters or any other incident that might get the U.S. busy dealing with its problems and lead to a reduction of Washington’s influence in the region, you will see that the Israelis will get their stuff and evacuate in the shortest possible time. Therefore, their destruction does not necessarily entail a war.

Israeli regime’s existence in Palestine depends on the U.S.’s spiritual, psychological, military and economic support. If the U.S. gets busy with its own problems, Israel will have no chance to survive and there would be no need for a war with that regime. This is just one example, truly foreseeable.

Everyone knows that the United States allocates an annual amount of $3 billion to Israel. Meanwhile, Israelis enjoy US $10 billion worth of US banking facilities per year. A part of U.S. taxpayers’ money is spent on Israel. Moreover, the most advanced technologies are transferred to Israel; Washington’s support for Israel is completely obvious. One of the most important reasons behind the humiliated stances taken by Arab regimes towards Israel is their fear of the United States, not fear of Israel itself. If a day comes when some Arab regimes and Arab armies free themselves from pressures by the U.S., their stances towards Israel will be different. Even the armies and the regimes themselves [will take a different stance].

Let me make another example: the governments of the world usually build armies for themselves, but it is said that Israel is an army made for the regime. In the world, a country’s army might collapse, but that country will stand. For example, after the U.S. war on Iraq, the Americans dissolved the Iraqi army, but Iraq remained and did not disappear. There are countries in the world that do not have an army or have a weak army; however, Israel is a regime that cannot survive without a strong army; if its army is defeated, or if the truth of the Israeli army—that is its weakness and instability—is disclosed to the settlers and they realize that this army is incapable of supporting them, you will see the Israelis will get their stuff and flee.

My dear brothers! Israel has many lethal weaknesses. That is why I believe that in the shade of a national will power against the survival of this regime, regional and international events will take place in this regard. I am among those who strongly believe in the new generation and God willing, this generation will enter Palestine and perform prayers in Quds, and there will be no Israel.

Imam Khamenei’s secret letter delivered to Hezbollah by General Soleimani

The 33-day war was a good test to see how powerful Israel is and how powerful Hezbollah and the axis of Resistance are as opposed to it. At some point, the Israeli army attacked several Arab countries and defeated them in a 6-day war. In the 33-day war, the Zionist army’s attacks on Hezbollah’s sites as well as on the innocent people in southern Lebanon were severe, but these attacks ultimately failed, and it seems that this war and the resulting victory became a turning point in the history of the region. What is your analysis of this war, and the defeat that Israel suffered as it failed to achieve its goals. In other words, what directions will it lead Tel Aviv to?

We can discuss it more broadly and refer to the aftermath of the 9/11 and the emergence of Neo-Conservatives in the U.S., i.e. the George Bush era; because the war on Lebanon was part of the same project and a bigger plan. It was at this point where the importance of the leadership role of Ayatollah Khamenei in the region became increasingly evident. George Bush and his associates used the 9/11 incident as the excuse to attack the countries of the region; fir they had the intention of conducting such attacks even prior to the 9/11. They chose to target Iraq on the pretext of possessing weapons of mass destruction. However, after the 9/11, they had to go to Afghanistan first and then move to Iraq.

So an American project opened in the years 2000 and 2001. Washington believe that the peace process in the region between Arabs and Israel had declined. The Resistance achieved a major victory in Lebanon, and consequently Israel retreated from southern Lebanon. Iran also became more and more powerful both in terms of its domestic affairs and in the whole region. This was a great victory for Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and even Palestinian resistance groups. Iran was also becoming more power day after day both domestically and regionally. After seeing these events, the U.S. decided to have an extensive military presence in the region so that, firstly they could pursue their interests, by gaining dominance over the oil resources and natural resources of the countries; secondly, they could impose a solution on the region that would benefit Israel and fixate its existence.

To achieve this goal, they needed to eliminate any obstacle. These obstacles Resistance in Palestine, Resistance in Lebanon, the Syrian government, and Iran. This was the project they were pursuing. All documents and evidence prove that. Well, after the 9/11, they had to go to Afghanistan, because the determining part of the neo-cons and George Bush’s project included encircling Iran and isolating it. The U.S. troops based in Pakistan, their forces in the Persian Gulf countries and the Persian Gulf waters as well as their forces based in Syria and the some neighboring countries were deployed to Afghanistan and then Iraq to complete the encircling of Iran.

Naturally, before isolating Iran and attacking it, the Americans would need to completely dominate over Iraq, destroy the Resistance in Palestine and Lebanon, and then put an end to the life of the Damascus government; that is, [destroy] Iran’s friends in the region and those countries the U.S. regarded as Iran’s strong allies and arms in the region. They also sought to annihilate those who would resist humiliating peace with Israel, because peace with Israel was one of the conditions for isolating Iran and attacking it. That is to say, the first goal was to expand the direct military presence, and then to overthrow the countries, to destroy the resistance groups, to establish an Arab-Israeli peace, and to form a single Arab-Israeli front led by Washington to attack Iran and overthrow the Islamic Republic and take over the country. This was the U.S. project.

Thus, the first step was the war in Afghanistan, and the second step entailed the war in Iraq. I will tell you about the third phase and what happened. After the occupation of Iraq, if you remember, Colin Powell, who was the U.S. secretary of state at that time, went to Damascus with a long list of U.S. conditions, and met with Bashar al-Assad. He wanted to exploit the environment of fear that had been created following the U.S. attack on the region to impose his conditions on Assad regarding the Golan Heights, Palestine, Palestinian Resistance, Hezbollah of Lebanon, etc. Anyway, it was a long list [of conditions]. Despite the U.S.’s threats, Bashar Assad refused to surrender to them.

So the Americans failed and moved to the next phase. At that time, the elections of the Palestinian Legislative Council were scheduled. The U.S. assumed that the Palestinian Authority, headed by Mahmoud Abbas, would win the election, and that Hamas and other resistance groups would be defeated. Washington presumed that the PA would win and then begin to disarm the Palestinian Resistance and commence the process of reconciliation with Israel. But what happened? A major surprise; Hamas took to the Legislative Council by winning the vast majority of the votes. After that, the U.S. took their next step, which entailed a military strike on Lebanon. At that point, the 33-day war and the Resistance of Hezbollah took place.

The goal of the United States was to eliminate Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Palestine, and then to attack Hezbollah in Lebanon. For after achieving their goal, they had plans to go to Syria after in order to overthrow the government of Damascus, and after that make peace with Israel and normalize relations between Israel and the Arabs; and afterwards to encircle Iran and isolate it. Naturally at that time, the victory over the Palestinian Resistance and Israel’s victory over Lebanon’s Hezbollah and the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad’s government could have been a major achievement for George W. Bush by which he could attain more victories at congress as well as presidential elections.

In late 2006, when mid-term congress elections were around and George Bush needed to win two third of the seats, an imminent American writer told me—and of course late he wrote it—: In order to succeed in congressional elections and even presidential elections, George W. Bush desperately needed to enter the electoral campaign like a cowboy, carrying three bloody severed heads: the head of the Resistance in Palestine, the head of Hezbollah’s Resistance and Bashar al-Assad’s head. If Bush succeeded in winning these three heads, he could win two-thirds of congressional votes for his party and, at the same time, he could guarantee a war against Iran.” The main purpose of what would happen was, in fact, to end the Palestinian issue and provide the preliminaries for a war against Iran. I am going to elaborate on this topic and I hope a there will be an opportunity to explain this matter to the Iranian nation so that they will properly realize the fact that the ultimate goal of the conflicts and disputes in the region is not only Palestine, but the ultimate goal is to restore the U.S.’s domination over Iran, over its resources and facilities and to bring it back to what it was during the reign of the Shah.

Well, at this stage of history of the developments in the region, Iran’s position, and the positions held by the Leader were of high importance. First, in the spiritual sense. Well, the U.S. entered the region. Obviously, there is neither the Soviet Union, nor the socialist front,; rather there is only one domineering, arrogant, and merciless power in the world called the United States. This power decided to launch a military war in the region and entered the region with its armies and military equipment. All but a few were frightened and startled. Here, we remember the stances taken by the Leader regarding the U.S.’s invasion of Afghanistan and then Iraq. Ayatollah Khamenei travelled to different provinces of Iran and reassured the Iranian people, the nations of the region as well as resistance groups, and delivered speeches wherein he strengthened the spirit of resistance and never surrendering to the U.S.’s historic and severe attack on the region. This was indeed a very difficult mission. I remember that after the invasion of Afghanistan and prior to the occupation of Iraq, I traveled to Iran to meet with the Leader.

I told him that some concerns had risen in the region. See what outlook he adopted. He turned to me and said: “Tell all our brothers not to fear; rather, the coming of the Americans to the region signals achieving freedom in the future.” I was surprised to hear this statement. He pointed with his finger this way and asserted: “The Americans have reached the peak but with their invasion of Afghanistan, their decline has started. If the Americans truly believed that Israel and other Arab regimes and their mercenaries in the region were capable of supporting the interests of Washington, they would have never deployed their armies and navies to the region. Thus, this military act taken by them is a sign of their defeat and the failure of their policies in the region. Had they not failed, they would not need to take such measured.  When the Americans come to the conclusion that they must act directly in order to achieve their interests in the region, this is a sign of weakness, not power. When any army, no matter how big and powerful, moves thousands of miles and goes to an area where there are living nations, such an army will surely be defeated and collapse. Therefore, the U.S. coming to the region marks the beginning of their fall and decline, not the beginning of a new era for them.”

Ayatollah Khamenei recurrently reiterated this point, putting it in different words on different occasions. However, he told me this very clearly and obviously, and I quoted him and we discussed this issue together. Anyway, it was the year 2006 when we took up the path of resistance. If you remember, on the very first day of the war, the Leader issued a statement wherein he endorsed the Resistance and stressed the need to resist and fight against invaders. This measure on his part was very valuable for us, our nation, and our combatants; because we are talking of a tough battle wherein we witnessed bloodshed, martyrs, and wounds.

When we saw that our wali e-amr, our leader, our frontrunner, and our marja’ encouraged us to resist, our spirit and motivation increased manifold and we powerfully engaged in a war against the invaders. After a short time and only within 4 or 5 days—that is when Israel had bombed all places it knew, the Americans assumed that we were in a weak position, we were scared and it was our time to surrender. At that time, the Americans spoke with Sa’d al-Hariri, who is now the Lebanese Prime Minister. A-Hariri was not the prime minister then, he was the head of a parliamentary fraction to which the prime minister of the time, Fouad Siniora, was inclined. Al-Hariri contacted us and reported that the Americans—that is the negotiator was the U.S. government—are ready to stop the war on southern Lebanon if three conditions are met.

The first condition was that Hezbollah releases two Israeli prisoners it had captivated. The second condition was that Hezbollah becomes completely disarmed and turns into a [merely] political party. The third condition was that Hezbollah agrees with the deployment of multinational forces to the south of Lebanon. That is, neither the international forces affiliated with the U.N., as you call international organizations of the United Nations. At that time multinational forces had already entered Iraq. These forces were not afflicted with the U.S. Security Council, rather they belong to the U.S.

The goal was to make us  accept that multinational forces be deployed to Lebanon, to the Lebanon-Palestine border, the Lebanon-Syria borders s well as in airports, coasts, and the Lebanese entrance and exit gates. That is, an international occupation and an American occupation. Naturally, we rejected these three conditions and continued to fight. At that time, Condoleezza Rice visited Lebanon. What did she tell the Lebanese? She talked of the determining battle and that Hezbollah would definitely be defeated and destroyed, and made the famous remark that “the region was going through the pain of giving birth to a new Middle East”. This is the “New Middle East” we were talking about.

Despite all this, the resistance stood and became victorious. Therefore, the first round of the U.S. project failed in light of the results of the Palestinian elections. The second round failed in Lebanon; that is the plot to destroy Hezbollah miscarried. Consequently, the third round also miscarried; because it was planned that after the destruction of Hezbollah, the war would go to Syria, and Israel and the U.S. would attack the ruling government in Syria. This did not happen, either. These were the first, second, and third failures that the United States faced.

With regard to Iraq, the Leader’s position was absolutely clear. He insisted that the United States should be recognized as an occupier in Iraq. All official stances taken by the officials of the Islamic Republic of Iran also indicated the occupation of Iraq by the United States. After a while, public resistance began in Iraq. While it was assumed that the U.S. would stay in Iraq, dominate it and take control of it, in the end, Washington had no option but to leave Iraq as a result of the armed and sincere resistance in Iraq—not a resistance like that of the Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda or takfiries— as well as a mighty political stance and the emergence of a national willpower in that country. Henceforth, the United States left Iraq, albeit in the light of an agreement. When the U.S. withdrew from Iraq, I explicitly stated that this was a great achievement and victory for the Iraqi resistance, but unfortunately nobody celebrated this great victory of the Iraqi people. This great victory of Iraqis during which the United States was forced to leave Iraq in 2011 should have been celebrated.

Eventually, all U.S. projects in the region miscarried at this stage: all-American projects from 2001 to 2011, or the “New Middle East” project failed. The United States failed to win control of the region in order to bring about a disgraceful peace deal with Israel, normalize the Arab-Israeli relations to eradicate the Palestinian question, destroy resistance movements, dominate over countries, and isolate and invade Iran. How did this happen? Here we see the role of the Leader, the Islamic Republic of Iran, as well as its allies and friends in the region. They were the ones who foiled these plots.

Naturally, the Al-Saud and the rulers of many Arab and Persian Gulf countries were an integral part of the United States’ plan in the region and they were in some way a means for implementing the American plots. Israel was the U.S.’s most important means for realizing its plans in the region. However, those who stood up to the U.S.’s plots and conspiracies were the Islamic Republic of Iran led by Ayatollah Khamenei, Syria led by President Assad, the Resistance in Lebanon and their allies, the Resistance in Palestine and their allies, sincere political and national leaders in Iraq—headed by the religious clergy in holy Najaf—, and Islamic and national groups in the region.

But who played the most important role, empowered others, and supported them? The Islamic Republic of Iran and Ayatollah Khamenei’s position, stances and determination. We were at the heart of the events that took place between 2001 and 2011—that is during a decade—and their obvious outcome was the defeat of the U.S.

I will close this part of my speech with a memory of Ayatollah Khamenei (May Allah protect him). In the 33-day war—which actually lasted 34 days, but is called the 33-day war—the Lebanese people were naturally very worried, at the beginning of the war, about what they was going to happen. What happened? Even some Lebanese officials contacted Saudi authorities, asking Riyadh to intervene as a mediator and end the war in southern Lebanon. The Saudis replied to the Lebanese officials by saying: “No one will interfere. There is a U.S., international and regional consensus that Hezbollah should be eradicated and crushed. Hezbollah has no way but to surrender or be destroyed.” Obviously, our decision was to fight back and there was a strong willpower for fighting and a spirit of Karbala ruling the whole of Hezbollah. This quote by Imam Hussain (a.s.) was always in front of our eyes that: “Beware that the humiliated man, son of the humiliated, has pressured me between the sword and surrender in humiliation. Never to humiliation!

We were faced with the two options of war or a humiliated surrender, and we chose war over the other. In the early days of the war, our dear friend and brother, Hajj Qasim Soleimani, contacted us. He came to Damascus, contacted Beirut and said that he needed to meet with us. We asked him: How do you want to do it? We said to Hajj Qasim Soleimani: “The Israelis are bombarding all the bridges, roads, and cars, and you cannot reach us.”

This dear friend of ours told us that he needed to get to us, because he had an important message from Ayatollah Khamenei to deliver to us. We arranged the situation, so eventually Hajj Qasim came to Beirut’s southern suburbs during the early days of the war. He said that when the Leader (May Allah protect him) was in Mashhad, he called on all the officials of the Islamic Republic—including the current and former presidents, the current and former foreign ministers, the current and former defense ministers, the current and the former IRGC commanders, and other officials to hold a meeting together.

Hajj Qasim explained to me that during the meeting, the war against Lebanon and its objectives as well as the question as what the war would lead to were examined. From the outset, the Islamic Republic of Iran considered the war on Lebanon to be part of the United States’ plan in the region and not an issue separate from that plot. Hajj Qasim said that all of the participants in the meeting unanimously agreed that the Islamic Republic of Iran had to stand alongside the Lebanese resistance, Lebanese government and people, as well as alongside Syria; because there was the threat that the war would be spread to Syria and therefore, Iran needed to use all its political, financial and military capabilities to help the front of Resistance win. Hajj Qasim further said that once the meeting was over and Maghrib and Isha prayers were performed, the audience were about to leave when the Leader asked them to stay longer, saying: “I have words with you.”  This happened after the first meeting; that is, the first formal meeting.

Afterwards, Ayatollah Khamenei turned to Hajj Qasim and said: “You write what I say, then go to Beirut and give it to that [particular] person. He will discuss the matters with his friends and brothers, if he deems it proper.” After describing the events, Hajj Qasim started reading the Leader’s words for me. Among his words, the Leader had said: “The captivity of Israeli soldiers by the Lebanese Resistance was a hidden divine grace; because the operation forced Israel to enter Lebanon, in respond to your action. The Israelis and the Americans were preparing themselves to attack Lebanon and Hezbollah late summer or early fall 2006, and so you would have been caught by surprise, while you were not ready for a war. Therefore, the captivity of the Israeli military forces by you was a divine blessing that brought about progress in time; so the war did not happen when the United States and Israel had planned it; it happened when they were not ready for it and they were just getting prepared, while you were already prepared for it. That is to say, it happened at a time when there was no source of being caught by surprise.

This statement of the Leader was later confirmed and verified great figures. For example, when I referred to it in the media, the eminent professor Mohamed Hassanein Heikal acknowledged it in separate programs on Al Jazeera channel at that time. Meanwhile, one of the great American writers, Seymour Hersh, confirmed the matter. I should point out that when I raised the issue in the media, I did not attribute it to the Leader.

Another point that Ayatollah Khamenei had referred to in that message was that he had said: “This war is very similar to the Battle of the Confederates, which happened during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h.). This war will be very difficult and frustrating, it will threaten your existence; you are obliged to be patient in this war.” In this part of his message he had quoted the Quranic verse “and hearts almost reached the throat … you started to think of God with suspicion; [the Quran; 33:10].” The Leader had also said: “you should place your trust completely in God.” Also, the third part of his message read: “You will be victorious in this war.” I had heard a similar sentence before—I do not exactly remember if it was before or after that—but someone narrated Ayatollah Behjat (Allah’s mercy be upon him), as telling us: “Be sure, and be certain that you will win the war, God willing.”

But the interesting and important point in the Leader’s message was that he had said: “you will win the war, and after that you will become a regional power to the point that no other power will be able to confront you.” At that time, I laughed and said to Hajj Qasim: “We will turn into a regional power? If we manage to survive the current battle and maintain our existence, we have made a great achievement.” Then, I commented jokingly: “My dear brother! We do not want to become a regional power.” But anyway, Ayatollah Khamenei’s letter on that day created some sort of assurance in me. From that day on, I was sure that we were going to win the war and after that, we were going to become a regional power; which actually happened.

Did his Eminence recommend any duas and supplications during the 33-day war?

During the early days of the war, I received a letter from the Leader, which I still keep. At that time, I also received a letter from my brother and friend, Mr. Hejazi. Mr. Hejazi advised us in his letter to recite some supplications, but I do not exactly remember if he had attributed the recommendations to Ayatollah Khamenei. I do not remember that very well, but I remember that the supplication “Jowshan” was recommended by the Leader—as far as I recall now.

The supplications “Jowshan Saghir” and “Appeal to Imam Mahdi (God’s greetings be upon him and may God hasten his reappearance)” as well as “Ziarat Ashura”, besides that well-known supplication were among the recommendations in this regard. But in general, I would like to refer to my experience on knowing the leader.

We would naturally recommend the same to our brothers. These are among the sources of strength for Hezbollah in the wars. Supplicating to God and relying on Him has always been part of our schedule, and the Leader always emphasized it. Ever since we knew the Leader, he always insisted on spiritual matters: that is, the need for trust in and reliance on God, the Almighty. He recited in all meetings: “If you help God, He will help you and make you steadfast (in your faith); [the Quran; 47:7].” He always stressed that what the Almighty God says is no joke; His words are explicit and this is God’s promise. God will surely fulfill His promise. He has always insisted on trust in God’s promises. Even now, at times, he specifically focuses on this matter in his statements. He particularly emphasizes on reciting Duas, supplicating to God, and asking for His assistance.

I remember at times we felt exhausted, because we faced very difficult phases and the situation was frustrating. In one of the meetings, His Eminence told me: “whenever you feel exhausted, in face of threats and difficulties, find a quite a place, get in and close the door. So for a short while—a few minutes, 15 minutes or 30 minutes—speak with God with your own words; there is no need to recite a supplication. With the same language you use to speak with others, speak with God; talk to Him about your sorrows and pains, and ask Him to help you. Don’t all of us believe that the Almighty God is always present, witnessing everything, and capable of doing anything? The Almighty God knows all our needs and there is no barrier between Him and us. He will welcome us at any time, and He will hear us, by any language we speak. If you do so, you will see that the Almighty God will grant you power, will and energy, and He will open all His doors to you.” Since then, we have acted based on the Leader’s recommendation and we have seen its fabulous results.

Several questions remain, and we don’t have much time left. There are two issues that we won’t discuss here: the enemy’s efforts to create divisions between the Shias and Sunnis, and the issue of Islamic awakening. In addition, during the last seven to eight years, we have witnessed the emergence of an important event in the region:  an event that has had very strategic effects in the region; and that is the events and crisis in Syria. In your opinion, why was Syria chosen for the implementation of the plots in this region, and what were the dimensions of this crisis? Another question I’ like to ask is why, despite the heavy costs, the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah got involved in the Syrian crisis? What would have happened if they hadn’t engaged in this affair? What were the presumed repercussions that led Iran and Hezbollah to assume their engagement in Syria as essential?

This is related to our discussion about regional transformations from 2001 to 2011. We said that the end was marked by the U.S.’s withdrawal from Iraq, their defeat in Lebanon, their failure in Syria, their defeat in Palestine, and therefore, the miscarriage of the U.S.’s plans in the region. After 2011, this situation—failures of the U.S.’s plans—is still ongoing. This is an important and historic phase in the life of the region, the life of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and the leadership of Ayatollah Khamenei (May Allah protect him); for in the early 2011 the Leader referred to it as the phase of “the Islamic awakening”; which is called the “Arab Spring” in the region.

I would like to speak about the Islamic awakening in the region before starting the debate on Syria. The Arab Spring, the Islamic Awakening, or massive popular uprisings in the region first erupted in Tunisia, later took place in Libya and Egypt, and then happened in Yemen. These incidents were followed by conflicts in Syria. Briefly, based on what was happening at that time we concluded that after the U.S.’s plans and attacks miscarried, Obama tried to compensate for the defeat.

The nations of the region became awakened and began to take action in hope of making changes. It was in this context that the Arab regimes found themselves at a disadvantage. A great opportunity was provided for the nations to overturn the regimes. My inference and many others’ conclusion was the same as what the Leader had suggested since the very beginning. He had said that “these national movements are genuine national movements.” The Tunisian movement represented the Tunisian people and their national will, the Egyptian movement represented the will of the Egyptian people, the Libyan movement represented the will of the Libyans, and the Yemeni movement was the same. All the slogans that these movements were chanting and the goals they were trying to accomplish rose from their popular and national views and interests.

Thus, we saw the true impact of Islam and the Islamist movements in this great movement and the awakening of the nations. That’s precisely why the Leader called it the “Islamic awakening.” But what was the main problem with this Islamic awakening? The problem lied in the lack of a leadership and unity. You see, the Islamic Revolution in Iran was a massive popular revolution, but what made this revolution successful and strengthened it after the victory was the existence of a leader, Imam Khomeini (r.a.). Another factor that led to the victory of this revolution was unity among all the people, authorities, and scholars who unanimously supported Imam Khomeini (r.a.).

Therefore, at that time there was a unified nation and a leader who outlined the policies and strategies for the orderly progress of the affairs. So the problem that existed in these countries (revolutions)—except in Syria which I will discuss later—was the lack of a reliable and united leadership. There existed many leaders and many parties with no unity among them: they had disagreements. When they wanted to negotiate with each other, their disagreements emerged. This also affected the people, so the people were divided, too. It even led to civil wars in certain regions.

The Americans and some countries of the region entered the scene to take possession of and defeat the national movements in different countries. Here, the U.S. played an important role. France also got involved in North Africa. Moreover, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates joined in fiercely to eliminate the Islamic Awakening—the Arab Spring—and eliminate popular uprisings. They were trying to achieve their goals by mobilizing their media power and supporting military coups in the region. We all know how the situation unfolded in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. But in Yemen, the situation is different. They tried to take possession of the popular uprising in Yemen for their profit, but a large part of the Yemeni nation, with national and political resistance, continued to support dear the brother Al-Sayyid Abdul-Malik al-Houthi and the Ansar Allah movement, and stood against the foreigners until an unjust war was imposed on them: the war which continues to this day.

Now we get to the case of Syria. What happened in Syria had nothing to do with the “Arab Spring” or “the Islamic Awakening”. What happened in Syria was the implementation of the plot of the U.S., Saudi Arabia and some countries in the region to block the achievement of the movement of Resistance; particularly, because at that time the popular revolution in Egypt had made Israel very worried about its future in the region.

At that time, the Israelis held big conferences in which they spoke of the strategic atmosphere. They were even considering re-establishing some military battalions and sending them to the Sinai borders. This shows how worried and frightened Israel was about the changes in Egypt.

After they lost hope in turning the Syrian government into their ally, their desirable goal to pursue in Syria was to overthrow the government and the ruling system. What many do not know is that before taking actions to overthrow the Damascus government, much effort was made so that President Bashar al-Assad would lead the Syrian movement to another direction. The Saudis worked on this issue so hard that even “Malik Abdullah bin Abdul-Aziz” personally went to Damascus, despite the fact that he had boycotted Syria. The Qatari government also worked hard to achieve this goal. Turkey and a number of other Arab countries, including Egypt, during the ruling of Hosni Mubarak, also tried to push Syria into joining the opposing front. By giving political and enticing financial promises to Assad, the U.S. and their allies tried to push Syria to another direction, the so-called “Arab moderation”, which we actually call “Arab surrender.”

Nevertheless, President Bashar al-Assad and other Syrian leaders consistently emphasized their firm support for the Resistance, believing that the Arab-Israeli conflict persisted. Bashar al-Assad believed that there would be no peace in the region without resolving the issue of the occupied Golan, and compensating for the unaccomplished rights of the Palestinians.

=All in all, what happened was that the Americans failed to make Damascus comply with them; Washington knew well that Syria had a pivotal status within the framework of the Resistance. If we want to explain the precise role of Syria with regard to the Resistance, we should mention the Leader’s description of the country. He stated: “Syria is the pillar of Resistance”. Today, without Syria, Lebanon’s resistance will be marginalized. Without Syria, Palestinian resistance will be marginalized, because Syria is one of the main components of the body of Resistance in the region. Some believe that Syria is like a bridge for the Resistance, but I believe that this country is more than a bridge, because Syria is one of the main components of the body, intellect and culture as well as the thinking and will of the Resistance in the region. This fact was proved especially after the 33-day war. Syria’s position, Syria’s support, and Syria’s stability were threatened during the 33-day war: [the plot was that] while the United States is present in Iraq and the borders of Syria, Israel would expand the scope of the war and attack Syria and launch a massive war against Syria. But Bashar al-Assad did not back down, and resolutely and sovereignly continued to support the Resistance during the 33-day war.

After the end of the 33-day war, the Israelis did some research and eventually concluded that in order to end the Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine, they first needed to abolish Syria and they planned to do so. Since they could not take over Syria through their policies, they opted for a military option. If they had been able to create a military coup by penetrating the Syrian army, they would have done so, but they could not. After this failure, the Americans and Israelis abused the freedom of expression in media and political space of Syria and pushed the transformations to a direction which created chaos and internal conflicts in Syria. Since the very early days of the anti-government protests in Syria, I saw first-hand that President Bashar al-Assad organized meetings with the leaders of opposition leaders and tried to meet their demands.

But, afterwards, the demonstrations turned into military operations, just like what happened during the occupation of Daraa. The Americans, Saudis and some other countries in the region sent al-Qaeda, ISIS and Al-Nusra Front Takfiris from all over the world to Syria so they dominate over Syria and put an end to the Syrian state. To serve the interests of whom? To serve the interests of the US and Israel. To serve the interests of the powers who look forward to extinguishing the Palestinian issue; to serve the interests of the powers who want to encircle, isolate and attack Iran. This is the truth. Therefore, the Syrian issue was by no means a problem of people seeking a certain type of election or reform, because Bashar al-Assad was ready to discuss any option that the people wanted. But others quickly took actions to occupy the areas and hit the Syrian army, security forces and Syrian institutions to overthrow Bashar al-Assad through a military solution.

They opened the borders and many ships came carrying loads of military weapons. Joe Biden himself says that tens of thousands tons of weapons and ammunition were delivered to Syria. The U.S. spent hundreds of billions of dollars in this country. What for? To realize democracy in Syria?! ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra were seeking to establish democracy in Syria? Were those who regarded the elections as the worst sin, considered voters in the elections as pagans, and killing them as legitimate, seeking to organize elections for Syrians? The answer was clear; and today, it has been proved that what happened in Syria did not have anything to do with elections, reforms or democracy-related matters; because Bashar al-Assad was willing to negotiate these issues. But they [the West] were in a hurry to overthrow the Syrian government and dominate the country.

What hastens the collapse of the Saudi regime is its officials’ actions

As I’ve mentioned in some media outlets, one and a half years after the start of the Syrian crisis, around 2012 or 2013, Malik Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz sent a special envoy to Bashar al-Assad. Saudi Arabia sent a message to Assad, declaring that if he withdrew from the Resistance and ended his ties with Iran, the war on Syria would be stopped and a solution to the takfiri groups would be found, and Assad would be recognized as President, forever. The Saudis told Assad, “we are demanding neither reform nor anything else, and we are willing to pay hundreds of billions of dollars to reconstruct Syria”. Therefore, the goal was completely different from the demands of the nations in the Arab Spring. The goal was to rob Syria off its historical status, to rob off its rights and to draw it out of the Resistance movement, to prepare the grounds for the obliteration of the Palestinian cause, for the stabilization of U.S.’s position in Iraq, and the isolation and encirclement of Iran. Well, since day one, our understanding of the war was this. I hope that the brothers in Iran will help disperse the information on these facts. Some U.S. officials and Syrian opponents said that if they could dominate Syria, they would immediately enter Lebanon to get rid of Hezbollah. Others said they would go to Iraq. So, the issue was not just Syria.

When the president of the United States, Donald Trump, acknowledges that Obama, Clinton and the CIA created the terror group ISIS and sent it to Syria, was the terrorists’ goal to establish democracy in Syria and the election, or they sought to destroy this country? That’s why we clearly knew from the first day that the goal of the war on Syria was not related to such matters. The goal of this war was to overthrow the Syrian government, destroy the Syrian army, and expand dominance over Syria, so that Syria would yield up its rights and grounds would be prepared for the destruction of the Palestinian issue, the normalization of relations with Israel, and the elimination of all the aspirations and dreams of the nations of the region. We agreed on this conclusion in Lebanon, for example in Hezbollah, and there was not even one single different opinion among the members of Hezbollah regarding the goals of the war against Syria. Even Ayatollah Khamenei—who is also approved by God and enjoys great historical insight and awareness, as well as the characteristics of the famous and exceptional leadership—believed in the principle that the Syrian issue was not a matter of democracy, reform, and so on.

I pointed out in some gatherings that there were people suggesting that Iran had ordered us to enter Syria, but this is not true. We decided to enter Syria because we felt seriously threatened by the situation in Syria and Lebanon. There was the risk that the war would soon be drawn into our towns and villages. We were willing to engage in the war, but after all, it required permission and support—and the former, i.e. permission, was more important.

I paid a visit to the Leader, I explained my data and inference about Syria and its transformations, and I presented my own arguments. I learned that his view about the events in Syria was much clearer and deeper than our view. His positions with regard to Syria and its transformations were clear from the very beginning. He said that this was a plot for overthrowing Syria, and it targeted Syria, the status of Syria with relation to the Resistance and the Palestinian issue, the Resistance movement, and also the Islamic Republic of Iran; because after they finish with Syria, they would attack Lebanon, Iraq and Iran. This is what actually happened. They came to Lebanon and occupied a part of Al-Baqaa, and if they had been able, they would have occupied more areas. But we and the Lebanese army stood up to them and besieged them in mountainous areas.

You saw in Iraq, Takfiri terrorists were quickly transported from the east of Euphrates in Syria to Iraq, and they dominated the province of Al Anbar over a very short period of time. This province accounts for over a quarter of Iraq’s total area. They also subjugated Mosul, Saladin, and other parts, reaching an area 20 kilometers from the city of Karbala and 40 kilometers from Baghdad. This means that we actually saw over the past years, what Ayatollah Khamenei had judged at the beginning of the Syrian events. There, the reason for the Leader’s firm position as to side with Syria was revealed. The Islamic Republic of Iran adopted this position, and we, too, taking this position, went to Syria and fought there. The Syrian government, people and army resisted the plots. A large portion of the Syrian population supported the government and resisted. We have always said that after God’s grace, this was the resistance and endurance of the Syrian government, people and leaders that led to the victory of Syria. Hezbollah of Lebanon, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Iraqi friends, and Russia were the arms that assisted Syria, and the main task was carried out by the Syrian government, people and army. If the Syrian leaders surrendered, if the Syrian army collapsed, or if the Syrian people stopped supporting the government and the army, we would not have achieved anything in the big war in the Levant. We only assisted them.

So, now we are here. I will finish this part of my talk by mentioning anecdotes of my visit to Ayatollah Khamenei and the spiritual capacity of this dear and honorable Sayyid. After the Syrian crisis began in 2011, a US-led international coalition entered this country, and all the countries of the world believed that Damascus would collapse within only two months. All the Arab countries believed this. Even some of our friends also believed that. So, we also felt a little worried, even though we didn’t really believe that. The dimensions of the matter were not clear for us, and we were very worried. At that time, some countries like Turkey and Qatar, with which we were in contact prior to the Syrian crisis, sent us messages. At that time, Mr. Davutoğlu who had a political responsibility came to Lebanon.

Did this happen before the Istanbul summit or after that?

No, it was after the events and before the Astana meetings. Astana meeting was held after Davutoğlu’s visit. I am currently talking about the transformations in the first and second years of the Syrian crisis, especially in the first year. The Turkish leaders sent us messages that “We are willing to give you a guarantee. You stand back and do not count on Syria, because we guarantee you that Damascus will fall in two or three months.” Many brothers in Iran were also influenced by this atmosphere. At a meeting with the Leader and a number of Iranian officials, we learned that some Iranian authorities were also influenced by the atmosphere formed in the region. But in that meeting, contrary to the views and opinions of all the countries of the world, the experts of the region, and even a number of Iranian officials, the Leader turned to me and said: “We have to make Syria and Bashar al-Assad win, and they will eventually win.”

Meanwhile, all the world said a different thing. After about 2 years, the signs of the realization of this prediction by the Supreme Leader of the Revolution were also revealed. Now that we reached this point, we are possibly witnessing a major and historic victory in Syria. Imagine for a moment that ISIS and the Al-Nusra Front and their American allies had become victorious in Syria and had subjugated this country, what would have happened to Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran? And what would the fate of the nations of the region have been? What would the fate of Palestine and Quds have been? In the case of the victory of the Takfiris, the deal of the century would have come about long ago, and it was enacted by this day. If today Ben Salman told the Palestinians to accept minor things they were given, what would have happened to Quds and Palestine? Therefore, if we want to know the importance of the victory that was achieved in Syria, we must reverse this question and ask: if we had not won and had been defeated in Syria, if they had won, what would be the situation in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, Iran, and the whole region? When we answer this question, we understand the importance of what the fighters have accomplished in Syria and the significance of their resistance.

You repeatedly emphasized that the rulers of different countries contacted Bashar al-Assad, giving him various promises of the financial and political kind, and even guaranteed his remaining in power, but he eventually refused to accept these promises. What was the reason for Bashar al-Assad’s persistence and resistance against these promises, and what caused him to endure so much pressure?

It was mainly because Bashar al-Assad did not trust the American and Arab parties. On the other hand, Assad knew their experience; because they all consider granting concessions. Yet, he himself is not a man who would give concessions in exchange for the essential and national principles. Bashar al-Assad believed that offering any concession in exchange for national principles would be risky for Syria’s existence, national sovereignty, and its status in the region.

Before Syria faced this situation and Iran, Hezbollah and Syria itself and the government of Dr. Bashar al-Assad opted for this solution, were other alternatives investigated to see if other options were available or there was basically no other way from the beginning?

Our initial option was negotiation, and a political settlement was our priority. The Syrian government, our brothers in Iran, and we in Hezbollah made numerous contacts with the Syrian opposition and invited them to negotiate for deciding on a political settlement, but the opposition strongly rejected political negotiation and discussion and believed that the Syrian government would fall within two to three months. I remember that some influential parties in the Syrian opposition told us that we intended to revive the dead! They said that the Damascus government was done with and they would not accept to negotiate with such a government. This was their mistake in calculations because they absolutely refused to negotiate a political settlement. But their even bigger calculation mistake was that they engaged in military action too soon, which was their main objective in Syria. As I mentioned earlier, their goal was not to establish democracy in Syria or to implement reforms in this country. Their main goal was to overthrow the Damascus government, hit the Syrian army and, change the equations in the country. Yes, that’s right; there was no other option when the Syrian government and its friends and allies opted for an armed resistance option.

An important matter that has always been emphasized by Ayatollah Khamenei is the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations and that members of different Islamic denominations should be able to coexist peacefully and should by no means be hostile toward each other. Meanwhile, we see some movements that add fuel to the fire of religious disputes, under the influence of the propaganda and policies of the foreigners—who are enemies of both Shias and Sunnis. What is your view about the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations promoted by Ayatollah Khamenei, and also emphasized by Imam Khomeini (r.a.)? What has this policy achieved? And what issues, do you think, can threaten this policy at the moment?

Firstly, this is one of the fundamental principles raised by Ayatollah Khomeini (r.a.) under the title of Islamic unity, solidarity among Muslims, the closeness of Islamic denominations, and the proliferation of the spirit of convergence, cooperation and coordination among all Muslims. The Islamic Republic of Iran has always favored this policy. After taking up the responsibility of leadership, Ayatollah Khamenei, too, continued this policy forcefully, always stressing it. The truth is that this is also the policy of the original Islam of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the Quran. Unity among Muslims, the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations, is an Islamic logic that all Muslims should heed.

Much effort has been made in this regard. Since the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, extensive relations were developed among Islamic parties and Muslim scholars across the region and even the world. Moreover, many congresses and conferences were held during these years to promote the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations. Undoubtedly, the attitude of Imam Khomeini (r.a.) and also Ayatollah Khamenei toward the Palestinian cause has played an important role in gathering all Muslims under one single flag, i.e. the centrality of the Palestinian cause.

Much effort has been made in this regard. If we look for the good results and the achievements of the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations, we will find them in recent years; because the most dangerous incident since 2011 was the U.S.-Saudi project aimed at creating faith and tribe related sedition and divisions between Shias and Sunnis in the region. This is more dangerous than what happened in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain. I remind you of four years ago; now we are in the fifth year. When the aggressive U.S.-Saudi coalition took military action against Yemen, the Friday Prayers’ Imam of the Great Mosque of Mecca (Masjid ul-Haram) announced during the Friday Prayers sermons that the war on Yemen was a Sunni-Shia war. The Saudis tried to present the Syrian war as a religious and ethnic war, too. A lot of efforts were made in the media and huge amounts of money were spent to make the different wars in the region look like sectarian and tribal conflicts. All these attempts failed. The Shias rejected this rationale. Many Sunni scholars and Sunni figures rejected this rationale. This has been one of the results of this policy pursued over the past 30 years.

Relations between the Shias and Sunnis, the efforts of the Islamic Republic of Iran, as well as the positions held by Imam Khomeini (r.a.) and Ayatollah Khamenei created solid relationships in the Muslim World, so that the Islamic world was able to nullify the biggest sedition aimed at creating an internal war between Shias and Sunnis. Naturally, we should continue this policy, although we have successfully passed this stage, and we have overcome many risks so far.

I believe that the United States and Saudi Arabia suffered a tough defeat in their efforts for causing sedition in the region and thus failed to make Iraq’s events seem like a Sunni-Shia battle. We saw that Sunnis, Shias, Iraqi nomads—including Shias and Sunnis—all stood against ISIS, and prior to that, they had resisted the occupation by the United States. In Syria, too, the people, including the Syrian army, the popular forces or the allied forces, who fought against ISIS, Al-Nusra Front and other terrorist groups were mostly Sunnis. That is, those who fought in Syria were mostly Sunnis, fighting alongside Shias and members of other Islamic denominations.

Therefore, based on what has happened so far in Yemen or other countries, I strongly believe that the division-provoking project has miscarried, which means that the Islamic Ummah has been largely spared of the risk of being afflicted with religious sectarian conflicts. We should continue this strategy to strengthen this achievement. Enhanced relations, cooperation, support of the Palestinian cause, resistance to the U.S. and defense of the nations of the region can lead to increased unity and solidarity among Muslims.

Sometimes, the adversaries of the Palestinian nation, the Islamic Revolution, and the Resistance movement propagate the idea that the people of Palestine are Sunnis. They also attribute other characteristics to the Palestinian nation so that under the influence of the propaganda, the Iranian people become skeptical toward the Palestinians. They try to create the ambiguity that ‘why should Iran support a Sunni nation?” But we have always seen that Ayatollah Khamenei has stressed and stresses that the Palestinian cause represents the most important matter of the Muslim world, and he has never adopted a Sunni-Shi’a perspective with regard to Palestine.

This position by the Leader has existed since the occupation of Palestine by the Zionists, and this is the position taken by all scholars, jurists (Faqihs) and religious authorities (marja’s) in Najaf and in the holy city of Qom and among all Shias of the world. Even beyond this, our great scholars and marja’s, who are said to be traditionalists and not revolutionary—if it is appropriate to say this about them—support the Palestinian cause, accuse the usurper Israel and provide assistance to Palestine; all of them have issued written permissions to grant part of the religious donations and Imam’s share to the Palestinian Resistance. This is a great action. You know that our marja’s are generally cautious about spending the Imam’s share, but they allow Imam’s share or some of it to be allocated to the Palestinian Resistance. Now, who were the members of the Palestinian Resistance? The members of the Palestinian resistance are Sunnis, not Shias; many were not even Islamist, for example, they were inclined to nationalist or leftist parties. Our marja’s did not include any prerequisite for assistance and authorized part of the Imam’s share to the Palestinian Resistance so that Palestine would be liberated. This means that there has been a great insight and awareness.

As for the question of Palestine, as Ayatollah Khamenei has pointed out on many occasions, if we search the whole world, looking for a matter that has remained intact, and its legitimacy is completely clear in terms of legal, religious, moral, and humane principles, it is the matter of Palestine. The enemies are trying to distract us from the Palestinian cause, using all the tools at their disposition and various weapons. This is an effort that has been made in previous years, i.e. when they sent Palestinian suicide bombers to Shia areas to carry out terrorist operations. That’s why I said on Quds Day a few years ago: “Why do you send Palestinian people? Why do you hire them to kill our women and children? If you are seeking to distract us from the Palestinian cause, then kill us everywhere: by every door, in every mosque and hussayniyah. We are the Shia of Amir al-Mu’minin, Imam Ali (a.s.), and we won’t let go of Palestine, the Palestinian nation and the holy institutions of the Islamic Ummah in Palestine.” These efforts in theory and practice are known. Undoubtedly, it is a matter of the Truth and Islam, so the Islamic Republic of Iran, we and all Muslims must take actions for this cause, based on their religious and divine duty.

Given the importance of this matter, I would like to ask two questions. First, the general view of Ayatollah Khamenei is clear about the approximation [the policy of approximation of Islamic denominations], and he initiated a movement of approximation at the beginning of his term of leadership. I would like to ask you to give some more concrete examples of his actions and views on the unity of Shia and Sunni and the approximation dialogue. For example, it is indicated that he has announced as forbidden (haram) to disrespect Sunnis sanctities, and so on. Secondly, some pretend that the issues that have occurred in different Islamic countries like Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and Bahrain over the past years have been based on the disagreements between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and others have entered into conflict, on their behalf. How much can this be true?

As for the first part of the question, the formation of the “Congress on approximation of denominations”, holding several conferences and gatherings in Iran, the special attention the Leader gave to these gatherings and his insistence on attending them and speaking to the audience and the Muslims of the world are some of his measures for promoting approximation. We also constantly observed during the conferences on Islamic unity in Iran that the Leader presented himself among the Shia and Sunni scholars and met with them, ignoring all the security and non-security considerations. The main reason for this attitude is his emphasis on the necessity of spreading the culture of unity among Islamic communities and Muslim scholars. His Eminence endorsed gatherings that bring about unity among scholars.

We, in Lebanon, have the “gathering of Muslim scholars”, which is one of the good and successful experiences for unifying the Islamic denominations. A large number of Shia scholars and Sunni scholars are present at this Islamic gathering. Whenever our brother organizers traveled to Iran for the gathering of Muslim scholars and met with the Leader, his Eminence praised the formation of such a gathering and emphasized the necessity of promoting it in other Islamic countries. In recent years, he has taken some brave positions. In these years, we have seen that many efforts were made aiming to disunite and divide Shias and Sunnis, and unfortunately, some Wahhabi and Takfiri movements, as well as some Sunni-attributed satellite channels such as Safa and Wesal, have tried to takfir (denote excommunication to) the Shia, attributing big lies to Shias. They attributed certain beliefs to Shi’ism that the Shia do not hold at all.

On the other side of the spectrum, some satellite channels are attributed to the Shia community, figures and groups that have nothing to do with Shi’ism, and none of the current notions, such as ‘the Islamic Ummah’, ‘the global Arrogance’, ‘Autocracy and Tyranny’, ‘freedom’, and ‘defending sanctities’ are important to them. The only mission of these satellite channels is to divide Shias and Sunnis by using insulting words to criticize the opposite community. That is what the Leader referred to as the “London-based Shiism”.

The type of activities of the satellite channels attributed to each community– either Shia or Sunni– shows that they are both conducted by one single force. For instance, we see that some channels attributed to Shias use insulting words for certain wives of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) or his companions. The Wahhabi channels then broadcast some of these cases. This means that each of these channels plays a complementary role in arousing sedition and sectarian conflicts between Shias and the Sunnis. Naturally, this had a dangerous impact on Muslims. I have discussed it with some major Sunni scholars in Lebanon and other countries like Syria and Egypt, who similarly believe that this is very dangerous. We believe that only one person can solve this problem and stand up to this wave. Because it requires bravery and a high position so that a sovereign position can be taken for it, in other words, so that the sedition is completely defeated.

While meeting with the leader some years ago, I mentioned these issues and the names. He also stated: “It is true; what is happening is very dangerous. One of the worst things is insulting the prominent figures of the denominations, and we need to adopt a strong position with regard to this event.”

 I remember that some years ago the Leader traveled to the province of Kurdistan and had a speech in the city of Sanandaj. In that meeting, he emphasized the fact that insulting Sunni figures was haram (forbidden). Nevertheless, shortly after his speech, the so-called Shia satellite channels started disparaging Sayyida Ayesha, and accused her of things that the Shia had never mentioned before. This was an event that could have caused big sedition in the countries of the Muslim World.

Afterwards, some of the religious scholars addressed a letter to the Leader of the Revolution, asking an istifta’ about the law applicable to insulting prominent figures of the Islamic denominations. The Leader’s response was so powerful and explicit that it had a significant impact on Arab and Islamic countries. I assure you that the speech of the Leader in Sanandaj and then his assertive answer to the scholars’ istifta [enquiry] about the actions of the channels attributed to the Shias and the Sunnis blocked the way to sedition and made futile the efforts of those who tried to arouse conflicts. Moreover, by God’s grace, at that time many honorable Marja’s in Qom and in Najaf issued separate declarations, explicitly announcing that the real position of the Shia community is the same as what Ayatollah Khamenei had stated.

As an answer to the second part of the question, I should say, the interpretation that the transformations in the region is indeed a Saudi-Iranian conflict, is a mistake. The conflict existed in the region even before the Islamic Republic was established; when the Soviet Union on one side and the United States of America and the West on the other side were in conflict. In addition, before the establishment of the Islamic Republic in Iran, there existed Arab-Israeli conflicts in the region. The Arab-Israeli conflict existed since 1948, before the victory of the Islamic Revolution. Therefore, Saudi Arabia’s problem with many countries of the region and many resistance groups in the region dates back to the time before the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. This is a well-known fact. So when the Islamic Revolution became victorious in Iran, and the Pahlavi regime, as one of the best friends of the U.S., collapsed, the Islamic Republic was established in Iran and started supporting the Palestinian cause, the resistance groups and the underprivileged in the region. From the very first moment, Saudi Arabia declared hostility to the Islamic Republic. Of course, Imam Khomeini (r.a.) extended the hand of friendship to all Arab and Islamic countries from the very early days of the Revolution. Despite this, since day one, Al Saud found that the existence of the Islamic Republic of Iran was a threat to the interests of the United States, Israel, the tyrannies and autocrats, as well as the mercenaries of Washington and Tel Aviv in the region. For this reason, Saudi Arabia became an enemy of the Islamic Republic.

They say, when in the war against Iran, they sided with Saddam, they paid $200 billion to support Saddam. At that time, however, oil was cheap. I remember a few years ago, one of the Saudi princes, Nayef, said that if Saudi Arabia had been able to pay more money to Saddam at that time, it would have done so. Therefore, Saudi Arabia was the initiator of hostility, war, and conspiracy against the Islamic Republic of Iran. Whereas, Iran had extended a hand of friendship to it. Saudi Arabia’s problem with Iran basically derived from the same reasons that had hampered Saudi Arabia’s relations with other countries which supported the Resistance in Palestine and the region. This is a fact. There is no such thing as a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia in the region.

Regardless of the position of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia always opposed the resistance groups even before the victory of the Islamic Revolution. So our problem with Saudi Arabia is not related to the positions of Iran. Saudi Arabia’s opposition to Palestinian resistance throughout history also has nothing to do with Iran. For example, when there was a great deal of hostility between Saudi Arabia and Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, the Islamic Revolution in Iran had not been in place, yet. Therefore, the controversy during the era before the establishment of the Islamic Republic has its own clear reasons. When the Islamic Revolution of Iran became victorious and the Islamic Republic started attending to the affairs of the Islamic and Arab Ummah, then Saudi Arabia started showing enmity to Iran. This is the reality.

 At the end of the discussion on Saudi Arabia, I would like to point out that recently the Supreme Leader, referring to the fact that some are equipping Saudi Arabia with missiles and nuclear weapons, said “we are not upset, because soon this equipment will be at the disposition of the Islamic fighters”. How do you evaluate this statement of the Leader?

The ruling regime in Saudi Arabia is an old regime; very old and aged. Perhaps this regime, for natural reasons, is going through its final era. The Al Saud family has inflicted all kinds of oppression on others during the last 100 years and looted the property of their own nation. Corruption is rooted in every part of this regime, and suppressing freedom in this country has reached its highest level. In addition, the monopoly of power within the members of the Saudi family has peaked in the last 100 years.

But what will precipitate the end of this regime is the performance of its current officials, which is completely different in terms of both appearance and method of action, with that of the former officials of Saudi Arabia. For example, the Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman launched a war against Yemen, and now we see that he is committing horrible crimes in that country. Undoubtedly, the adoption of such a decision, namely, the war on Yemen and committing crimes against civilians, will have a negative effect on the future of the Saudi regime. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia’s apparent interference in the affairs of various countries is among other factors that will affect the future of this regime. For example, in the countries of the Arab world, we see that Saudi officials interfere in every country and try to show themselves as sided with the nations.

In the past 40 years, we have seen that Saudi Arabia has tried to present itself as a friend of all countries and all nations, pretending to be a good state which helps others. However, we hear for the first time that the slogan “Down with Al Saud” resonates in many Arab countries. For the first time, we see that political and national groups, as well as governments, are openly opposed to Saudi Arabia’s crimes and interference in Arab countries. Saudi Arabia’s involvement in countries such as Bahrain, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan can be seen. Even in Libya, where there is a military conflict now, at least one of the parties involved says that Saudi Arabia and the Emirates are conspiring to destroy Tripoli and Libya.

Today, in many Arab and Islamic countries, many personalities as well as parties, movements, scholars, and governments abhor Saudi Arabia’s attitude and oppose it. Add to this the Saudi stance on the question of Palestine, and in particular the so-called Deal of the Century. Saudi Arabia’s humiliation, indignity, and disgrace before Trump will normally undermine Saudi rulers’ dignity and power. The Saudis have always shown themselves to be independent of others, to be honorable and to be servants of the Holy Shrines. Trump’s recent trip to Saudi Arabia and what he says at celebrations today is worth considering. Look at Trump’s recent remarks on Saudi Arabia. “I called the king of Saudi Arabia and told him I love him,” he says. He says he told the king of Saudi Arabia: “You have a lot of money and we have paid a lot of money to support you. You must pay for the support.” He says he has gained a huge amount from Riyadh, much easier than earning $100 from a New York store. Look at Saudi Arabia, its media, its officials; absolute silence! Even their friends in the world, their media in the world did not speak a word. This is the ultimate humiliation. Trump makes similar remarks to ridicule and humiliate Saudi Arabia. The Americans laugh at the Saudis and ridicule them.

This is while if a person from the Muslim world made similar remarks about the Saudis, they would be furious.

Definitely. They might even cut off diplomatic relations with the leaders of that country and accuse them of disbelief [kufr] and sentence them to capital punishment! I cannot but say that Saudi Arabia has never experienced such humiliation, vanity, weakness, humiliation, and scandal in its history. That’s precisely why I think the current Saudi rulers will not stay in power for a long time. Divine and historical traditions and the nature of affairs indicate that they cannot endure for long.

How did we defeat the U.S. in its ISIS project?

Over the past few years, we have witnessed popular uprisings in some Islamic countries, including Yemen, where the people rose up. We also witnessed popular uprising in Bahrain, but in all of these cases, Saudi Arabia, with its interventions, has been trying to suppress these popular uprisings in the region which seek the establishment of Islamic and anti-Zionist governments. As you know, Ayatollah Khamenei has always emphasized the role of the people in creating a general movement to confront Zionism. That is, even if certain measures are taken by the Resistance movement, he still focuses on the people of the region, and he always raises hope that the people will rise up. Even in the case of Palestine, when some of the Palestinian leaders sign inappropriate agreements for a compromise, he says that the Palestinian people are opposed to this. Accordingly, given his emphasis on the role of the people, how do you evaluate and analyze the role of the people in the developments of the Islamic world in the perspective of Ayatollah Khamenei and based on the meetings you have had with him?

What we heard from the Leader (May Allah protect him) on public occasions, in public meetings or private meetings, was that he emphasized on massive popular movements in all matters. He always emphasized that if you had a certain organization, this organization should always be at the heart of its supporters and the people, and no organization or party should be separated from the involved people; the true power is the power of the people’s presence. Of course, this is what we saw during the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran. We have also had such an experience in Hezbollah in Lebanon. Our power as Hezbollah in Lebanon is not only due to military capabilities, but also due to the popularity that this group has gained among various grassroots groups.

In Palestine, too, those who are fighting against Israel’s aggression and conspiracies—including the Deal of the Century—are the people of Palestine. The Palestinian resistance movements were able to resist, fight and take strong positions thanks to the support of the Palestinian people. Today in Yemen, without the presence of the people and the popular support of Ansar Allah, could Ansar Allah, under the leadership of dear brother Sayyid Abdulmalek Al Houthi, be able to enter the fifth year of battle and continue to fight? In many Yemeni cities, like “Saada” and “Sana’a”, we see massive popular presence, while there are many problems, including war and the spread of cholera and other diseases and the siege of Yemen. Yet, all the Yemeni people, men and women, old and young, take to the streets in every occasion, and this popular presence has given the Yemeni army and popular committees the power to resist Saudi-American invasion.

Another example is Iraq. Who stood up against ISIS? In Iraq, people stood up against ISIS terrorists. In Iraq, those who were able to resist ISIS, were the Iraqi people and the Popular Mobilization Force, after the fatwa of the Marja’iah [religious leadership] and support of Ayatollah Khamenei and the Islamic Republic of Iran. If the Iraqi people hadn’t supported the Popular Mobilization Forces, the army and the Marjaiyah, resistance against the Takfiri terrorism and defeating it would not have been possible. It’s the same in all arenas. So the matter of the nations is a fundamental matter.

Now what has actually been the main factor that has been able to keep the Palestinian cause alive—after decades of conspiracy and deceiving—and has defeated the U.S.’s plans and plots against the Palestinians, one after the other in the region, has been the popular support and not the positions of the governments. The popular stance, the uprising of the nations, their attention to the issues, their involvement, their sacrifices, and their resistance has always been the cause of victory. We say in Lebanon’s literature: “The nation and resistance are like the sea, that is, like water and fish.” The fish cannot survive out of the water, and this means no resistance movement can resist and win outside the circle of the nation and widespread popular support.

You referred to Iraq; well, we have witnessed very important events in Iraq over the past recent years, and we can say that during this period, two important incidents took place; the first event was the occupation of Iraq by foreigners after the fall of Saddam, and the second was the formation of ISIS terrorist group. After the formation of this terrorist group, Iraq was severely invaded and significant parts of the country were occupied by the members of this group. But, both the American occupiers and ISIS occupiers finally had to leave Iraq. What role did the Islamic Republic of Iran play in the shifts in Iraq? What were the macro-level policies of the Islamic Republic regarding these events and its role in preserving the unity and integrity of Iraq? In recent years, some events also took place in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region that we would like you to talk about, as well.

Firstly, since the start of the occupation of Iraq by the United States of America, the position of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Leader (May Allah protect him) was quite clear towards the occupiers. The Islamic Republic of Iran rejected the occupation of Iraq by the United States. Even before the U.S.’s invasion of Iraq, Iran’s position was clear. After the occupation of Iraq by the United States, the Islamic Republic of Iran, with a clear position, called for the withdrawal of the U.S. from Iraq so that the Iraqi people can themselves manage their country. This was a great political stance.

Secondly, after the occupation of Iraq by the U.S., the Islamic Republic of Iran made many efforts to unite Iraqi parties, movements and various groups, so that they form a unified position against the occupiers. Meanwhile, the Americans at that time were trying to take advantage of the internal disagreements in Iraq to stabilize their occupation. Therefore, the second attempt (of IRI) was to coordinate the positions of Iraqi leaders, groups and parties, who had  intellectual, political, religious, tribal, and regional differences. In order to achieve this important goal in Iraq—namely to unite different parties—the Islamic Republic of Iran established good relations with all Iraqis, including Arabs, Kurds, Turkmans, Shias and Sunnis.

Thirdly, the Islamic Republic of Iran supported the stance taken by the religious Marja’iah [religious leadership] in Najaf, Ayatollah Sistani (May Allah protect him), the eminent Marja’iah [religious leadership] of the Shias, because the positions of the Marja’iah [religious leadership] in Najaf were very important and had a significant impact on shaping the central and crucial events. For example, after the occupation of Iraq, the U.S. sought to impose a new constitution on the country, to which the Marja’iah [religious leadership] objected and declared that the Iraqis should decide on the constitution and agree on it. This is just one example of the cases when the Marja’iah [religious leadership] intervened.

Among other important factors was that the Islamic Republic of Iran’s support strengthened and inspired the Iraqi resistance groups who resisted the American occupiers. The position of the Islamic Republic of Iran was explicit; they regarded the resistance in Iraq as legitimate and the natural right of the Iraqi people. They believed the Iraqis had the right to engage in armed resistance against those who had occupied their land. Eventually, the U.S. couldn’t achieve its goals in Iraq.

Moreover, in one of the stages, along with the honorable Marja’iah [religious leadership] in Iraq, the Islamic Republic of Iran worked hard to prevent conflicts among members of different denominations in Iraq. At that time, the takfiris who had entered Iraq, were seeking to cause conflicts between the Shias and the Sunnis by suicide bombings in Shia community areas, such as their mosques, Hussainiyehs, the shrines of the immaculate Imams (a.s.) including the shrine of Imam Hussain (a.s) and the shrines of Imams Askariin (a.s.) in Samarra. Most of the suicide bombers were from Saudi Arabia and their car bombs were also sent to them by Saudi Arabia’s Intelligence services. So although Riyadh endeavored to create religious schism in Iraq, the efforts of the religious Marja’iah [religious leadership] in Najaf and the Islamic Republic of Iran prevented tribal conflicts and a civil war—even if some struggles and contests occurred.

As a result of political resistance and political effort on the one hand, and armed resistance on the other hand, the U.S. found it impossible to stay in Iraq. During the premiership of Nouri al-Maliki, they sought to sign an agreement to withdraw from Iraq, and eventually the signing of an agreement between Baghdad and Washington led to the decision of withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. Naturally, the U.S. wanted to stay in Iraq for longer. During the negotiations for the agreement, they tried to maintain about 50,000 troops of the total 150,000 U.S. forces in Iraq, but the Iraqis refused to accept. [The Americans were bargaining by diminishing the number]: they accepted to leave 30 thousand, 25 thousand, 20 thousand, and finally, 10 thousand of their forces in Iraq, but still the Iraqis opposed; obviously, not all the Iraqis, but this was the view of the public in general. The Iraqi government rejected the granting of diplomatic immunity to American troops and military forces. Consequently, Washington under President Barack Obama concluded that there was no choice but to leave Iraq.

Yes, the Americans retained their embassy in Iraq and a large number of embassy protection forces, as well as some of their consulates, but their open military presence was over, and the American military bases were closed down and America’s military retreat from Iraq was announced. This was a great victory for Iraq and the Iraqi people. Another incident occurred when ISIS inflicted calamity and pain on the Iraqi people. Everyone knows about ISIS. ISIS took advantage of its presence in Syria, at the east of Euphrates and the Badia (the Syrian Desert). You remember that this group then occupied 40 to 45 percent of the territory of Syria. ISIS’s leaders were Iraqi, indeed, the main leaders were Iraqi, and they paid special attention to Iraq, and therefore they were counted on. The United States of America and some countries in the region, and more than others, Saudi Arabia, were behind-the-scenes players of what ISIS did in Iraq. We all recall that when ISIS arrived in Mosul, Diyala, Anbar and Salah al-Din, many satellite channels affiliated with Saudi Arabia and some Persian Gulf countries reported on the event as a major victory. ISIS dominated a number of Iraqi provinces and facilities in a short time. The Iraqi forces collapsed and ISIS was on the verge of entering Karbala and even Baghdad. The situation was very dangerous. Even ISIS had reached only some hundred meters to Samarra, and it had become a threat to the shrine of Imams Askariin (a.s.).

In the early days, the Islamic Republic of Iran rushed to aid Iraq. Iraq’s religious Marja’iah [religious leadership] decided on certain positions, and Ayatollah Sistani issued the fatwa of jihad kafayee. The Iraqis became prepared to rise up but they needed assistance for managing and commanding, weapons and facilities. At that time, a significant part of the war armaments and facilities of Iraq had been robbed by ISIS. The Iraqis said that many of their firearm warehouses were empty. We remember that in the early days, dear brother Hajj Ghasem Soleimani and the brothers from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps went to Baghdad to organize resistance groups rooted in Iraq and coordinate them with Iraqi government forces. Mr. Nouri al-Maliki also cooperated very well. Resistance to ISIS began. After a few days, Hajj Qasem came to Lebanon and met with me. He asked us to send about 120 Hezbollah members to Iraq to command operations. He said that combatants weren’t needed because there were so many combatants in Iraq, but commanders were needed for operations in different areas. So we sent a large number of our brothers to Iraq. The borders between Iran and Iraq were opened so that weapons were provided via the border areas and that there would be no need to send them from Tehran and distant places. Importing armaments started, providing arms for the Iraqi army and the Popular Mobilization Forces set off, and the fight began.

All Iraqis know the reality. We said that the Islamic Republic of Iran rushed to aid Iraq, while taking firm positions. Rejecting ISIS’s dominance, the Islamic Republic started fighting against the Takfiris openly and unhesitatingly, and assisting Iraq. The best commanders in the Guard Corps went to Iraq to help the Iraqis. All of the facilities of the Iranians were provided for the Iraqi people. Everyone knows that the Leader’s stance on helping the Iraqi people and Iraqi forces to impose a defeat on ISIS was that there was no red lines that would prevent the Islamic Republic of Iran from offering the aid.

Praise be to God, thanks to the religious Marja’iah [religious leadership] of Iraq, the fatwa of jihad Kafayee, the firm positions of the Leader, the valuable aids provided by the Islamic Republic of Iran, the direct involvement of the Revolutionary Guards’ brothers and especially the Quds Force, the measures taken by the Popular Mobilization Forces and the Iraqi forces as well as the national unity and solidarity of the Iraqis, in particular, among the Shias and Sunnis and Kurds in confronting ISIS, after a few years, a great victory was achieved in face of ISIS. This achievement would not have been made without the historic and great positions of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Leader, the positions of the religious Marja’iah [religious leadership], the actions of the Popular Mobilization Forces, the Iraqi government and the Iraqi forces.

Recently, you warned of the re-emergence and reactivation of ISIS.

I highlighted two issues, which the Iraqi Prime Minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi, also referred to. The threat posed by ISIS—which is called the “Caliphate State”—is persisting in Iraq. Of course, there is no government under this name now. They formed a government between Syria and Iraq, which was a large government; that is, at some point, their government was larger than what was left of the Syrian and Iraqi governments. The ISIS government ended. The ISIS army, that is the big military infrastructure of ISIS, ended. However, the group’s major leader is still alive, and there are naturally questions about his fate as well as the role of the United States in this matter.

Many of ISIS leaders are still alive, and have been saved from the east of Euphrates and various battlefields. ISIS has small groups that are based in different parts of Syria, Iraq and other parts of the region. They carry out anti-security activities: they engage in suicide attacks, bombings, they kill people; and these are the threats we have to counter. This means that if the ISIS and its security infrastructure are not completely eliminated, ISIS will remain as a threat to Syria and Iraq, as well as to Iran, Lebanon and the entire region.

Based on our information, the Americans have taken some parts of ISIS to Afghanistan. Now the question is whether the members of this group will act against the Taliban in Afghanistan or against the countries of Central Asia. The case is open. A part of ISIS was transferred to North Africa. In the future, it will not be surprising if ISIS is used to exert pressure on China, Russia and other countries, because the U.S. resorts to such methods. Another issue, I called attentions to, is related to Trump, the U.S. and Iraq. Trump insists on the U.S. forces remaining in Iraq. The warning I gave was that Trump is trying to fulfil his electoral promises, sometimes succeeding, and sometimes not.

He might not succeed, but he is trying to fulfil his promises. For example, during his presidential campaigns, Trump promised to transfer the U.S. embassy from Quds to Tel Aviv, which he did. He promised to recognize Quds as the eternal capital of Israel, which he did. He promised to retreat from the nuclear deal, which he did. He promised to intensify sanctions against Iran, and he did so. Well, he also made some promises that he failed to realize. For example, he could not build a wall between Mexico and the United States because he failed to gain the Congress’s approval and the funding. Yet, he is still striving to fulfill this promise.

So this man strives to fulfill his promises. Well, one of the promises he made, which he insisted frequently, was that the departure of the U.S. from Iraq during Obama’s administration was a mistake, and that the U.S. should stay in Iraq. This means that he does not want to leave Iraq, although this is not what the Iraqis want. The second issue is that he says, “Iraq’s oil belongs to the U.S., because we spent $ 7 trillion to free Iraq from Saddam Hussain,”—in his words—“and this should be paid back to us”.

He says, “we need to exploit Iraq’s oil and sell it to get our money back”. When asked how, he said, “we would send the U.S. Army to dominate the oil fields, encircle the oil fields and prevent Iraqis from exploiting these fields. We would use their oil for years and then we will deliver it to them”. Can Trump do this? Maybe not, but he will try to do so. Therefore, I warned that the Iraqis should be vigilant about the plots and dangers of this man who has focused on their oil. Just as he is focusing on Saudi’s capital and is plundering it, he also seriously considers looting Iraq’s oil. What can prevent Trump is the Iraqis’ vigilance, their willpower and their diligence.

Trump’s overnight trip to Iraq apparently infuriated him.

Exactly. He says ‘we sent our military forces, we had casualties, we spent a lot of money, and now we have to travel to Iraq overnight. That’s right.

Since the early days following the victory of the Islamic Revolution, the U.S. officials were angry with Iran. Well, the Shah regime was obliterated, so they lost the regime which was dependent on them, and was their biggest base in the region. Since forty years ago, the U.S. has been faced with resistance on the part of the leader of the Revolution, the Iranian people and the Muslim nations that support the Resistance movement against the Front of Arrogance. Therefore, Americans are very angry with Iran.

You probably remember the famous quote by martyr Beheshti which was derived from a verse of the Holy Qur’an: “The U.S.! be angry with us, and die of this anger.” In this situation, Ayatollah Khamenei states that U.S. is declining in West Asia and Islamic countries, and this power will go away, and the nations of the region will become victorious. I would like to learn about your opinion on this analysis of Ayatollah Khamenei; and what proofs do you think support it?

Firstly, what Ayatollah Khamenei has said about this issue is based on experience, information and concrete realities in the region. One of the hallmarks is the withdrawal of the United States from Iraq, despite the fact that the U.S. had entered Iraq to stay forever, and not to leave it. The United States was unable to stay in Iraq and had to return to the country under the pretext of ISIS. This country cannot remain in Iraq. If the Iraqi authorities and people make the determination to dismiss U.S. forces, they will succeed to do so in a few days. The United States is not strong enough to stay in Iraq against the will of the Iraqi people. Well, this was the first sign and example.

The U.S. was also defeated in Syria. Even eight months ago, Trump announced that the U.S. forces settled in east of Euphrates had plans to retreat. But other officials persuaded him to let the forces stay for six more months. He recently wanted to pull the U.S. forces out again, but he was told that this should not be done, because the departure of the United States was like a major defeat for the U.S., and it would disappoint Washington’s friends in the region. So he decided to let the U.S. forces stay; however, they could possibly leave Iraq any moment. In a telephone conversation with Mr. Erdogan, he said: “the U.S. is leaving Syria; Syria is left for you to do whatever you want with it.” This infuriated Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Therefore, the Emirates embarked on immediately reopening its embassy in Damascus. Well, this was about Syria.

In Yemen, too, it was not only Saudi Arabia that was defeated; rather, the United States also suffered a defeat. The United States became frustrated and despondent in Yemen. Today, the United States cannot impose what it wants on the countries of the region, except in some cases like dealing with the craven among the Al-Saud. The United States is unable to impose its demands on many countries in the region. Washington cannot defend its interests. Remember that 20 years ago, the U.S. went to Somalia and could not stay in that country even for a year, and eventually they left it, humiliated. The United States has become too weak to stay in and dominate over the region; its power is declining day after day. This has happened in the wake of the nations’ awareness and confidence. The obvious manifestation of this failure is that the United States has been trying to encircle the Islamic Republic over the past 40 years, and to overthrow its Islamic system, but it has always failed. They say ‘we are not seeking to overthrow the Islamic Republic, we just want Iran to change behavior and method’, yet they failed.

The Islamic Republic continues to adhere to its values, principles and positions, even though 40 years have passed, and its policy has been quite clear since Imam Khomeini (r.a.).

Pompeo came to Lebanon, and met with Lebanese officials. Then, during a press conference, he said to the Lebanese people, “you have to be brave and fight against Hezbollah”. Nevertheless, he did not receive one single positive answer. When Pompeo came to Lebanon, even those who are our rivals told him: “We cannot confront Hezbollah and it is not acceptable for us to cause a civil war in Lebanon.” This means that the U.S.’s demands and decisions are not even accepted by its friends. These are not our friends, they are our rivals. The reason is that, firstly, we are strong, and secondly, our opponents know that pushing toward a civil war negatively affects Lebanon in general. Therefore, they rejected to confront Hezbollah.

Even now that Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, are seeking to impose the Deal of the Century on Palestine, we see that the entire Palestinian nation reject this plan. From Hamas and Islamic Jihad, to Fatah, the Liberation Organization, and Mahmoud Abbas are against the Deal of the Century. Mr. Abbas accepts to compromise, negotiate and give concessions, but he says: “this type of contract and compromise is not even acceptable to me; because it is so disgraceful and insulting that no Palestinian can consent to such a plan.” Even in the last meeting of the Arab League foreign ministers, despite the fact that many of the participants were not honest, they stated in a declaration: “We cannot accept political solutions against international agreements and laws.” This means they oppose the Deal of the Century. They said this publicly; but why? Because they know that their nations will not accept the Deal of the Century, even if a person like Trump supports this plan.

Hence, there are plenty of signs indicating the defeat of the U.S. Moreover, now we see the current leaders of the U.S.—namely Trump, Bolton, Pompeo—have no respect for others. They don’t consider diplomacy; and they are greedy, arrogant and haughty. Therefore, they humiliate their friends and allies and damage their relation with them. Their behavior toward the Europeans, the tensions in their relation with Russia and China are examples of these behaviors. Nobody knows to which direction they are leading the world. If you ask the public opinion whether they think the U.S. is a reliable government, you will get a negative answer. Now the U.S. leaves all treaties and agreements; it seeks to impose its demands on the international community. This kind of behavior has disrupted and weakened America’s image. Therefore, the signs of the U.S.’s defeat are very clear in many countries.

One of the signs of this major U.S. failure in the region is, in my opinion, the situation of Hezbollah and Lebanon today. I traveled to southern Lebanon two days ago and went as far as the frontier with the occupied Palestine and visited the area. There was a time when the Zionist forces would enter the Lebanese territory whenever they wished, and even advanced up to Beirut in 1982, committing many crimes and killing many people and even many Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. In short, they did whatever they wanted to and committed any crime with impunity. During the 33-day war, they attacked from air and ground. Two days ago, I saw the Lebanese people live in peace and security in the area, and they were not at all worried about being attacked by the Israeli enemy. I saw there, that now it is the Zionists who have built walls to protect themselves. All this shows that Hezbollah, which grew and evolved over the course of about 35 or 40 years, has become a great power today, against the will of the Zionists and the U.S. So much so, that it has given Lebanon a special credibility and this is a national pride and power for Lebanon. Those scenes show that during these years, the U.S.’s plan to completely eliminate the resistance movement has completely failed, and today, the Israelis consider themselves defeated in this region.

That’s right. At least since 1982, when the Zionist aggressors invaded Lebanon, this was part of an American project for Lebanon and the whole region. Since then, every U.S. plan and project has failed in Lebanon. These failures occurred in 1982, then in 1985, and later in 2000, 2005, and 2006, and finally in the current period. Today, the U.S. cannot impose their will on the Lebanese people and their attempts have failed, by the grace of God. The same is true about the Israelis. As you have seen and said, southern Lebanon is in peace and security, which is unprecedented for the past 70 years; that is, since the creation of the Israeli usurper and cancerous regime. You know that southern Lebanon and the border with the occupied Palestinian have always been insecure. The Israelis carried out military invasions and bombarded it. They crossed into the region, kidnapping army men, security forces and even ordinary people.

They ridiculed the Lebanese. For example, in the 1967 war, when Israel sent separate army units to the Sinai, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and the Golan, Israeli war minister was asked if an army unit had been sent to Lebanon. He replied: “No, it is not necessary. It’s enough to send a music band to occupy Lebanon.”

That is the extent they disparaged Lebanon. That period ended by the grace and help of God the Almighty. Today, in southern Lebanon, they do not dare bombard, kidnap, kill, or even trespass. They are very cautious and constantly in fear; because they know that in the event of any aggression, the resistance gives them a decisive answer, which in our view signifies observing the rule of the game and the conflict.

Southern Lebanon has always been frightening [for Israel], and today northern Palestine is the same. Colonialists, settlers, and Israelis in northern Palestine—and not the people in our towns and villages—are scared. This time, it is the Israelis who are building walls and defensive lines, when before, they were always in an offensive position. We were always in a defensive position, but today, we are in an offensive position. It is us who threaten them today; that we will one day enter the occupied Palestine by the grace of God. Hence, thank God the equations have changed, and this has been achieved in the wake of the victory of the Islamic Revolution, through the leadership of Imam Khomeini and the Leader (May His Oversight Last), constant support, and unwavering positions of the Islamic Republic of Iran alongside Hezbollah and the resistance groups in the region.

The image of Hezbollah and the Islamic resistance of Lebanon—in the minds of most people who are not familiar with it—is the image of a military organization. They think Hezbollah is just a military organization. In addition to its defensive and military dimensions to protect Lebanon and to undertake the responsibilities it has defined for itself in that regard, what services has Hezbollah offered to the Lebanese people? We have heard a lot about the progress that Hezbollah has made in science. Besides, there has also been progress in terms of education and literacy rates in that region, especially as compared to before the formation of Hezbollah. These facts have been little publicized. Please tell us more about it. Given the emphasis placed by the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution on the progress and investment in the scientific fields of Iran, do you feel you are among the addressees of this remarks?

Naturally, we consider ourselves to be the addressee of these words too, and believe that this is part of our duty, and we work towards this goal. Regarding Hezbollah, from the very beginning, we were concerned with this issue, but today it has become more important and we are paying more attention to it. Hezbollah is not just a military organization, but a popular movement. This group is a popular movement rather than a [political] party, but it is called the Party of Allah. Hezbollah acts like a national and popular movement. In addition to armed resistance and military activities, Hezbollah engages in various activities. Hezbollah has religious activities, and has scholars and missionaries in religious seminaries who carry out promotional activities in different areas. This is a great change. If today you look at the number of religious students in Lebanon compared to the past, you will realize that the proportion of the Lebanese population who are students of religion is significant. If we include our brothers in the holy cities of Qom and Najaf al-Ashraf too, it will make for a spectacular number. This is unprecedented in Lebanon’s history. Regarding ​​religious activities, in many towns and villages of Lebanon, there was not a mosque before. But today, there is no village in which there is not a mosque. There are also mosques in different parts of cities. For example, in Southern Dahieh, even though hundreds of thousands of people live there, there were only 3 or 4 mosques; but today, praise be to Allah, there are mosques in most of its neighborhoods.

Today there are seminaries in different regions. Seminaries for women, as well as cultural, scientific, and religious studies institutions for women can be found in different regions. Organizing religious ceremonies during Muharram and the holy month of Ramadan, organizing Qur’an recitation gatherings, and holding Muharram processions—which are getting more traction year after year—are among other religious activities of Hezbollah. People are keener on religious occasions and activities in Ramadan and the nights of Qadr.

Beside religious activity, Hezbollah has academic and educational activities. We have the strongest student organizations in universities. The most powerful student organizations at universities are those affiliated with Hezbollah and include both boys and girls; they have a significant presence in universities. They have a strong and active presence at universities among university professors, and school teachers in middle schools and high schools. Hezbollah Group is one of the strongest and largest student and educational groups in Lebanon’s schools. They carry out the same activities as those carried out by Hezbollah student organizations at universities.

Therefore, there are cultural, intellectual, media, political, and scientific activities. In the official examinations, we see that girls and boys who are members of Hezbollah, always rank top and are successful in government and official examinations. We have diverse cultural and social activities for different groups. For example, we have a large division called “Women’s Councils” in Hezbollah. Women’s societies are found in all villages. They communicate with all women; organize cultural classes, and ceremonies on religious and political occasions; provide social aid, and govern women’s affairs in different places. We also have a division for teenagers called “Imam Mahdi (as) Scouts”. This organization, in terms of the number of male and female members, is the largest Scout organization in Lebanon. This is another cultural, intellectual, religious, social and, of course, recreational activity.

We have schools under the name of Imam Mahdi (as) Schools, from kindergarten to secondary school, in different regions, including Beqaa, Beirut and the south. A few years ago, we also set up a University of Religious Education. This university has diverse colleges. We also have a radio station. Al Nour radio is one of the strongest radio channels in Lebanon. Al-Manar TV station also belongs to us; in this field, the range of our activities go beyond television. There are also some institutions of social and service activities in Lebanon that belong to Iran, but are run by Hezbollah brothers. For example, the Martyr Foundation, the Imam Khomeini Relief Committee, and others. These institutions provide services to the families of martyrs, disabled war veterans, and underprivileged families. We take care of many poor families in need, and a large number of orphans.

Another important area of activity is medical care. We have hospitals, surgery, and therapeutic clinics. We also have a large civil defense organization that helps emergency patients. All of this is supervised by Hezbollah, and not the Lebanese government. All these institutions provide people with health, medical, social and financial services. We have an extensive institution called Imam Kazim (as) Qard al-Hasan [interest-free loan] Institute, which is known as the ” Bayt al-mal of Muslims”; but called the Imam Kazim (as) Qard al-Hasan [interest-free loan] Institute. This institution has branches in most districts and has given tens of thousands of interest-free loans to the people. This is also one of the important and well-known matters in Lebanon.

In addition to all the service centers mentioned, Hezbollah also runs other institutes, such as “Constructive Jihad,” which basically helps people in agriculture. We provide a great deal of assistance in this regard. I may have forgotten some other things. Among other important issues is the participation of Hezbollah in municipal elections. Today, Hezbollah is present in most municipalities and many of the heads of municipalities are among our brothers. These municipalities also particularly serve the people. So, if you go to different cities of Lebanon today, you’ll see the situation there is quite different compared to 10, 20 or 30 years ago.

Well, we get to the participation of Hezbollah in parliamentary elections and the presence of our members in the parliament. Naturally, the number of Hezbollah members of Lebanese parliament does not reflect the true size of this group; that is, this number is not proportionate to the true size of Hezbollah. Because, we tend to form a coalition and hand over several seats to our allies so that they also have a strong presence in the parliament. Our representatives serve the people of their regions in the parliament. We participate in the government and have ministers, and we hold ministries such as the Ministry of Health which are naturally to provide services. The current health minister is among the most active ministers of the government. Therefore, apart from the military dimension, Hezbollah is also politically, socially, and culturally active. We have institutions that are active in communications, and even poetry, literature, painting, and music.

But what the media usually concentrate on is the military dimension, since the most important action by Hezbollah since 1982 was defeating Israeli occupiers and achieving the first manifest Arab victory. This was a huge and great action. That is why Hezbollah’s military dimension is often highlighted. Also, Hezbollah went to Syria to fight against the Takfiris and against a project of foreign domination over the whole region. As a result, its military dimension has been wide and essential. However, other activities of Hezbollah continue strongly; even though they are sometimes not adequately portrayed in the media.

I was listening to your speech on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the victory of the Islamic Revolution; I noticed you pointed out some of the problems the Lebanese people face such as the problems with electricity. When we come to Lebanon sometimes, we see the problem of electricity is very serious, and in fact, it is a concern for the Lebanese people. I heard that Saudi Arabia is one of the obstacles. Please tell us about the needs to solve this problem in Lebanon, the government’s lack of serious action to solve the problem and how it is Hezbollah’s concern.

We follow these cases. Not just Saudi Arabia; the main problem is the United States. For example, what disrupts cooperation between the Lebanese government and the Islamic Republic of Iran? Threats posed by the U.S. Some in the Lebanese government are afraid of the U.S. and their sanctions against Lebanon. Otherwise, a few years ago, delegations from Iran came to Lebanon with offers of help and loans. But they are afraid of U.S. threats and sanctions. The U.S. block [cooperation between Iran and Lebanon]. The U.S. prevents Lebanon from cooperating with not only Iran, but also with Russia and even China. For example, the Lebanese government can buy weapons and use Russian military equipment and armaments, but it does not do so because the U.S. has threatened the Lebanese government saying: “If you buy arms from Russia, we will cut all our aid to the Lebanese army.” Well, China has plenty of opportunities and is willing to cooperate with Lebanon. But why do Lebanon’s doors not open to China? The main reason is the U.S. threat of sanctions. The United States now does not threaten Lebanon of occupation and does not send military forces to it. Because they know that if they enter Lebanon, they cannot occupy and dominate this country. The U.S. knows that in this case, their experience in Iraq would be repeated in Lebanon; as it has already had such an experience in Lebanon in the past. But now the United States resorts to sanctions. When they threaten a country with banking, foreign currency, and trade sanctions, the other party gets scared and back off.

But in any case, we are pursuing in the government, along with the officials, the issues concerning Lebanon and the Lebanese people to the extent of the authorities’ capabilities. To this date, the U.S. has supported Israel in the south, preventing the Lebanese from extracting oil and gas in southern Lebanon; because Israel has threatened [them]. Naturally, we are also threatening [them]. But the companies come looking for a guarantee, and the United States penalizes any company that comes to extract oil and gas in that region, of course, if any company dares to come in the first place. So, the main problem is the United States. Of course, Saudi Arabia is also pushing to prevent serious cooperation with the Lebanese government. For example, Lebanon needs to work with and interact with Syria now, but some Lebanese government officials who count particularly on the relations with the United States and Saudi Arabia do not try that, although the interests of Lebanon require to do so.

Lebanon is an interesting example for those who think cooperation with the United States can solve their problems, and sometimes complain, asking why the Islamic Republic does not resolve its issues with the U.S. government to help resolve its problems. Well, Lebanon has no political problems currently with the United States, and has a good political relationship with it; but the main obstacle to Lebanon’s progress is the United States. I read somewhere you said “we are superior to the Zionists in three areas.” One of the areas you mentioned was in intelligence and information. Well, it’s said that the intelligence system of the Zionist regime is one of the most advanced information systems.

Even during the reign of previous regime in Iran, when they wanted to organize very high levels of intelligence training, they either sent SAVAK agents to the occupied territories, or they brought some trainers from Israel to hold courses in Iran and strengthen Iran’s intelligence systems. Now, you have said that you are superior to Israel in terms of the intelligence system. Based on the points I mentioned and that there are people who might not accept your remark, what explanation do you have in this regard?

I do not remember saying that we are superior. That is, I do not remember saying that we are superior to them. I said we have some information about the situation of Israel that helps us defeat it. We cannot claim to be superior to Israel in terms of intelligence. It is not true. They have some capabilities both technically and in terms of their services. Currently in Lebanon, the services of the U.S. and the services of the European and Arab countries are all at the disposition of Israel. They are technically powerful, and their drones are always flying in our skies, but we do not have such superiority. What I said was that in the past, we had no information—or very poor information—about Israel. But now our strength is that we have much information about Israel, and we know about its bases and barracks, the strengths and weaknesses of its army and its capabilities. We can collect this information by use of various methods. What we need to be able to strike the enemy is this amount of information that we have today, but it is not correct to say we have superiority.

So I would like to ask a question related to the point you mentioned, and then you could continue your words.

That we managed to launch a psychological war against the enemy and affect the enemy’s people showed that my information and the news and issues I was talking about were true and real. The Israelis said: “Wow … they have got so much intelligence.”

One essential point in the context of military confrontation with the Zionist regime is an intelligence surveillance over the enemy, and to use this intelligence in various fields, both in defense of yourself and in planning attacks against the enemy. How much intelligence surveillance has Hezbollah currently gained?

We have an excellent intelligence surveillance that is unprecedented. Hezbollah obtains the necessary intelligence using various methods. The most important intelligence is what we need for any future war or confrontation, or to face any possible threat from Israel. We have an excellent intelligence surveillance and keep track of every development on the enemy’s side. We track the intelligence about the developments related to the enemy, whether obtained through public or confidential methods. But the important thing is to analyze this intelligence; that is, it is important that we evaluate and investigate the intelligence, even when obtained through public means, in order to arrive at a conclusion. This is important.

Hezbollah’s strong point is that it always examines ideology, culture, traditions, customs, weaknesses and strengths as well as the developments related to Israel. This always puts Hezbollah in the context of what goes on within this regime; so that we know how they think, what they like or dislike, what affects them and what problems they are facing. We also know what political, religious and partisan divisions and discords exist within this regime and what the differences between the personalities are. We also evaluate the enemy’s political and military commanders and possess such information. This increases our power to a great extent, and helps us face and confront the enemy through various strategies.

Throughout what you said, you made some remarks about Ayatollah Khamenei on different occasions. I would like to ask you a bit more specifically, considering that you have been in contact with Ayatollah Khamenei for nearly forty years; what are his most prominent personality traits in your opinion? Especially since you have naturally known other important personalities, what makes him singular in comparison?

Firstly, whatever I say in response to this question, I might be accused of bias out of the passion and love that I have for him. Because of this, it may be said that I have brought these issues forward out of affection and love for the Leader. But, realistically and far from the emotional aspects, I have to say that after this extensive experience I have found the Leader possessing exceptional character traits. Sometimes you talk about someone and say that they have good characteristics, of which one or more are excellent and extraordinary. But regarding the Leader, I have to say that he has many exceptional characteristics. For example, his intense sincerity towards God, Islam, Muslims, the underprivileged and the oppressed is an awesome and remarkable devotion. Perhaps this is one of the indications that he is approved by God. This sincerity is very deep and uncommon. When I speak of sincerity, I do not just mean his personality; I have lots of evidence for this. This sincerity lies in his intrinsic personality, in his leadership and in his authority, and does not stop at a certain limit. He always preferred the interests of Islam, Muslims and the public over any other issue.

For example, one of the most prominent features of the Leader is his piety and righteousness. This is a well-known matter. Recently, the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and elsewhere has been trying to attack the Leader’s personality. But, idiotically, they have focused on an aspect of his character that nobody would believe their words. For example, they propagated that the Leader’s personal wealth reaches $200 billion.

One of the distinctive features of the Leader is his moral character and his personality traits. Whenever we meet him, we can see humbleness in his face. Every Lebanese who has travelled to Iran and met with the Leader, in private or in public, has been amazed by his humbleness and modesty. Here in Lebanon, we see that even the head of a small municipality in a small area, is not as humble as the Leader before the people and his visitors.

Others feel that rather than an Imam, a Leader, and a sovereign, they are meeting a loving, caring and affectionate father. Regarding his modesty, and paternal behavior, I told you before that whenever we expressed our views, he would weigh in by saying “my suggestion is …”, and asked us to evaluate it for ourselves. This is one of the signs of the modest, kind and paternal behavior of the Leader. This behavior is fatherly because it teaches us how to mature, and make decisions, and it is kind because he does not want to put us in a difficult position and force us to decide.

Another one of his characteristics, is his extensive political and historical knowledge. The Leader knows our region, despite the region and its developments being very complex. I am referring to the West Asia region, also known as the Middle East, and in particular Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and of course specifically Lebanon. The issues in the region are extremely complicated and even many regional politicians and thinkers make mistakes in analyzing the situation. Meanwhile, we have found every analysis by the Leader to be accurate and reasonable over the past 40 years. Every stance he has made towards the countries of the region, even countries where their own people have been unable to analyze their own issues, has been correct. This is extraordinary.

One of his distinctive features in my opinion, is his absolute trust in the Almighty God. We are not talking about someone who has isolated himself to pray or someone who is active in teaching or in scholarly activities and claims to trust God absolutely. The real test is to have a responsibility as important as that of the Leader, to lead the Islamic Republic, lead the Ummah, confront the U.S., the imperialists on Earth, and the arrogant powers, and to support the oppressed and the underprivileged, go to the most difficult battles, and say I trust in God, and really do have trust in God. That is the difference. This is the true faith in God and the ability to nurture it in others. What is meant is not just claiming to have this trust, but to create and nurture it in the hearts and minds of others like the Hezbollah of Lebanon. It is in the shadow of this trust that progress, consciousness, endeavor for the sake of God, and victory will be achieved. It is through this trust that the Iranian nation and the Iranian youth have stood against the U.S. and faced challenges. If the Leader himself had not achieved such a great level of trust in God, he could not pass it on to others.

In the intellectual realm, today there are very few Muslim thinkers in the Muslim world. There is a difference between a thinker and an educated person. We have many Muslim scholars who have written many books and delivered many lectures, but there are not many Muslim thinkers, the like of the martyr Motahhari, or the martyr Sayyid Baqir Sadr who are among the thinkers of the Muslim world. Today, the number of Muslim thinkers in the Muslim world is very small. There is no doubt that someone who listens to the Leader’s speeches, reads his books and listens to his statements and advice, especially during the month of Ramadan, when he meets with different groups, realizes that he is a great Muslim intellectual leader. Perhaps there is no other thinker in the Muslim world of his stature. That is, no Muslim intellectual is currently comparable to him.

Regarding the subject of jurisprudence and fiqh, naturally, the Leader’s scientific character, and his status among scholar has not been adequately presented. I do not claim to be a scholar, but I know many knowledgeable and mujtahid brothers who are scholars themselves and have attended the Leader’s fiqh classes, and have given solid testimonies about his mastery of Islamic law, and his command of jurisprudence and fiqh. When providing testimony regarding his authority in fiqh, this testimony has gone through testing, investigation, and serious scientific examinations, and not based on an emotional stance or the like.

Today, the struggle continues. Who is conducting this struggle, and its requirements, including science, knowledge, thought, and real identification of the issues in every political, economic, social, cultural, military and security dimensions? Who is conducting this struggle which requires deep insight and courage? One may have insight, but lack the courage and spirit of sacrifice with his soul, life, and blood. Which leaders possess all these features all together? This was a summary of the Leader’s characteristics. Although, if one wants to study his exceptional and distinctive features, one would learn about many of them.

You pointed out his courage. In your opinion, what was the most courageous decision by Ayatollah Khamenei regarding the issues of the region?

You know that after the events of September 11 in the U.S., George Bush and the neoconservatives in the U.S. were outraged. They misused the anger of the American people as a pretext to break every legal boundary and international norm. On that day, George Bush declared that the world is either with us or against us. He sent U.S. troops to Iran’s neighbors. We are not talking about U.S. troops deployed to, [let’s say] Brazil. We are talking about forces deployed to Afghanistan, Iraq, and countries surrounding Iran and its neighboring waters. Bush did this to show his blunt and fierce hostility.

Anyone standing in his way, he would try to destroy. Many in the region were in a state of great fear and horror; because they thought that the U.S. would come and take over the region.  I remember, at the time articles were written claiming the region would enter an American era for 200 or 300 years, and no one can stand up to the United States and defeat it. Who stood up to the United States? The Leader. This stance does not only require historical wisdom, political knowledge, piety or sincerity. It also requires a great deal of courage. He stood against the only arrogant imperialist superpower in the world; a fuming superpower that does not abide by any rule. He stood up to them, not in a subdued state, but taking an attacking posture. In conclusion, the person who has led the fight against the American project in the region over the past years has been the Leader.

When we were talking outside of this interview, you described the decision to get involved in Syria also as a very courageous decision.

Of course; there is no doubt that all of these decisions have been courageous. But you asked me about the most courageous decision. The most courageous decision was to stand against the stupendous, fierce and utterly mad tornado of the United States, and to reject any kind of kneeling or surrender to this tornado and ultimately vanquish it.

About the book “Certainly, Victory Comes with Patience” that you also referred to, during the ceremony marking the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution; please tell us if you remember an interesting point or remarks from this book.

First of all, when this I received this book before its final edition, I read it the same night. It was sunset when I received this book. That night, I read it with great enthusiasm. I first read the introduction written by the Leader in his own handwriting. An introduction in Arabic, which is obviously, also in Persian alphabet. I was surprised. I knew that the Leader is fluent in Arabic, but the text I read was of the highest level of rhetoric and was very eloquent and expressive. I do not think that today, any Arab native could write a text of such beauty and eloquence in Arabic. This was the first thing I noticed at the beginning of the book.

Likewise, what was said in the introduction of the book, regarding its language and expression was very significant. Because I had heard from a brother, Dr. Azarshab that: “This text – i.e. the Arabic text – is written by the Leader, and I have only made simple modifications to it “. The text of this book is a great and very important text in Arabic literature and rhetoric. Many Arab literary figures, not scholars, but literary figures, cannot write a text with such excellent rhetoric and eloquence.

Another feature is a clear, detailed description of the events. The Leader has narrated the events beautifully, in a way that many of them are new to the Arab world, although this may not be the case for the Iranians; because there is of course a Persian version of this book. I had read some books about the Leader’s memories and his life; a collection of many books. But this was the first time I read a book in Arabic written by the Leader himself, which includes extensive details. It was very effective. And, of course, the amount of oppression, pain, suffering and solitude that the Leader and other brothers endured became apparent to the people. But anyway, he narrates his personal recollections, and not those of the others, who are not the subject matter here. Obviously, the Iranian nation, religious leaders, officials, and even those who took up responsibilities later suffered a lot and made many sacrifices for the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

In your meetings with the Leader, what language are the meetings held in?

I speak Arabic and he speaks Persian. But sometimes, at the beginning of the meeting, he asks some questions in Arabic. For example, he asks about how we are, and about our families and brothers in Arabic. But he continues in Persian. Indeed, it was an agreement at the beginning of his leadership and even during his presidency, but mostly during his leadership. Because I understand Persian. But some of my brothers in the Council understood Persian to a certain degree. So, they used to bring an interpreter to the meetings with the Leader. He said in the beginning that we should rely on an interpreter. At a meeting where the Leader, the Lebanese and some Iranian brothers were present he said: “We will not rely on an interpreter from now on. The Iranians must learn Arabic to understand what you say, and the Lebanese must learn Persian, so they do not need an interpreter.” Since then, there has never been an interpreter present at any of our meetings with the Leader.

Clearly, you have many memories of your meetings with the Leader. These memories are related to politics, military discussions, etc. some of which have been explained. Now, at the end of this conversation, if we ask you to share with us one memory that is very sweet and interesting for you, of the many memories that you have, which one would it be?

(Sayyid Hassan laughs) Now, we need to search. They are all good memories. (Sayyid Hassan laughs) It’s difficult to choose one. You know that in the 1990s, i.e. in 1997 or 1998, we were going through a difficult period because of all the hardships, challenges and many dangers and we were very tired. We were in a very difficult position, both domestically in Lebanon, and in our foreign affairs, and the issues related to Israel and our neighbors. Naturally, at that time, I was young. My beard was completely black, and the burden I had on my shoulders was beyond my capacity. I sometimes travelled to Iran. To the Leader I said: “Our Leader! What do I do? “At that time, the Leader answered:” You are still young and your beard is still all black. What complaint should I make about fatigue, with all my beard grey?” He said: “It is natural for anyone to face challenges, difficulties and dangers, sometimes coming from enemies and sometimes from friends. Often, the hardships coming from friends are heavier than those from the enemies, and it causes more pain. Well, ultimately there are limitations in many things. Sometimes a man gets tired mentally and needs someone to guide him and show him the way forward. Sometimes a person needs someone to hold his hand; sometimes he needs someone to calm him down and give him spiritual and moral relief; sometimes he needs someone to increase his strength and reinforce his determination. Well, for all the things we need, we have God the Almighty and do not need anyone else. We have God the Almighty. God the Almighty, through His Kindness and Compassion, has allowed us to call Him and talk to Him at any time and place.”

These words were all by the Leader, stated without any formalities. He continued: “For that reason, whenever you feel tired or overwhelmed, I recommend the following. Enter a room alone, and for 5 or 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour, talk to God the Exalted. We believe that God is present, hears, sees and knows, and He is capable, rich and wise. That is, God has everything we all need. So talk to Him, and for this purpose, there is no necessity to read the Prophet’s (PBUH) or the infallible Imams’ invocations. No, in your own language, say what weighs on your heart and minds, using your everyday language. God will hear and see, and He is generous, benevolent, forgiving, merciful, and the source of guidance and knowledge. If you do this, God gives you peace, confidence and power, and takes your hand and leads you. I say this from experience. Try it and see the result. “

Then I told them that God willing, I will follow his advice. Since then, I have done this occasionally and seen the blessings of this advice and guidance from the Leader. No matter how great the hardships, if we resort to this means, the doors of the great divine blessing will open to us. This was the most important thing we did during the 33-day. Whether I, or my brothers, we each sought a secluded corner, and we would resort to God the Exalted and ask for guidance, support, determination, power, courage, and so on. God the Exalted is so generous.

Thank you very much. At the end of this conversation, I would like to ask your Excellency if you would like to say a few words in Persian to the Iranian people.

It’s hard for me. I speak in Persian in our private meetings, but because it is for the media, I have to be cautious.

We cannot thank you enough for the amount of time you dedicated for us, several hours both yesterday and today. We are grateful, and God willing, this interview will be a source of blessing and goodwill for the Iranian nation and the Islamic Ummah. May Allah keep you in good health; you are a source of pride for all Muslims.

 

شبكة دفاع جوي وقروض الإسكان معايير استقلالنا

نوفمبر 22, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– يحتفل لبنان بعيد الاستقلال بعد خمس وسبعين سنة على نهاية الانتداب الفرنسي، في زمن لم يعد معيار الاستقلال يُقاس ببقاء الجيوش الأجنبية، بقدر ما يقاس بأمرين، أولهما القدرة على امتلاك هامش واسع للقرار الوطني النابع من المصالح الحقيقية للدول، والثاني حسم القرار الخاص بالشؤون السيادية الرئيسية وفقاً لتوازنات وحسابات محلية. وفي المجالين لا يبدو لبنان بأفضل حال.

– تمر الذكرى ولبنان في وضع اقتصادي يؤكد أن نظامه السياسي فشل في بناء مقوّمات اقتصاد على درجة من القوة تضعه بمنأى عن الاهتزاز على إيقاع اي مؤثرات خارجية. فالانتصار الذي حققه لبنان على الاحتلال الإسرائيلي بقوة مقاومته وصمود جيشه وشعبه، كما الانتصار الذي حققه على الإرهاب بقوة جيشه وحضور مقاومته ووحدة شعبه، لم يرافقهما بناء سياسي اقتصادي يعزز مساحة القرار المستقل. فبقي لبنان في كل أزمة تعيشها المنطقة نقطة الضعف التي تتلقى الترددات، وتعيش النتائج، والسلبي منها على وجه الخصوص.

– تمر الذكرى أيضاً ولبنان في أزمة حكومية تتعثر معها مساعي تشكيل حكومة جديدة، بعد انتخابات نيابية أجمع اللبنانيون على اعتبارها اختباراً ناجحاً للديمقراطية، لكنهم فشلوا ولا يزالون في ترجمة نتائجها بحكومة تقود البلاد. ويبدو الوضع الاقتصادي الضاغط على اللبنانيين عاملاً من عوامل التأثير في تشكيل الحكومة سلباً وإيجاباً، حيث توظف الضغوط الاقتصادية كعامل للحث على استعجال الحكومة، كما تستخدم للضغط على أصحاب المطالب المحقة لتحميلهم مسؤولية التعطيل، وتظهر ثنائية اسمها حزب الله والعقوبات الأميركية في قلب معادلتي السياسة والاقتصاد.

– لا يمكن إخفاء حقيقة أن محاولة تحميل حزب الله مسؤولية تأخير ولادة الحكومة وبالتالي استمرار الجمود الاقتصادي وتفاقمه، بسبب تمسكه بتمثيل نواب اللقاء التشاوري، لا ينفصل عن تحميل حزب الله مسؤولية نسبة كبيرة من الجمود ناتجة عن العقوبات الأميركية التي تطاله وتطال معه لبنان واقتصاده، وبالتالي يصعب الفصل بين الشق الخارجي من الضغوط، وبين بعض الاستثمار الداخلي لها ضمن التوظيف السياسي للضغط على حزب الله في شأنَيْ العقدة الحكومية الحالية، والحضور السياسي للحزب ومواقفه من قضايا الصراع في المنطقة.

– في بلدان العالم عندما يكون الجمود مسيطراً لأي سبب تسارع المؤسسات المسؤولة عن الوضع الاقتصادي والمالي، خصوصاً في غياب الحكومات، إلى ابتكار أساليب لضخ المزيد من الأموال في الأسواق، وتشجيع الناس على الاستهلاك، وفي لبنان مجال حيوي يتكفل بتخفيف وطأة الضغوط الاقتصادية والمالية، ويرتب حركة ونشاطاً في روافد الاقتصاد، وهو قطاع الإسكان، وفي ظرف سياسي صعب يتوقف ضخ المال اللازم في قطاع الإسكان، ليصير مفعول العقوبات الأميركية حرباً نفسية، وتصير العقوبات الحقيقية هي وقف قروض الإسكان.

– في مثال سيادي آخر يُظهر درجة ضعف القرار المستقل، يعجز لبنان عن امتلاك شبكة دفاع جوي متطورة تحمي أجواءه من الانتهاكات الإسرائيلية اليومية لسيادته. فالغرب يمتنع عن تزويده بها مهما قيل خلاف ذلك، طالما أننا نرى حجم الضغوط التي يتعرّض لها الروس بسبب تسليمهم شبكة دفاع جوي لسورية، وبالمقابل يمنع الغرب على لبنان الحصول على هذه الشبكة من مصدر آخر كروسيا، التي يشتري منها حلفاء أميركا في الناتو شبكات مماثلة، كحال تركيا والسعودية.

– معيار القرار المستقل اليوم تشريعات وإجراءات عاجلة تعيد الحياة لقروض الإسكان ولو ضمن ترتيب انتقالي لشهور، وقرار موازٍ بالحصول على شبكة دفاع جوي تحمي

السيادة اللبنانية.. فهل نجرؤ؟

Related Videos

Related Articles

• لزهور على النصب التذكارية!
• رفع العلم اللبناني في جادة الشهيد هادي نصرالله
• قراءة موضوعية في «ما يُسمّى» استقلال لبنان
• ‫8 آذار: إذا أراد الحريري الاعتذار… فليست آخر الدنيا
• الأسد وعون… وباسيل ثالثهما!
• » لا يليق بأهل فلسطين إلا المقاومة
• قائد الجيش للبنانيين: أناشدكم تجديد ثقتكم بالجيش
• الشيوعي: الاستقلال يوجِب التخلص من النظام
• » محمد بن سلمان متهم رسمياً بقتل الخاشقجي… ويلتقي ترامب وبوتين في قمة العشرين المراوحة مستمرة… وعون يحذّر من ضياع الوقت… وخلوة رئاسية في استقبالات الاستقلال
• » الكويت: لتمثيل عربي عادل ومتناسب في مجلس الأمن

Once Upon a Time…There Was a Martyr

Local Editor*

Tanks and military vehicles were all over the roads, and the soldiers watched the entire place. It was a crossing point where people waited for days to get “assent” to reach their towns or the capital (Beirut).

He got off his car and walked steadily to the investigation chamber. His eyes glowed with fury. The “Israeli” investigator examined his face and the photograph posted onto his identity card. In an ineptly accented language, the investigator asked him whether he had been in Saudi Arabia. “Yes,” he briefly answered. That was enough to exclude his name from the list of “terrorists'”. Having clinched his fist, he could hardly avoid punching the investigator in the face. He walked back to his car as soon as he was allowed to leave.

The driver he sat beside didn’t bother to stop speaking about politics, the current security situation, the high living cost, and anything that would eventually blame him for coming back to his homeland. How could one enjoying this golden chance waste it by returning to a country manipulated by war? But he kept quiet all the way, staring at the roads, most of which had been turned into mounds and checkpoints… Hardly could he breathe in any air… Even the tree leaves of the orchards along the seashore of Sour city (Tyr) resembled captives beyond bars…

Could that be the South?! Was it the beautiful city of Sour any longer?! Then why did shell smoke mask away sunlight?! Where were the little yellow flowers sprouting all over the town?! And what about the wild flowers with the scent of earth which inspired souls?! Besides, where were the kids sneaking to the roads to play ball?! Behind which curtained window had freedom hidden?!

It was hard for the car to cross all of those roads. The situation was too throbbing; agony grew wilder every time he reached a new town…

He reached his town, where he walked with his heavy suitcase in hand. While his family eagerly waited for him, he was anticipating the moment he would meet his father… For a while, he anticipated his father’s eyes blaming him for returning home… He had been enjoying a productive job in Saudi Arabia, and his family did need such an income, especially in that harsh time of war. Actually, that war left no room for good but rooted poverty wherever the “Israeli” tanks went…

“I could not stay there,” he said to his father in a soft voice, “It is hard to be away from home when occupation forces strike… Imagine that I needed “assent” to get home… But I promise you, dad, I promise I’m going to send those soldiers to hell…” His father patted his shoulder and held his arm tight, “I’ve been waiting for you…”

The smell of the bread his mother was baking at dawn woke him up. He prayed and went out to sit near her. He began to fuel the saj (traditional bread oven) fire with short wood sticks. The low crackle of fire pleased him, and the smell was so lively…

When he met his friends, they said they were headed by His Eminence Sheikh Ragheb Harb at every Friday prayers. His friends added the Sheikh’s sermons overwhelmed the Zionists…

As his friends retold some of Sheikh Ragheb Harb’s statements, he was impassioned… He adored the Sheikh even before seeing him… Wouldn’t that be the case sometimes?

Hardly could he wait for Friday… He got ready early and started the pickup, transporting fresh vegetables he would sell at his father’s shop, just like every day. Two friends sat in the front, while the others sat at the back…

Fast he set off to Jibshit… But wait a minute! He slowed down and got off his pickup truck, getting closer to a sign reading Hebrew letters… He looked at his friends, “What the heck is this?!”

“It’s the town’s name,” one of them said, “The enemy has replaced the Arab signs with Hebrew ones so that the soldiers would find their way…”

Hearing so, he grabbed the sign pole and shook it forcefully until he uprooted it. Then he placed it in his pickup. Breathing out loud, he told his friend, “Well, we do not want the “Israeli” soldiers to find their way…”

All along the way, he kept getting off his pickup, uprooting signs, and placing them in the pickup trunk. Now the trunk was full of signs!

Having reached Jibshit, he met Sheikh Ragheb Harb… It was one of the happiest moments of that dark-skinned young man’s life. He heard the Sheikh saying, “Martyrs’ blood is received by Allah, and whatever Allah receives grows plenty.” Now all he could see were daisies spread above martyrs’ bodies…

Every morning his pickup truck transported vegetables, under which were firearms that the Resistance fighters would be expecting to get… As he drove through “the Bus region”, he could neither accept having to wait at the “Israeli” checkpoint nor seeing the headquarters of the “Israeli” military “governor”… Just like he uprooted the signs, he uprooted that headquarters… And his blood wrote the name of the southern towns, “Welcome to Deir Qanoun an-Nahr…”

This story “Keep in Mind, I’m an Arab” is dedicated to the Self-Sacrifice Martyrs’ Prince Ahmad Jaafar Qasir.

*Written by Nisreen Idriss on behalf of the martyrs association–obtained and translated by moqawama.org 

—

Ahmad Kassir’s Final Moments

Samir Alemeh

He came up with an idea and fulfilled his joy by defeating the Zionists.

What did Ahmad do before executing the operation and what were the circumstances that accompanied it?

“Machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades will not destroy this building. It needs something that would completely destroy it.”

Martyr Ahmad Kassir confided these words to one of his friends while they passed by the Azmi building in the Jal al-Bahr area in Tyre. The building housed the headquarters of the “Israeli” military governor. It was just an idea he had since the Zionist enemy occupied southern Lebanon in June 1982. That idea then grew into a proposal that he presented to officials from Hezbollah. It entailed him blowing himself up in the Azmi Building. By doing so, he became the prince of the self-sacrificing martyrs.

Whenever he saw the enemy’s aircraft violating the airspace in southern Lebanon, he would say, “Your turn will come soon, God willing.”

Thus, Ahmad began preparing to defeat the Jews. He was rushing things fearing that he might miss his opportunity. Yet, he did so without any changes in his behavior that would indicate that he is on a path to martyrdom.

People close to him described him as cheerful and happy. No one could have imagined that this young man had the spirit of martyrdom in him. At the same time, he continued with the acts of worship, especially reading the Quran and performing Salat al-Layl [Night Prayer].

Those who knew him spoke about his patience. Some said that prior to the execution of the operation, he stayed alone in one of the houses for two weeks. Due to security concerns, he was unable to use the heating or even the lights. Yet, he bore the cold and dark. He prayed to God to bestow him with victory and martyrdom.

He spent his nights, all the way to the last one, in worship. As dawn approached, he performed Ghusl al-Shahada [bath of martyrdom]. Due to the necessities of the execution, he performed the Morning Prayers in the car, which was driven towards the target with his determination and faith.

God has men who will what he wills. The large number of dead and wounded among the ranks of the Zionists was, first and foremost, the result of divine care. The operation was postponed for two days due to several reasons. On the night of the execution, it rained heavily and forced “Israeli” soldiers housed in tents to take cover in the Azmi building. They remained in the building all night and left the second day as stiff corpses and torn body parts.

One of the coincidences that came under the auspices of God Almighty is that days before the operation, the Zionists transferred the Lebanese detainees to the roof of the building after placing barbwire around it. Instead of using one of the floors below, the rooftop was transformed into a prison. When the explosion struck, the building was flattened and the roof was reduced to the same level as the ground below. Most of the Lebanese detainees were safe and sound. They were able to escape. Those who found themselves in the interrogation rooms at the time of the blast were martyred.

Ahmad Kassir drove his car slowly with a great deal of courage and trust. Moments before his arrival, one of the Zionist soldiers moved a vehicle blocking the main entrance. The martyr was meant to enter through that entrance. Another soldier lifted the shutters of the door. Thus, Ahmad’s way to martyrdom was cleared of any obstacles. He was able to defeat the Jews at a time when they were perceived as invincible.

And so Ahmad got his wish that always used to utter, “my greatest joy is that, God willing, I will inflict losses on those Jews the way they harmed our dignity and our people.”

Source: Al-Ahed News

Related Videos

https://www.shiatv.net/embed.php?viewkey=c47a14953059e1a1ceed&autoplay=0

Related Articles

• Old Times: Photos of Hezbollah Martyrs Funerals
• They All Have One Thing in Common… Martyrdom!
• Martyrs Do Not Die! Hajj ’Alaa 125’ Example
• November 11… a Day of Pride!

The Facts from Operation Truthful Promise وقائع من عملية «الوعد الصادق» ابراهيم الأمين

Ibrahim al-Amin

Less than 6 years on, the Shaba’a 2000 scenario was repeated – but with complete success! On July 12, the state of alert along the border seemed different than before. Hezbollah had noticed that “Israel” was thoroughly scrutinizing a lot of things. It was talking about “indications of Hezbollah’s intention to do something.” As far as the resistance was concerned, everything was ready: transportation vehicles, medical operations room, captivity room – and refrigerators for those killed in battle.

In the central operations room, Hajj (A. M.) sat beside the commander of the ground units Haj (M), the first sector officer Hajj (G) and others from the field intelligence unit in the resistance. A couple of cups of tea and summer fruits sat on a wooden table. (M) did not stop telling jokes. He recalled that he had survived an enemy surveillance operation for the 110th time along the border area. But in those days the burden of the task required a greater degree of movement.

(A. M.) said

“Sayyed  Hassan has once again fulfilled his promise to the public that a capture operation will take place. This requires additional work from us to achieve the objective and obtain the desired result: to capture soldiers that “Israel” cares about (that are not of Arab origin) while they are still alive.”

A while back, preparations for such an effort were unsuccessful. Sometimes, the target was moving in an area that needed complex operational arrangements. Other times, public warnings by the resistance imposed a constant alert on the part of the enemy soldiers. But this does not preclude scrutiny of the procedures to reach an accessible gap. These are the equations of the resistance: there is a gap in each of the enemy’s procedure. The most important thing is to diagnose it accurately and not to make any error in the estimation and timing.

There was a permanent review of past experiences by the leadership. One of the major missions took place in the town of Ghajar. The groups were prepared to execute a new kind of operation: storming fixed positions under unprecedented, centered and extensive artillery shelling of all points of the enemy’s movement. Hundreds of fighters were ready to carry out the largest incursion operation. Military-upgraded civilian cars were prepared near the location without anyone paying attention to the matter. The resistance imposed a routine movement for its fighters and cars until the scene began to look like a boring routine: the resistance fighters monotonously monitor the next scene. They whisper and then disappear.

When the decision came to launch the attack, the resistance needed only a few minutes to succeed in paralyzing the movement of all the “Israeli” positions in the area and the hills overlooking it. The shelling was very violent and intense. The anti-tank rocket launchers burned the military vehicles similar to the Atari, as Sayyed Nasrallah later described. Then the resistance fighters in four-wheel-drive vehicles and motorcycles stormed the place. For the first time in history, one of them carried a new weapon, the B-29. It was the new generation of the conventional Russian B7weapons. The machine guns did not stop firing in the direction of the bunkers and the ambushes. But there was a flaw in the monitoring process, which led to an unaccounted confrontation. A few minutes passed before a group of resistance fighter were ambushed, resulting in the martyrdom of four of them.

Communication with the central command pointed to the failure. Work was quickly done to pull the operations group from the battlefield. The special preparedness group assigned to confront any response from the enemy remained on high alert. Meanwhile, the “Israelis” were checking up on their soldiers through intensive radio communications. And as usual, the planes were late in reaching the area. When the Northern Command received news of the confrontations and the results, it made sure that no soldier went missing. The enemy’s leaders breathed a sigh of relief. They decided to respond. A few hours passed and calm returned to the place. A long time passed since the Ghajar Operation. The process of drawing lessons by the leadership of the resistance intensified. Sayyed Nasrallah, who has always faced situations of this kind, overlooked the errors of those responsible for the operation. In his own way, he praised God and asked Him to help make other missions successful. As for the leaders concerned, they were stressed for a long while. Silence prevailed, accompanied by a quick review and the start of work again.

After May 25, 2000, the resistance fighters began monitoring a new frontline. They spotted sizable gaps in the movement of the enemy soldiers. But public warnings from the leadership of the resistance regarding the capture the soldiers were more frequent, and precautionary measures were not enough to fill the gaps. After a few months of close monitoring, the famous operation point was identified at the Shabaa Gate near Naqqar pond. That day, a classic operation took place. A hostile vehicle passed. It was blown up by a large explosive device. The big bang unexpectedly destroyed the unarmed vehicle. The soldiers were killed, and their bodies were quickly loaded into a four-wheel-drive vehicle. In less than half an hour, everything was over.

Less than six years had passed since that operation. According to facts on the ground, after the Ghajar operation, the enemy’s alertness rose to unprecedented levels. The resistance fighters had to exhaust the enemy soldiers nonstop. Organized breaches of the electronic wire forced enemy patrols to carry out nonstop inspections. There was a great need to monitor the mechanism of action by the enemy: the type of vehicles used, the number of soldiers in each, routine or sudden movement, the margin of maneuver of the soldiers and the mechanism of communication between them and their leadership, the level of combat readiness and how to act towards what is happening at the fence. Many tests were carried out. When the resistance leadership found it necessary to expand the area of ??operation, nature was a facilitator in the western sector of the front. It took time for the resistance leadership to make sure that the area presented a serious opportunity to carry out a swift operation. It was clear that the work would be very similar to the famous Shebaa operation. No significant military action was required. What was required was an operation with a security dimension. This means that the monitoring unit should provide sufficient information to prevent any surprises. The fact that the objective is to capture living soldiers imposed on the mission a mechanism of military action. The resistance fighters did not have to shoot to kill, but they had to use mechanisms of action that would kill some and leave other soldiers alive. Thus, the theoretical lesson from the Shebaa process is important at this moment: the destruction of an armored vehicle without killing those inside and destroying the support vehicles and killing those who move to assist them.

Several weeks passed on the close monitoring of the point. One day, a high-ranking “Israeli” officer, Audi Adam, passed through the area. He was not alone. He was with his family. At that moment, he was not a serious target. The resistance fighters who were trained to carry out the attack and prepared weapons, offensive plans and tools, spent long days and nights keeping an eye out for the conditions of a successful attack.

The intelligence data of the resistance indicated that the brigades’ shift change was nearing. The operation site became more vulnerable. Relaxation appeared in the movement of the soldiers and their command. And the switch approached. But the resistance leadership received surprising information that the Druze battalion would take over within 48 hours. This means that the operation may succeed, but the soldiers who are supposed to be captured will be of Arab origin. The resistance was looking for a prey of another origin, calling for a different state of alert. On July 12, the state of alert along the border was not the same as before. Hezbollah noticed that “Israel” started to scrutinize many things. Each time the party intended to do something, it had to inform all the observation posts and known centers that they had to evacuate. The size of the resistance grew. And the movement was no longer unable to hide completely. The “Israelis” spoke a lot about “warnings or signs of Hezbollah’s intention to do something.” Some believed and still do that “Israel” depended on intelligence data, the kind which is usually classified as a breach. But “Israel’s” Northern Command was merely content in observing one of its locations for a sudden movement of resistance fighters for it to act on the grounds that something was going on.

On that day, the decision of the resistance was not the same as before. The resistance units deployed along the border and behind it did not receive advance warning or a unified operations order regarding what special groups could carry out near Aita al-Shaab or opposite to the Zarit settlement. Meanwhile, the assigned units were acting as if it was a battle:

Five groups of resistance fighters deployed across the operation site. One group directly attacked with rocket-propelled grenades. Another provided cover fire using light and medium machine guns. The third group bombarded the military points that were the direct focus of the operation. The fourth’s mission was to cross the border after the iron gate was bombed by a special explosive device and facilitate the entrance of the civilian car to transport the captives in addition to disabling the movement of “Israeli” soldiers and opening the doors of the military vehicles.

In a place where it is difficult to ascertain whether it is near or far away, the other teams were also ready. There were others in civilian vehicles prepared to provide first aid to anyone injured among the resistance or the prisoners. A special operating room equipped with all the necessary equipment to perform surgical operations for the “Israeli” soldiers in case of light or severe injury was also prepared. There were special refrigerators to keep the bodies of the soldiers in case they were killed. There were also rooms intended to accommodate the soldiers if they were captured alive.

When the patrol approached the point of attack, the plan was to surround it and fire at it away from the prying eyes of “Israeli” controls. The operation did not tolerate any kind of error or any kind of sluggishness. When it was confirmed that there were two armored vehicles transporting more than six soldiers, the field command was notified. The answer was not delayed and gave the order to prepare to execute. The order did not only include the groups that carried out the attack but also other units present, both at the frontline and at the border areas.

“The target has reached the point of death” as the resistance fighters say. The signal was given to start the attack. The second vehicle was hit with a direct missile attack that completely destroyed it and killed and injured those inside. There was no movement. There was a group taking care of it. Within three minutes, the Humvee turned into a broken child’s toy. The lead vehicle also came under fire. But the injuries were different. The resistance fighters had trained to hit an armored vehicle without burning it completely, and how to direct heavy fire towards heavily armed soldiers without fatally injuring them.

The main target of the attackers was the lead Humvee. The plan was to capture the soldiers inside. So the resistance fighters made sure that the missiles aimed at it were not lethal. The “Israeli” army later concluded that the resistance’s plan was aimed at targeting the Humvee in a way that would trap the soldiers inside.

The resistance fighters fired three RPGs at the Humvee. The rockets exploded on the side where Goldwasser and Regev were sitting, injuring them. At this moment, the other two soldiers, Maudi and Feinberg, managed to escape from the vehicle and headed toward a grove opposite the road and hid.

The rule entailed that the soldiers either get away from the vehicles and choose a suitable place for the confrontation or stay inside the vehicle and wait for help. The assault unit was armed with sharp tools intended to open closed doors. The four soldiers in the first Humvee did not have a chance to take a breath. Two soldiers got out of the vehicles towards a nearby forest in search of a safe place. They did not act as soldiers during a battle. Something happened in less than a minute. The other two soldiers suffered different injuries. A group of resistance fighters approached the burning vehicle and pulled out Goldwasser and Ragev. The others blew up the nearby border gate. The vehicle crossed and quickly disappeared into the “safe zone” where the enemy could not follow it. The resistance groups were withdrawing at an astonishing speed, leaving dead, wounded and bleeding soldiers behind. It was not too long, until the prisoners arrived where their trace would disappear until the day of the exchange.

Sayyed received the “gift” and watched the recording of the operation

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah did not disclose what he was doing during the operation. But his aide did not lift his eyes from the phone. He did not know what Nasrallah wanted from him that day when he insisted on not neglecting any call from the military leadership. During work, this kind of communication must be curtailed. Despite all the special safety procedures, the enemy was still trying to catch up with him. How can Nasrallah speak from an unknown location in Greater Beirut with the existing border control point just one meter from occupied Palestine, and remain reassured that no one is eavesdropping?

Preparation for the operation took at least four months. Sayyed Nasrallah was exceptionally confident that the mission would succeed along the front line. Less than an hour after the start of the operation, Sayyed received the final call: the gift arrived! It was not possible to understand the content of the rest of the conversation because Nasrallah quickly asked a series of questions: were there martyrs? Did any of the brothers get hurt? Are the prisoners alive? Are things going according to plan? What are the field leadership’s estimates of the enemy’s reaction? What information is there from the enemy’s public or private monitoring room? What is the situation along the border now?

Certainly Nasrallah was not in his office at those moments. A few hours later, none of the resistance leaders remained in their offices or home. The combat units were preparing in the south for the possibility of the enemy’s response expanding. The instructions recommended that an all-out confrontation be avoided, pending the magnitude of the decision in Tel Aviv.

Later, a group of resistance leaders went to Sayyed Nasrallah’s office. The room was hastily prepared, and everyone watched a recording of the operation. The details were complete. Minutes later the recording was hidden. It has not been watched by anyone else including the person who filmed it.

Source: Al-Akhbar Newspaper, Translated by website team

وقائع من عملية «الوعد الصادق»

ابراهيم الأمين

  الخميس 12 تموز 2007

بعـد أقلّ من 6 سنوات تكرر سـيناريو شبعا الـ2000… لكن بنجاح تام! يوم 12 تموز، لم يكن الاستنفار على الحدود شبيهاً بما سبقه. انتبه حزب الله إلى أن إسرائيل صارت تدقّق في أشياء كثيرة، وتتحدّث عن «إشارات إلى نية حزب الله القيام بشيء». أمّا من جهة المقاومة، فكان كلّ شيء جاهزاً: سيارات النقل وغرفة العمليات الطبية وغرفة الأسر… والثلاجات لمن يقتل في المعركة

في غرفة العمليات المركزية، جلس الحاج (ا. م) والى جانبه قائد الوحدات البرية الحاج (م) ومسؤول القطاع الأول الحاج (ج) وآخرون من وحدة الاستخبارات الميدانية في المقاومة. على الطاولة الخشبية كانت بضعة فناجين من الشاي وفاكهة صيفية. لم يتوقف (م) عن إطلاق النكات. كان عليه أن يتذكر أنه نجا للمرة العاشرة بعد المئة من عملية رصد يقوم بها العدو له في المنطقة الحدودية. لكن أعباء المهمة تفرض حركة مكثفة هذه الأيام.
قال ( ا.م): «لقد التزم السيد حسن مجدداً أمام الجمهور بأن عملية أسر سوف تحصل. هذا يلزمنا بعمل إضافي لتحقيق الهدف والحصول على النتيجة المطلوبة: أسر جنود تهتم إسرائيل لأمرهم (أي ليسوا من أصول عربية) وهم أحياء».

منذ وقت غير قصير والاستعدادات لعمل من هذا النوع لم تلامس النجاح الكامل. في بعض الأحيان، كان الهدف يتحرك في منطقة تحتاج الى ترتيبات عملانية معقدة. وفي أحيان أخرى، كانت التحذيرات العلنية من جانب المقاومة تفرض استنفاراً دائماً لجنود العدو. لكن ذلك لا يمنع من التدقيق في الإجراءات وصولاً الى الثغرة التي يمكن النفاذ منها. هكذا هي معادلات المقاومة: كل إجراء للعدو فيه ثغرة، والمهم تشخيصها بدقة وعدم ارتكاب أي خطأ في التقدير ولا في التوقيت.

في أذهان القادة تجري مراجعة دائمة بشأن التجارب السابقة. آخر المهمات الكبرى، كانت في بلدة الغجر. أعدت المجموعات لتنفيذ عملية من النوع الجديد. اقتحام صاعق لمواقع ثابتة، تحت تغطية غير مسبوقة من القصف المدفعي المركز والشامل لكل نقاط التحرك من جانب العدو. كان المئات من المقاتلين في وضعية استعداد لتنفيذ أضخم عمليات الاقتحام. سيارات مدنية ذات طابع عسكري جهزت بالقرب من المكان دون أن يلتفت أحد للأمر. فرضت المقاومة حركة روتينية لمقاومين وسيارات حتى صار المشهد مملاً: مقاومون يرصدون بصورة رتيبة المشهد المقبل، يتهامسون ثم يختفون.

يوم تقرر تنفيذ الهجوم، احتاج المقاومون لدقائق معدودة لكي ينجحوا في شل حركة كل المواقع الاسرائيلية في المنطقة والتلال المشرفة عليها. كان القصف عنيفاً وكثيفاً جداً. وكان رماة الصواريخ المضادة للدروع يحرقون الآليات العسكرية على شكل لعبة «أتاري» كما قال السيد نصر الله لاحقاً. ثم اقتحم مقاومون بسيارات رباعية الدفع وعلى دراجات نارية المكان. وحمل أحدهم للمرة الاولى في تاريخ المقاومة سلاحاً جديداً هو «ب ـ 29» وهو الجيل الجديد من السلاح الروسي التقليدي «ب ـ 7». الرشاشات لا تتوقف عن إطلاق النار في اتجاه الدشم والكمائن المفترضة. لكن خللاً برز في عملية الرصد. وأدى إلى نشوب مواجهة غير محسوبة. مرت دقائق قبل أن تقع مجموعة من المقاومين في كمين أدى الى استشهاد أربعة منهم.
الاتصالات مع القيادة المركزية أشارت الى الفشل. جرى العمل بسرعة على سحب مجموعة العمليات من أرض المعركة، فيما بقيت مجموعات الجهوزية الخاصة بمواجهة أي ردة فعل للعدو في حالة استنفار قصوى. في هذا الوقت، كان الإسرائيليون يتفقدون جنودهم عبر اتصالات لاسلكية مكثفة، وكعادته تأخر الطيران للوصول الى المنطقة. وعندما تلقت قيادة المنطقة الشمالية أنباء المواجهات والنتائج، تأكدت من أن أي جندي لم يفقد. تنفس قادة العدو الصعداء. وقرروا الرد موضعياً. مرت ساعات قليلة وعاد الهدوء الى المكانمر وقت طويل على عملية الغجر. عملية استخلاص العبر تكثفت لدى قيادة المقاومة. السيد نصر الله الذي لطالما واجه أوضاعاً من هذا النوع، وقف على خاطر المسؤولين عن العملية. وعلى طريقته، أكثر من «الحمد لله سائلاً إياه العون على إنجاح مهمة أخرى». أما القادة المعنيون فلم يفارقهم التوتر لأيام طويلة. كان الوجوم قائماً، وإن رافق مراجعة سريعة والبدء بالعمل من جديد.

بعد الخامس والعشرين من أيار عام 2000، باشر المقاومون عملية رصد للحافة الأمامية الجديدة. كانت الثغر كبيرة في حركة جنود العدو. لكن تحذيرات قيادة المقاومة العلنية إزاء الأسر كانت أكثر حضوراً، والإجراءات الاحترازية لم تكن كافية لسد الثغر. وبعد شهور قليلة من المراقبة اللصيقة، حددت نقطة العملية الشهيرة عند بوابة شبعا قرب بركة النقار. يومها جرت عملية كلاسيكية. مرت مركبة معادية وفجرت بها عبوة ناسفة كبيرة. الانفجار الكبير دمر السيارة غير المصفحة بخلاف ما هو متوقع. قتل الجنود لكن جثثهم حُملت على وجه السرعة في سيارة نقل رباعية الدفع. وخلال أقل من نصف ساعة، كان كل شيء قد انتهى.

أقل من ستّ سنوات مرت على تلك العملية. بدا من الوقائع الميدانية بعد عملية الغجر، أن استنفار العدو ارتفع الى مستويات غير مسبوقة. كان على المقاومين إنهاك جنود العدو دون توقف. عمليات التحرش المنظمة بالسلك الالكتروني فرضت على دوريات العدو عدم التوقف عن عمليات التفقد. كانت هناك حاجة كبيرة لمراقبة آلية العمل من جانب العدو: نوع السيارات المستخدمة، عدد الجنود في كل منها، الحركة الروتينية أو المفاجئة، هامش المناورة أمام الجنود وآلية الاتصال بينهم وبين قيادتهم، ومستوى الاستعداد القتالي. وكيفية التصرف إزاء ما يحصل على السياج. اختبارات كثيرة حصلت. وعندما وجدت قيادة المقاومة أنه لا مناص من توسيع رقعة العمل، كانت الطبيعة عاملاً مساعداً في القطاع الغربي من الجبهة. ومر وقت قبل أن تتأكد قيادة المقاومة من أن هناك فرصة جدية لتنفيذ عملية خاطفة. كانت الصورة واضحة في أن العمل سوف يكون مشابهاً بقوة لعملية شبعا الشهيرة. ليس مطلوباً القيام بعمل عسكري اقتحامي كبير. ولكن المطلوب عملية ذات بعد أمني. ما يعني أن على وحدة الرصد أن تقدم المعلومات الكافية التي تمنع أي نوع من المفاجآت. وحقيقة أن الهدف هو أسر جنود أحياء، فرضت آلية من العمل العسكري. لم يكن على المقاومين عدم إطلاق رصاصات قاتلة ضد الجنود، ولكن كان عليهم استخدام آليات من العمل التي تتيح قتل البعض وترك البعض الآخر على قيد الحياة. وبالتالي فإن درس عملية شبعا النظري مهم في هذه اللحظة: إعطاب آلية دون قتل من بداخلها، وتدمير آليات الدعم وقتل من يتحرك لنجدتها.

مرت أسابيع عدة على المراقبة اللصيقة للنقطة. ذات يوم عبر المنطقة ضابط إسرائيلي برتبة عالية،هو اودي ادم ، لم يكن وحده، بل كانت معه عائلته. ولم يكن هدفاً جدياً في تلك اللحظة. المقاومون الذين دربوا على تنفيذ الهجوم، وأعدوا له ما يجب من أسلحة وخطط هجومية وأدوات، باتوا لياليهم الطويلة وراقبوا لنهارات عدة قبل أن تظهر في الأفق ملامح الهجوم الناجح. كانت المعطيات الاستخبارية لدى المقاومة تشير الى اقتراب لحظة التبديل في عمل الكتائب المنتشرة هناك. كانت نقطة العملية قد تحولت الى نقطة أكثر ضعفاً من الفترة السابقة. الاسترخاء ظهر على حركة الجنود وقيادتهم، وموعد التبديل اقترب. لكن المفاجأة جاءت على شكل معلومة وردت الى قيادة المقاومة، بأن الكتيبة الدرزية سوف تتولى المهمات خلال 48 ساعة. وهذا يعني أن العملية قد تنجح، ولكن الجنود المفترض أن يقعوا في الأسر سوف يكونون من أصول عربية، كانت المقاومة تبحث عن صيد من صنف آخر. ما استدعى الاستنفار بطريقة مختلفةيوم 12 تموز، لم يكن الاستنفار على الحدود شبيهاً بما سبقه. انتبه حزب الله إلى أن إسرائيل صارت تدقّق في أشياء كثيرة. وفي كل مرة ينوي الحزب القيام بعمل ما، كان عليه إبلاغ جميع نقاط المراقبة والمراكز العلنية بوجوب الإخلاء، . كبر جسم المقاومة، وباتت الحركة غير قادرة على الإخفاء كلياً. وتحدث الاسرائيليون كثيراً عن «إنذارات أو إشارات الى نية حزب الله القيام بشيء». كان البعض يعتقد ولا يزال، بأن اسرائيل تستند الى معطيات استخبارية من النوع الذي يصنّف عادة في خانة الخرق. لكن قيادة المنطقة الشمالية، كانت تكتفي بملاحظة لأحد مواقعها عن تقلص مفاجئ في حركة المقاومة، حتى تتصرف على أساس أن هناك شيئاً ما يتحضر.

في ذلك اليوم لم يكن القرار على نفس المستوى، لم تتلق وحدات المقاومة المنتشرة على طول الحدود وخلفها إنذاراً مسبقاً أو أمر عمليات موحداً حيال ما يمكن أن تنفذه مجموعات خاصة قرب عيتا الشعب أو قبالة مستعمرة زرعيت، بينما كانت الوحدات المكلفة العمل تتصرف على أساس أنها المعركة:

في مسرح العملية، انتشرت خمس مجموعات من المقاومة، تولت واحدة أمر الهجوم المباشر بواسطة القذائف الصاروخية، وتولت أخرى توفير الغطاء الناري بواسطة الرشاشات الخفيفة والمتوسطة، بينما تولت ثالثة قصف النقاط العسكرية ذات الحساسية المباشرة بالعملية، وكانت مهمة الرابعة تجاوز الحدود بعد تفجير البوابة الحديدية بواسطة عبوة خاصة وتسهيل دخول بسيارة مدنية لنقل الأسرى. اضافة الى تعطيل حركة الجنود وفتح أبواب السيارات العسكرية،

وفي مكان يصعب التأكد ما إذا كان قريباً أو بعيداً عن المكان، كانت الفرق الأخرى جاهزة أيضاً. سيارات مدنية اخرى فيها من يقوم بعملية الاسعاف لاي جريح يسقط من المقاومة او من الاسرى. كذلك جهزت غرفة عمليات جراحية خاصة مجهزة بكل ما يتطلبه أمر إجراء عمليات جراحية للجنود الإسرائيليين إذا أصيبوا بجراح خفيفة أو قاسية. وبرادات خاصة لحفظ جثث الجنود إذا ما قتلوا. غرف مخصصة لإيواء ضيوف من هذا المستوى إذا ما تم أسر الجنود احياء.

عند اقتراب الدورية من نقطة الهجوم، كانت الخطة تقضي بمحاصرتها بالنيران في أكثر النقاط ابتعاداً عن أعين الرقابة الاسرائيلية. لم تكن العملية تحتمل أي نوع من الخطأ أو أي نوع من البطء. ولما تم التأكد من وجود سيارتين وأن تصفيحهما جيد، وأن بداخلها أكثر من ستة جنود، أُبلغت القيادة الميدانية بواقع الأمر. ولم يتأخر الجواب بإعلان الاستعداد للتنفيذ. وهو إعلان لا يشمل فقط المجموعات التي تولت الهجوم الصاعق، بل يشمل وحدات أخرى، سواء على مستوى الجبهة أو على مستوى المناطق الخلفية.

«وصل الهدف الى نقطة المقتل» كما يقول المقاومون. أعطيت الإشارة ببدء الهجوم. السيارة الخلفية تعرّضت لقصف صاروخي مباشر أدى الى تدميرها بالكامل وقتل وجرح من بداخلها. لم تصدر عنها أي حركة بينما كانت هناك مجموعة تتولى أمرها، لا توقف الصليات المباشرة في ما بقي من الهامر التي أضحت في أقل من 3 دقائق كلعبة أطفال محطمة. أما السيارة الأولى، فكانت هي أيضاً في مرمى النيران. لكن الإصابات أخذت شكلاً مختلفاً. كان المقاومون قد تدربوا على كيفية إصابة سيارة مصفحة دون إحراقها بالكامل، وكيفية توجيه الصليات الغزيرة من النيران باتجاه جنود مدججين بالسلاح دون إصابتهم إصابة قاتلة.

الهدف الرئيسي للمهاجمين كان الهامر الأمامي، كانت الخطة تقضي بأسر الجنود من داخله. لذلك حرص المقاومون على أن تكون صواريخهم الموجهة نحوه غير قاتلة في إصابتها. استنتج الجيش الإسرائيليلاحقا بان خطة المقاومة كانت ترمي إلى استهداف الهامر بطريقة تؤدي إلى احتجاز الجنود داخله.

أطلق المقاومون ثلاثة قذائف صاروخية من طراز “آر بي جي” باتجاه الهامر، فانفجرت في الجانب الذي يجلس فيه غولدفاسر وريغيف، وأدت إلى إصابتهما بجراح. في هذه اللحظة تمكن الجنديان الآخران، موعادي وفاينبرغ، من الفرار خارج الآلية وتوجها نحو حرش محاذ للطريق ليختبآ داخله.

كانت القاعدة تقول بأن الجنود إما يهربون من السيارة بعيداً حيث يأخذون مكاناً مناسباً للمواجهة، أو يبقون داخل المركبة بانتظار النجدة. كان تسليح وحدة الاقتحام يتضمن آلات حادة مخصصة لفتح أبواب مغلقة أو خلافه. لم يكن أمام الجنود الأربعة في سيارة الهامر الأولى فرصة لالتقاط الانفاس. خرج جنديان من السيارة باتجاه حرج قريب. بحثا عن مكان آمن ولم تظهر منهما أي حركة كما يفترض أن يبدر من جنود في معركة. شيء ما حصل خلال أقل من دقيقة. الجنديان الآخران أصيبا بجراح مختلفة. اقتربت مجموعة من المقاومين من الآلية المشتعلة وسحبوا منها الجنديين، غولدفاسر وريغيف، فيما كان آخرون يفجرون البوابة الحدودية القريبة، لتنْقض عبرها السيارة التي سرعان ما اختفت في «المنطقة الآمنة» حيث لا يمكن للعدو أن يلحق بها. وبينما كانت مجموعات المقاومة تعمل على الانسحاب بسرعة مذهلة مخلفة قتلى وجرحى ودماءً، كانت عمليات التبديل قائمة خلف الحدود بمسافة طويلة. ولم يمض وقت طويل جداً، حتى وصل الأسيران الى حيث تختفي آثارهما حتى يوم التبادل.

---

تلقّى السيّد «الهدية» وشاهد العملية مصورة

لا يقرّ السيّد حسن نصر الله بعد ما الذي كان يفعله أثناء تنفيذ العملية. لكنّ مساعده لم يرفع نظره عن الهاتف. لم يكن يعرف ما الذي يريده نصر الله منه اليوم، عندما ألحّ عليه عدم إهمال أي اتصال من جانب القيادة العسكرية. وفي لحظة العمل، يجب تقليص هذا النوع من الاتصالات، برغم كل شبكات الأمان الخاصة التي تتطلب جهداً لا يزال العدو حتى اللحظة يحاول الإحاطة به، حيث السؤال: كيف يتمكن نصر الله، من أن يتحدث من مكان مجهول في بيروت الكبرى مع نقطة المراقبة الحدودية الموجودة على بعد متر واحد من فلسطين المحتلة، وأن يكون هو ومن يتحدث معه على اطمئنان إلى أنه لا أحد يسترق السمع؟

استغرق الإعداد للعملية أربعة شهور على الأقلّ. كان السيد نصر الله على ثقة غير عادية بأن المهمة سوف تنجح في مكان على طول خط المواجهة. وبعد أقل من ساعة على بدء العملية، تلقى السيد الاتصال الأخير: الهدية وصلت! لم يكن ممكناً فهم فحوى بقية الحديث، لأن نصر الله أطلق رشقات سريعة من الأسئلة: هل سقط لنا شهداء وهل أصيب أحد من الاخوان، هل الأسيران على قيد الحياة. هل تسير الامور وفق ما هو مقرر. وما هي تقديرات القيادة الميدانية لردة فعل العدو. وما هو الوارد من غرفة الرصد الخاصة بإعلام العدو العام أو الخاص. وما هو الوضع على الحدود الآن؟

بالتأكيد لم يكن نصر الله في مكتبه في تلك اللحظات. وبعد ساعات لم يبق أحد من قيادات المقاومة لا في مكتبه ولا في منزله، فيما كانت الوحدات القتالية تستعد جنوباً لاحتمال توسع ردة فعل العدو. وكانت التعليمات توصي بعدم الانجرار الى مواجهة شاملة، بانتظار تبيان حجم القرار في تل أبيب.

لاحقا، حضرت الى مكتب السيد نصرالله مجموعة من قيادة المقاومة. اعدت الغرفة على عجل، وشاهد الجميع شريط فيديو خاصاً بالعملية. كانت التفاصيل كاملة، وبعد دقائق اخفي الشريط وحتى اللحظة، لم يشاهده احد حتى من قام بتصويره.

مخلفات دبابة الميركافا التي فجرها المقاومون قرب عيتا الشعب، وقد جمعت إلى جانب غنائم أخرى للعرض هذا الشهر

المزيد لابراهيم الأمين

• السعودية ترفض تجديد التسوية الرئاسية ونتائج الانتخابات
• العلاقات اللبنانية ــ السورية: عودة إلى شعار التكامل السياسي والاقتصادي
• ماذا يجري في «شورى الدولة»؟
• عصر المقاومة

Related Videos

Related Articles

• دراسة إسرائيلية: إضعاف حزب الله بإثارة مفردة جنوبي / بقاعي
• «درّة التاج» تفشل أمام صواريخ حزب الله: «مقلاع داود» بلا مقلاع
• عصر المقاومة
• تحرير العام 2000: الانتصار المستمر

Hassan Nasrallah on Israeli Warmongering & US Sanctions: Hezbollah Stronger than Ever, Resistance Not For Sale

June 10, 2018

Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayed Hassan Nasrallah on May 25, 2018, on the occasion of the commemoration of the 18th anniversary of the Liberation of Lebanon.

Translation: unz.com/sayedhasan

Videos here

Transcript:

In Any Upcoming War, Hezbollah will Surely Defeat Israel […] Despite all the intimidation, all the threats, all the blockades, (despite the inscriptions on the) lists of terrorist organizations, the (campaigns of) defamation, all these efforts (to weaken Hezbollah and diminish its popularity in Lebanon) have been in vain. Therefore, we have a community, a people who, prior to 2000, were worthy of victory, and that is why God granted us victory (on May 25, 2000), and He gave us the victory of 2006, and we remain, by the grace of God, the strongest and the most glorious, because we are worthy of it.

Myself, personally, when I talk about the future … Of course, we always say that we do not rush to war, but we do not fear it. The (Israeli) enemy is always threatening, promising, erupting, (trying to) terrorize us, but when we talk about the possibility of a war (against Israel) – may God take this perspective away from this country and this region –, whether during internal meetings or other, I speak of our victory with certainty, because God, with whom we were and with whom we still are, stands by our side. He never left us nor abandoned us, because our people, our community, our Resistance, are there and are worthy to be granted victory by God, the Most High and the Exalted. This is the fundamental point of strength on which we base ourselves and rely. […]

Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine Not For Sale

(First, the US are exerting) pressure on our popular base to punish it (for its support for Hezbollah), psychological, moral, financial, economic pressures, meant to dislocate, reduce and weaken it.

Second, (there is pressure on) our friends and allies to scare them and induce them to distance themselves (from us), because of fears (of sanctions).Third, and this is the fundamental and most important goal, (these sanctions are intended to) cut our funding sources, what they refer to as the drying up of the funding sources of Hezbollah, of the Resistance in Lebanon and of the Resistance movements in the region. But this is not something new, they work at it since 1990. We are on the list of terrorist organizations since the 1990s. It is in order to dry our funding sources that continuous pressure is exerted against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is our main support. And that is a mark of honor for the Islamic Republic of Iran, this gives it a high rank and status.

Today, what is the US problem with Iran? You’ve seen the 12 demands of the US Secretary of State (Mike Pompeo) for them to reconsider their relations with Iran. Among the 12 demands… What do they really want from Iran? That it becomes a weak country, without missiles, without civil nuclear power, excluded of the Middle East’s (issues), that takes no responsibilities and has no involvment nor influence at the regional level, that it becomes, like many countries, an enslaved country. That if (Washington) requires (Iran) 100 billion, they would pay it cash. If (Washington) wants to appoint or depose a President, a King or a Prince, (Iran) would comply at once. That’s what they want from Iran. That’s what they did in Iran at the time of the Shah.

Anyway, among the US demands, there is cessation of support to Resistance movements that (Washington) characterizes as terrorist. And (Pompeo) mentioned Hezbollah and Palestinian Resistance movements. Thus, one reason of these pressures against Iran is that it assumes (the responsibility of Resistance to Israel).

Likewise, (the sanctions) are pressuring any contributor or benefactor who can bring money or donations to this Resistance, its organizations, its (families of) martyrs, its wounded, its orphans, its Resistants, its infrastructure, its capacity… This is their goal (to dry any financial support for Hezbollah).

This is part of the struggle. I do not mean just to describe its aspects, but also to determine our responsibility (against these measures). They are part of the confrontation, of the current battle. And we, psychologically, have to understand (the goals of) our enemy and realize that this is part of the current struggle.

It goes without saying that when the Resistance in Lebanon stood since 1982 and proclaimed its rejection of continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon –which is also a US occupation–, its rejection of the American-Zionist project in Lebanon, either as an occupation, or the imposition of political control, policy management or peace agreements with the enemy… (When) we reject this and struggle, fight and sacrifice, and inflict a defeat on this enemy… When Israel is the primary project for the United States and its military forward base in the region, and that you cross their path, confront them and defeat the army (reputed) invincible, when you humble and expel it from your territory, humiliated, defeated, running (for their lives)… When you cause a strategic turning point in the Arab-Israeli struggle because of what happened in 2000, with its repercussions inside occupied Palestine and the launch of the Intifada… When you are responsible for a huge cultural transformation in the region… When you face the American project, as happened again in 2006, the new Middle East project which, according to Condoleeza Rice, was being born before our eyes… When you raise against the US-Israeli projects and contribute to their collapse –I do not pretend that we have ruined them alone, but we helped to make them fall to some extent, according to places, battlefields and countries… When you are a force that denies US and Israeli hegemony over Palestine, in Lebanon and the countries of the region… When you are a force demanding your rights to sovereignty, authentic sovereignty, not sovereignty as a slogan (devoid of reality)… Every day, the Israeli enemy violates our airspace. Yesterday, it hit Syria from Lebanese skies. Where are the (pseudo) sovereignists? (I mean genuine) sovereignty! When you are a force that demands and truly work for the sovereignty, freedom, liberation (of your territory), for its independent decision, not submitting to the United States or anyone else in this world, (when you claim) that the people of each country is sovereign at home, and must take decisions by its own in his country… When you do not allow neither the US nor Israel to put their hands over a (single) inch of your territory at the border, or one (single) cubic meter of your (territorial) waters, or a (single) drop of your oil, it is natural that this enemy will see the threat (you represent for him), for its projects, for its hegemony, for its interests, (because you are) a force that defends your people, your nation and your Community and it will not sit idle in front of you. It will (try to) fight you, kill you, launch wars against you, it will plot against you, etc., etc., etc. Then from there, it will submit you to an economic and financial blockade, (put you on) the list of terrorist organizations, dry your funding sources, etc. So that’s (a full) part of the struggle.

And those of our brothers, among our noble families, merchants, businesses, organizations, associations, affected by (the sanctions), they must consider the damage as part of the struggle. This is exactly the same as for the family that offers a martyr, who has an injured or a partial or total paralysis, who sees their house bombed during the war and who ends up in a camp. In the same way, this is part of the sacrifices required by this battle, and those affected and disabled (by sanctions and inscription on the list of terrorist organizations) must consider this damage, firstly at the personal and psychological level, as part of the sacrifices (required), we have to consider this as part of the sacrifices on the path (of Resistance) that we took, we must consider that this is part of the battle and face it.How to cope with it? In order to face (these measures), the essential point, as we have said in some (previous) battles, is to defeat the purpose (of sanctions). We cannot respond to these inscriptions on the list of terrorist organizations (and the resulting sanctions) by similar measures, because we have neither banks nor US currency, nor do we exchange dollar, euro or any such thing. But we have to frustrate their purpose. What is it? Their goal is to shake our resolve, the determination of our people and our popular base. They want to engage our will, our determination and our resolve, our perseverance and persistence on this path, on this line and on this position. As long as we remain resolute, determined and steadfast, (their sanctions) have no weight. And may God make the best out of it.

True, there will be damage, we will suffer losses, but this is part of the required sacrifices, like the martyrs, the wounded, demolished homes and factories that were destroyed during the war. After that, God the Almighty and the Exalted compensated, international assistance helped rebuild, the State assumed its share of responsibility, we took our responsibility, but it’s part of the path (of Resistance we chose).

So far, the experience showed (our enemies) that death, murder, wars, massacres, destruction, refugees, and all that was inflicted on us, to us and to our people in Lebanon, in no way diminished our commitment, our resolve and our determination. And therefore, now, I say that these measures will lead to no result. They do not delay nor accelerate anything. They cause damage, this is natural. As I said, it’s like all the other sacrifices: when a martyr falls, the father, mother and wife are grieving, the woman becomes a widow, the mother becomes *** (word untranslatable designating the mother who lost her child), children become orphans. We are human beings, we have feelings, but it’s part of the struggle. We endure, we rely on it to go ahead, and we shape victories over these losses. We do not stop, we are not scared, we are not afraid.

Now I want to return to the point that I mentioned at the beginning, I said I would come back to it. Before 2000, the capacities of the Resistance were very modest. And now it is true that the capacities of the Resistance are very large, and it needs money, no doubt. But in the worst case, in the worst case, say this inscription on the list of terrorist organizations and financial and economic siege manage to cut a large portion of that money, or even all of the money. I declare to the US, its allies in the region and the Israeli enemy: you are very wrong in understanding the Resistance and the people.

Wherein lies this error? It stems from their culture. It is that they see their friends (allies) and the people in general as mercenaries. Every man, every individual, for the United States and its allies or instruments, is not considered a man. They consider them, as we joked before, like an S with two bars (dollar sign). Money. How much are you worth? How much do we have to pay to buy your voice (in elections)? $ 100? $ 1,000? $ 3,000? Or is it that (on the contrary), your voice is not for sale? Can your position be reversed with money, with suitcases (full of banknotes)? If one brings you suitcases, will you move from one position to another? Or is it that (on the contrary), your position cannot be bought, it’s not for sale? They see the world only through the prism of money. They do not believe in principles. If they are told that such people are people of principle, patriots, they will ask you to explain the meaning of “principle”, “patriot”, “humanity”. (They are unaware of and unable to understand) these concepts, they have no existence for them. What matters for them is the work, money, weapons trade, how much money you have, how many yachts, how many banks, how much is your oil, how much credit you have in the banks, etc. This is your value. Your value is not your good deeds, as the prophetic tradition says: “The value of a man lies in his good deeds.” Your value is the balance of your bank account.

Their mistake is to consider the Resistance as mercenaries of Iran, for example. Since Iran gives money (to Hezbollah), just like Syria, they believe that we are mercenaries, that we are fighting as mercenaries, and that if they deprive us of our money, we will stop fighting and change our position. This is their fundamental error.

This Resistance in Lebanon, Palestine and the region, those people who demonstrate every Friday in Gaza are not mercenaries. They are defenders of a cause. These Resistants, and their people, their fellow countrymen, their families, their popular base and all who are with them, (Washington and its allies) must know that they are people of principle, patriots, humanists, defenders of a cause in which they believe (fervently), and for which they fight and are willing to sacrifice, and sacrifice their dearest ones and their children. They are ready to live their entire lives in the worst conditions for their cause to triumph. Such people cannot be defeated neither by lists of terrorist organizations, nor by sanctions, nor by a financial siege or by drying up their sources of money.When you fight, in Lebanon and Palestine, those opposed to the Israeli enemy, a popular will, a popular Resistance and a popular culture, you are unable to inflict a defeat on them, regardless of any measure you can implement. That is why their (economic) battle (against us) is lost in advance.

But the condition for that, like in the military war, as in all previous challenges, is that we become aware of the essence of this (economic) war, that we understand their motive and goals, that we endure and that we make its objectives fail. And this is easy. Because if we maintain our determination, our resolve and our will, they will not be able to do anything.

Denunciation of Morocco and tribute to Algeria & SoudanEven (the US attempt) to isolate (Hezbollah) in the region (will be in vain). The fact that such country has no links with us, that another breaks relations with us, than another yet (accuses us) under a thousand false pretexts, as did Morocco just a few weeks ago without any basis of truth.

(Morocco) said that the Moroccan Minister of Foreign Affairs visited Iran, and submitted a folder to the Foreign Minister of Iran about the involvement of Hezbollah with the Polisario Front. The Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs promised to keep me informed, and he did. I asked where is the folder, but there is no folder! The Moroccan Minister of Foreign Affairs did not even provide a single file or piece of paper, although they claimed to have provided evidence and documents, but they refused to give even the sheet that… He had a sheet in his hand, from which he was reading (to the Iranian minister) the names (of Hezbollah members allegedly involved with the Polisario): so and so, so and so, so and so, so and so. (The Iranian minister) asked for the sheet, but (the Moroccan Minister) refused. Even this piece of paper (he read), he refused to give it!

Well, where is the evidence, where are the facts? Do you have videos, recordings, witnesses? Who are your witnesses? But there is absolutely nothing. (Morocco) said that so and so, so and so, so and so, so and so from Hezbollah… Moreover, some of these (Hezbollah members) have no involvement in the security and military operations, and these brothers mentioned work in very remote locations from each other, so it is clear that it is the Israeli intelligence that provided the names to Morocco, but there is no link between these (Hezbollah) brothers. (Morocco is merely asserting emphatically that) Hezbollah supports the Polisario, and it breaks its ties with Iran, (just like that).

While we have no relationship with the Polisario, not even political relations. I do not even take a position on this issue, that we have not studied, and on which we have no position, neither negative nor positive. In truth, there is no relationship between us, not even political, we have no contact, but we will see Morocco accuse us of having received the Polisario in Lebanon, of having visited them in their town –I do not even remember its name, it was the first time I was hearing of it–, of having provided them with support, training, training camps, weapons, etc.

Anyway, these accusations and actions are futile, they will have no result in terms of resolution and determination of the Resistance. Before 2000, when the Resistance has triumphed and achieved this feat of which we celebrate the 18th anniversary today (Lebanon’s Liberation), it had no regional relations. There was Iran and Syria, nothing else. We could have friendly relations with the Embassy of Algeria, the Sudanese Embassy, ​​such or such country, but we did not have regional relations. Rather, many did not even dare to open links or contacts with us, because since 1992, we are on the list of terrorist organizations.

Therefore, all these measures of political, diplomatic and financial siege, these intimidations, I say to our enemies that they will not change anything. The Resistance that has shaped the victory of 2000, this glorious and resounding victory that imposed on the (Israeli) enemy to get out humiliated and crushed, with no clause, without any conditions, without any concession whatsoever (only by the force of arms, as Hezbollah refused any negotiations with Israel), the Resistance is stronger today, more powerful, more robust, even regarding the determination, faith, principles, soul, mind, until the new generations that you think (corrupted by materialism).

It is this new generation that fought in 2006, and much of our martyrs are part of the generation born in the 1990s. And today, it is also the case for the great battle that was conducted in the region (Syria). When you participate in the fight against the American project in the region, in Syria… We are proudly and publicly involved in this crucial battle. And it is during such a commemoration (on May 25) that I announced our entry into this battle several years ago (in 2013). And we said then that the US and its allies have gathered the takfiris from all around the world to bring down Damascus and the Syrian State, and I said in a speech like this, without vis-a-vis, that the Syrian leadership, the Syrian people and the Syrian army and its allies would never allow Damascus to fall, whatever sacrifices were required.Today, on the occasion of the holiday of the Resistance and Liberation, which we celebrate to commemorate the South(-Lebanon) Liberation, today also, we address Syria, the Syrian leadership, the Syrian Arab Army, the Syrian people and all their loyal allies, and we congratulate them for the liberation of Damascus, the Damascus suburbs and the whole Damascus area in its entirety, freed from any danger and any (terrorist armed) organization, especially during this last battle against ISIS and the glorious victory that took place there, and now that all Syria goes from success to success, successes that set up the next stage (of reconstruction). Those who (like Hezbollah) take such positions must bear the consequences, and I declare that we are stronger, more determined and more present, and with God’s grace, these (diplomatic sanctions) will have absolutely no effect. […]

source: http://sayed7asan.blogspot.com/2018/06/hassan-nasrallah-on-israeli.html

» The resistance equations, its makers, and its partners… On the Resistance and Liberation Day معادلات المقاومة وصنّاعها وشركاؤها… في العيد

 

The resistance equations, its makers, and its partners… On the Resistance and Liberation Day

مايو 27, 2018

 

Written by Nasser Kandil,

Some Lebanese may live on the Resistance and Liberation Day as an additional ordinary holiday because the country of sects and regions has lost many of the elements of the national sense. The occupation during two decades of the age of Lebanon was an issue that belongs to its people who suffered from it and its humiliation and who sacrificed their sons and daughters. Many Lebanese were among spectators, neutral, or complainers from the exaggeration of refusing compromises that must be accepted in balances of what is so-called the political realism. Despite the failure of the compromises in ensuring the Israeli withdrawal and the winning of the resistance which bet on the blood of its martyrs there were those who said before the liberation that the presence of the resistance complicates this withdrawal. The state seemed conspired with the occupation until the fall of the seventeenth of May and it became neutral until the arrival of the General Emile Lahoud to presidency. At his era the state accompanied the resistance, this means that the consensus on the resistance was not a condition for the completion rather its acceptance was the end of the ability to complete. Furthermore, the subjection of the resistance to the logic of a state means its end and the fall of all its achievements, since every time has its equations. The only acceptable consensus is the consensus on the future of the resistance after the liberation, where no decision is taken without its acceptance. The relationship between the resistance and the state is a friendly accommodation between two necessities for the survival of the homeland and its strength.

The generation which accompanied the course of the resistance since the occupation in 1983 and shared its sacrifices and its achievements is a generation that is must be integrated not competed. That generation recognizes that the youth of the Islamic resistance were the most efficient to carry the banner until victory. Hezbollah’s leaders do not deny that they established and accumulated on what they inherited of those who preceded them from the Mujahideen of Amal Movement and the resistance fighters of the Lebanese national resistance in its national and leftist wings. Both of them have unforgettable heroisms and undeniable contributions. The resistance became the collective movement of those who were truly distinguished by the honesty of their choice and the greatness of their sacrifices; they have martyrs and many honorable symbols. For those without exception we owed the celebration, the happiness, and the feeling of pride and dignity.

We remember on the first days of the birth of the resistant action, many figures who do not fear dangers; they put in front of their eyes the humiliation of the occupier without any considerations, some of them became martyrs and some of them are still continuing without arrogance their roles as resistance fighters, strugglers, politicians, writers, or contributors in the public affair. Damascus was bringing us together, we who are observed and eavesdropped or sometimes planned to be killed. Damascus at that time was not mere a safe place for meeting, rather it was our operations room, a training center, and a source of weapons, it remained like that despite all the structural changes in its institutions and the structural changes of forces concerned with the resistance. Damascus which a Lebanese-Syrian corruption front which stemmed from the convergence of two resistance fronts wanted to distort its role and to mix between its honest partners in losses and its opportunists and beneficiaries of gains away from the source of the gains. Damascus, which it is fair to recognize that without it the resistance would not be as it is now.

As in Damascus in Tehran the resistance fighters meet, they get the support and the auspices to support the course of this resistance and to make its victory imminent. Many fighters were boasting of their identity and their cause away from their country in which they fear and feel afraid to disclose their identity and their cause. Even in the era of the rising force of the resistance, the resistance fighters in Damascus and Tehran were called in their names as resistant while in their country their names became symbols of guardianship or the group of Syria and Iran. As the liberation was a festival for all Lebanon, as the victory in July 2006 and the victory in May 2000. Some Lebanese remained refusing the partnership in victory and refusing considering it a victory; their eyes are as Israel on the resistance weapon asking the same questions about its fate.

On the Liberation and Resistance Day, a call to think quietly and to contemplate; will we have a homeland before we reconcile on right and wrong in our modern history? Was Israel indeed an occupation? Was the resistance the right national expression to confront that occupation, or was our history related under the name of the civil wars or the wars of others on our land?  Was the division on the occupation between the dealing and the resistance a kind of a civil war or a kind of the manipulation of others?

The painful fact which some find it difficult to accept is that the real civil war is being formed by changing the concepts of patriotism, occupation and resistance in order not to embarrass each other. Therefore the history becomes courtesy and hypocrisy and the national hypocrisy becomes the shortest way to the civil war, while the national agreement begins from the acknowledgement of the facts of history.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

معادلات المقاومة وصنّاعها وشركاؤها… في العيد

مايو 25, 2018

ناصر قنديل

– قد يعيش بعض اللبنانيين عيد التحرير والمقاومة كعطلة إضافية عادية، لأنّ بلد الطوائف والمناطق ضرب الكثير من مقوّمات الحسّ الوطني، حتى كان الاحتلال خلال عقدين من عمر لبنان قضية تخصّ أهله الذين ذاقوا مرارته وذله وصنعوا من أبنائهم وبناتهم مقاومته، وكان الكثير من باقي اللبنانيين بين متفرّج ومحايد أو متبرّم مما يسمّيه المبالغة في رفض تسويات لا بدّ من قبولها في موازين ما يسمّيه الواقعية السياسية. ورغم فشل وَصْفَات التسويات في تأمين الانسحاب الإسرائيلي، وفوز المقاومة برهانها المعقود على دماء شهدائها، بقي مَن يقول قبيل التحرير إنّ وجود المقاومة يعقّد هذا الانسحاب، أما على مستوى الدولة فقد بدأت متآمرة مع الاحتلال حتى إسقاط اتفاق السابع عشر من أيار، وصارت محايدة حتى وصول العماد إميل لحود إلى رئاسة الجمهورية، فرافقت المقاومة لسنتين من عهده. وهذا يعني أنّ الإجماع على المقاومة ما كان يوماً شرطاً للإنجاز، بل كان القبول به نهاية لقدرة الإنجاز، كما يعني أنّ إخضاع المقاومة لمنطق الدولة بالمطلق يعني موتها وسقوط كلّ إنجازها. فالمعادلات التي تصحّ بتطبيق منطقها بمفعول زمن مضى لا تصحّ لزمن آتٍ، والإجماع الوحيد المقبول هو الإجماع على مستقبل المقاومة بعد التحرير، أيّ اشتراط قبول أهلها بكلّ ما يخصّها، حيث لا قرار بدون رضاها، والعلاقة بينها وبين الدولة هي مساكنة ودية بين ضرورتين لبقاء الوطن وقوّته ومنعته على السياسيين اكتشاف معادلاته وصناعتها.

– الجيل الذي رافق مسيرة المقاومة منذ الاحتلال عام 1982، وتشارك تضحياتها وصناعة إنجازاتها، وتناوب على ريادة ساحاتها، هو جيل يتكامل ولا يتنافس، ويقرّ كلّ أبنائه بأنّ شباب المقاومة الإسلامية كانوا الأكفأ بحمل الراية حتى النصر، بينما لا يغفل قادة حزب الله أنهم أسّسوا وراكموا على ما ورثوه ممن سبقوا، من مجاهدي حركة أمل ومناضلي المقاومة الوطنية اللبنانية بجناحيها القومي واليساري، وقد كان لكلّ منهما بطولات لا تُنسى وإسهامات لا تُنكر، فصارت المقاومة هي التيار الجامع لكلّ هؤلاء الذين تميّزوا بصدق خيارهم وعظيم تضحياتهم، ولهم شهداء وأحياء ترفع القبعة لهم، وقد صار بعض تضحياتهم منسياً، وبعض عائلاتهم ومنها أسر لشهداء كبار، تعيش الحسرة والقهر والفقر، فلهؤلاء بلا استثناء ندين بالعيد والفرحة وشعور العزة والكرامة.

– نستذكر في تلك الأيام الأولى لولادة العمل المقاوم قامات شامخة بالعنفوان، لا تأبه المخاطر، وضعت نصب أعينها إذلال المحتلّ وقهره بلا حساب، بعضهم صار شهيداً وبعضهم لا يزال يواصل بتواضع النأي عن التباهي دوره مقاوماً أو مناضلاً أو سياسياً أو كاتباً أو مساهماً عن بُعد في الشأن العام، والذي يجب أن تتضمّنه كلّ شهادة للتاريخ هو أنّ الشام وحدها كانت تجمعنا نحن الذين كان كلّ لقاء يضمّ منا إثنين تراقبه العيون، وتترصّده آلات التنصّت والقتل أحياناً. ودمشق يومها لم تكن مجرد مكان آمن للقاء، بل كانت غرفة عملياتنا، ومركز التدريب ومصدر السلاح، وبقيت كذلك مع كلّ التغيّرات في هيكيلية مؤسسات الدولة فيها، وتغييرات هيكيلية القوى المعنية بالمقاومة. دمشق التي أراد تلازم فساد لبناني سوري نشأ على ضفاف تلازم مسارين مقاومين أن يشوّه دورها ويخلط بين شركائها الصادقين في خيارات الغرم، وبين المتنفعين الوصوليين ناقلي البنادق من كتف إلى كتف من أهل الغنم، بمعزل عن مصدر الغنم وعنوانه، هي دمشق التي يقتضي الإنصاف بالإعتراف أنه لولاها لما كان للمقاومة كثير مما كان.

– كما في دمشق في طهران، وكما من دمشق من طهران، يلتقي المقاومون دون أن يسألهم أحد عن غير حال المقاومة، ويتلقون الرعاية والمؤازرة، في ما يدعم مسيرة هذه المقاومة ويجعل نصرها قريباً. وبحسرة يذكر كثير من المقاومين أنهم كانوا يفاخرون بالمجاهرة بهويتهم وقضيتهم في غير بلدهم، الذي كانوا فيه يخشون ويحسبون ألف حساب لانكشاف هويتهم واكتشاف قضيتهم، وحتى في زمن قوة المقاومة وانتصاراتها بقي المقاومون يُعرَفون في دمشق وطهران وتجري مناداتهم بصفاتهم كمقاومين، بينما في بلدهم صار اسمهم رموز الوصاية أو جماعة سورية وإيران. وكما كان التحرير عيداً يهديه المقاومون لكلّ لبنان كان النصر في تموز 2006، ومثلما كان في أيار 2000، بقي بعض اللبنانيين يرفض الشراكة في النصر، ويرفض بالأصل اعتباره نصراً، وعينه كما عين «إسرائيل» على سلاح المقاومة، ويطرح أسئلتها ذاتها عن مصيره.

– في عيد التحرير والمقاومة دعوة لتفكير هادئ وتأمّل، ليقف الجميع أمام حقيقة، هل يكون لنا وطن قبل أن نتصالح على حقيقة الصواب والخطأ في تاريخنا الحديث، وليس القديم، هل كانت «إسرائيل» احتلالاً بالفعل؟ وهل كانت المقاومة هي التعبير الوطني الصحيح عن التصدي لهذا الاحتلال، أم انّ كلّ تاريخنا موصول باسم حروب أهلية، أو حروب الآخرين على أرضنا، وفي قلبه يصير الانقسام حول الاحتلال بين التعامل والمقاومة بعضاً من الحرب الأهلية، أو بعضاً من تلاعب الآخرين بنا؟

– الحقيقة الجارحة التي يصعب ربما على البعض قبولها، هي أنّ الحرب الأهلية الحقيقية يجري التأسيس لها بتمييع مفهوم الوطنية، والاحتلال، والمقاومة، فقط كي لا يُحرج بعضنا بعضاً، فيصير التاريخ فعل مجاملات ونفاقاً، والنفاق الوطني أقصر طرق الحروب الأهلية، بينما الوفاق الوطني يبدأ من الإقرار مرةً بحقائق التاريخ.

 

Related Videos

Related Articles

• عيد المقاومة والتحرير 2018: بدء الحصاد الآخر
• عيد المقاومة.. بقعة ضوء تتوسّع
• «القومي»: المقاومة ضمانة تحمي إنجاز التحرير بمعادلة الردع
• ثقافة المقاومة متجذّرة في مجتمعنا وتصعيدها مطلوب في مواجهة التطبيع
• مسار مستدام للمقاومة
• ليكن عيد المقاومة والتحرير هذا العام انطلاقة متجدّدة للبنان المعزّز بكلّ عناصر القوة
• عندما يفتخر «إيهود باراك» بخياره في ذكرى عيد التحرير…

President Lahoud to Al-Ahed: Liberation One of the Most Beautiful Days in My Life

Fatima Salameh

25-05-2018 | 08:49

It would not be a “Resistance and Liberation” holiday without hearing from him. He holds the title of the pro-resistance president and the “man” – described as such by the master of victory.

His national and historic positions, which never abandoned the resistance, testify to that. The path of President Emile Lahoud, the nationalist, is full of honorable stances that carried Lebanon from the age of dependency to liberation. He defended the resistance before he knew them. It is enough that he is one of those who sought to liberate the land. The historic victory of 2000 was the pride of his reign and the result of his courageous positions that supported the path of Jihad at a time when the entire world stood against him. He was offered a lot in exchange for abandoning this path. He chose to work with conscience and in accordance with his convictions, which are not bought and sold.

In an interview with al-Ahed, President Lahoud recalls many stages, from his time as commander of the Lebanese army to the time he took over the presidency. His does not conceal his “joy” with the liberation of the land during his reign. He describes this event with pride. He tells how he learned about Hezbollah and its leader for the first time and how very proud he was of meeting him [the leader]. He often expresses his happiness that he is living in the time of the resistance fighters, who have returned Lebanon’s stolen dignity.

Below is the script of the interview:

Eighteen years after liberation, what does President Emile Lahoud remember from that era?

It is the most beautiful day of my life. Before that date, there was no hope that we would be able to regain our dignity. Our land has been occupied for 22 years. All the officials who inherited the government were accustomed to this issue until it became obvious. Truthfully, I never heard of Hezbollah. When I took over as army commander, I was living in Rayak. The atmosphere was charged against Hezbollah. When I wanted to visit my family in the north, they used to send me telegrams asking me to be careful and watch out for Hezbollah members who intended to kill me. However, the teaching inside the house, which does not know a path of sectarianism, made me not interested in the matter, even though the picture in my mind drawn about Hezbollah is that it was a Takfiri group. When did I learn of Hezbollah? It was in 1991, when I took over the army command. A decision was issued by the Lebanese state to position the army in the South. I went to Tyre. One of the officers told me: “For 22 years, I was deployed here. I was a company commander and we received instructions that ‘if a militant is caught, we must hand him over to the intelligence services, who in turn will imprison him.’ You are a new army commander, what are your instructions for me in such a case?”

I asked him, what is their nationality, are they Palestinians? He said no, they are Lebanese who want to return to their villages, which are occupied by the “Israelis”, and they carry out operations against them. Sometimes we catch them before they arrive as they are on their way to the valleys. What do you want us to do in such a situation? I told him: “Lebanese who want to return to their villages that are occupied by the Zionists are resistance fighters. You have to support them.” He told me, “appreciated” and he rejoiced. It was the first time an officer thought in this way. ” To me, as Emile Lahoud, any nationalist army commander should not ask permission from anyone to issue such an order. Should I stand in the face of those who seek to liberate the land! On the contrary, I should be an absolute support for them.

Then I returned to Beirut and the President of the Republic, Elias Hrawi, told me:

“Emile are you crazy? You are supporting people who are causing trouble at the border. Tomorrow an “Israeli” soldier will be killed and [“Israel”] will attack all of Lebanon.” Do you want to ‘destroy’ Lebanon?

I told him:

“Have you ever heard of an army commander whose land is being occupied and he gives an order to his officers that whoever liberates the land should be imprisoned? We must support them. He told me: I give you an order to confront them. I told him: I will not obey.

In 1993, the resistance became stronger than before. The Zionists were annoyed and exerted pressure on the Americans, who in turn pressured the Lebanese state and the Security Council. The latter took a decision to get rid of Hezbollah. The Lebanese state at the time issued a decision. I remember an incident that took place at the time. Members of the army spoke to me. They told me that a Zionist tank bombed a Lebanese area and killed a woman. What do you want us to do? It was the first experience with “Israel”. I asked them: is there a Lebanese tank in range? They said yes. I said, what are you waiting for? Respond. At this point, the President of the Republic summoned me and told me: “Emile, what is happening? How could you do that and give an order to respond? I told him this is what I must do. He asked me more than once to eliminate Hezbollah with the support of the UNIFIL forces. I told him: You are not understanding me, I will not do it. He told me: ‘Tomorrow is the meeting of the Supreme Council of Defense and you have to attend.’ I said, ‘I will not attend.’ He replied, ‘then we will take the decision without you. Someone else will be the army commander.’ I told him: let him come. I am doing my duty and what my conscience tells me. The next day I came late to the meeting. I found them meeting with the UNIFIL commander. They designed a map for the elimination of Hezbollah. I told them: what are you doing? Fold this map. The commander of the UNIFIL forces replied: ‘they have taken the decision in the Security Council.’ I told him: let them take whatever they want. I will not comply. Let them bring another army commander to carry out what they want. What right does the Lebanese state have to order a national army to strike its people because the “Israelis” are annoyed?

All this and you had no interaction with Hezbollah. When was your first direct contact with them?

After all these years, there was no contact between us. But there was absolute support on my part.

The first contact in which I got to know Hezbollah was in 1997 when I got a call saying that Hadi, the son of the Secretary General of the party, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, was martyred. I told them, this is the first time that an Arab leader presents his son as a martyr. I want to get to know him. Indeed, the measures were taken. I found him relaxed although the news of his son’s martyrdom was announced an hour before my visit. We spoke for about ten minutes as I consoled him. I felt that we would win and triumph with this leader. Days passed, and we did not meet. In 2000, at the time of the liberation, Sayyed Nasrallah asked me to meet him. So we met and he presented me with an “Israeli” rifle. After that, I never saw him until I left the presidency. At the time, we sat for about three hours and talked about everything. He told me, ‘I do not know you.’ I told him, ‘We met in good conscience.’

What does to Emile Lahoud that the land was liberated during his reign as you have always described this event with pride?

It means my dignity. I take pride in this event very much. I am glad that the dignity of the Lebanese had been restored during my days. Is it possible that the “Israelis” occupy our land for 22 years and no one is shaken. Only a handful of resistance fighters met and liberated the land and defended us. Without them, “Israel” would have been among us.

How did the liberation of the land contribute to your military experience?

We can achieve the impossible. Many asked me what I was doing. No one can resist “Israel”. I told them, you will see. The resistance is the immunity of Lebanon. I am surprised how some people speak after the conclusion of the elections on the need to disarm the resistance, after all that it has done! They certainly get money from their masters who incite them to do so.

How do you perceive the golden equation, which you supported early on?

Without the golden equation, Lebanon would no longer exist, especially after the events that took place in Syria and Iraq, which made Lebanon strong and able to stand up to “Israel”. Unfortunately, we did not learn that we must preserve it through national action and not through sectarianism.

Today, the Palestinians are doing all they can to liberate their land. What is your advice for them given the experiences with the liberation of Lebanese lands?
There is no talk with “Israel” except in the language of force. I do not want to criticize, but when I hear some Palestinian officials talking about the need for a settlement, this does not return the land. The solution is only by force, just as we did in Lebanon. Here, I recall an incident. At one of the closed summits of the Arab heads of state in Khartoum, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said ‘how can I possibly pay for the salaries for the ‘Strip’ when the Zionists are not allowing the funds to arrive. I ask you Arabs to mediate with the concerned parties to put pressure on “Israel” so that the money can reach us. I told him, ‘Abu Mazen, behave like we did in Lebanon. It is shameful to beg for our salaries. We have to attack them by force. If you acted like Lebanon, you will not be here right now.’

You have always said that the the crisis in Syria will conclude with a victory. How do you describe the situation seven years after the crisis started?

Syria triumphed. The losers including the Zionists and the Arabs are coveting a winning card. That is why they are pressing in the last quarter. But they will not triumph. The crisis will soon be over and with it the conspiring mentality in Lebanon will end.

A final word

How lucky we are that we have lived in the time of the resistance and the men who sacrificed themselves for the homeland.

Source: Al-Ahed

Related Articles

• Emil Lahoud: Exposing Lebanon’s and Arab zionists
• Resisting President LAHOUD: We Must Defend Lebanon Whenever Being under Attack
• Israel benefited from Hariri assassination: Lebanon ex-President Lahoud
• Lahoud: As Israel failed in Lebanon Saudi will Fail in Yemen
• Emile Lahoud: Ersal
• Lahoud: Syria Triumphs Under Assad Leadership
• Lahoud: Whatever Sacrifices Needed, Lebanon to Protect Its Wealth
• “Get rid of Emile Lahoud…”
• Sayyed Nasrallah Thanks Lahoud for Brave, National Stances

The Sacred Defense Video Game: A New Form of Resistance in the Face of the Soft War

Mohammad Keserwani

No one would disagree that soft war is some of the fiercest warfare. It is no less important than a direct military confrontation.

It can be more powerful and deadlier if it is overlooked. The West has used every means possible to exercise this type of war on our Islamic countries. It is doing everything it can to drown our children and youth with the values ??it chooses in order to obliterate our cultural and religious identity. It uses many methods for that purpose, whether through the subliminal messages it transmits through cartoons, or through the state of “addiction” created by the social media world, or electronic games that seek, with magical charm, to destroy our values ??and distract us from our core issues.

Hezbollah’s electronic media unit has always been confronting the enemy’s soft war tactics. It also using all means to preserve the environment of our resistance community and most importantly to build a generation that lives within its borders, possess its culture, and preserves its history and momentous occasions. Electronic games are one of the methods that the unit has worked to create and develop. After the two-dimensional “Al-Quds boy”, “Special Force- Part I” after the 2000 liberation, and “Special Force- Part II” following the 2006 divine victory, the Electronic Media Unit is proud to present the three-dimensional Sacred Defense Video Game which simulates Hezbollha’s Jihad in Syria against the Takfiris, in line with the slogan “history is written by the victors.” Hezbollah and the axis of resistance defeated the Takfiri enemy in the region, and today it documenting its victory using several means, including the Sacred Defense Video Game. The game is a direct interactive documentation with the public. 

The game embodies a series of battles in which the party participated, starting with the defense of the shrine of Sayyida Zeinab (PBUH) in Damascus through to  the battles protecting the Lebanese-Syrian border in Ras Baalbek.

* Video Game Time Frame:

The game begins with the visit of Mujahid Ahmad to the shrine of Sayyida Zeinab (PBUH). The holy shrine comes under Takfiri attacks that push Ahmad to join Hezbollah fighters in order to defend the shrine (the sanctities). As the time frame evolves, Mujahid Ahmad participates in a series of battles against the Takfiris, including defending the border at Ras Baalbek.

* Similarities between the game and the field reality:

The game is based on real events and facts that have occurred over the past years. In the battles which Ahmad is participating in, the features of the areas are very similar to those on the ground. The high-quality image accurately shows landmarks similar to those areas, roundabouts, schools and homes. Such as the Hejira Roundabout, Shehade School in Hejira and others. We also see these resemblances in the Qusayr Level, which shows the basic features such as the clock and the Grand Mosque.

* The Game’s Purpose:

There are three basic purposes of the Sacred Defense Video Game. The first is to simulate the jihad of the Islamic resistance fighters during their battles against the Takfiris (an element of suspense and entertainment). The second is to stimulate the jihadist spirit in the target audience by broaching harmful realities and crimes perpetrated by the Takfiri groups.

The third and most important purpose is to document the victory over the Takfiri enemy in the region.

* Game Production Path:

The game consists of a picture and a program code. The picture is the drawing and design, and the code moves it. This combination is present throughout. The work behind the Sacred Defense Video Game has always been driven by the idea which involves the simulation of the jihad of the resistance fighters along the front lines. Therefore, in the game we notice the high-quality picture, the music that suits the subject, and the program’s code that helps to provide it in a way that fits the general framework of the idea of ??the game.

At the beginning, it was just an idea. When it was finalized, a visit was arranged to the holy sites and some fronts. Then the drawing and the design began. The program codes were added and the game was released with its trial version (DEMO).

The work was completed in the experimental phase, where many individuals from different age groups (14-40) were recruited to play and jot down their observations. We, then, made some adjustments according to the remarks before the game was released in its final formula. Later, its own music was composed. Fliers and ads were printed. Finally, it was released in the market.

* Competition with global games:

When we want a comparison to study the competition, we must look at two criteria. The first is the techniques, and the second is the idea. In terms of technique, yes, the game was programmed according to an advanced production engine. It can be categorized within the latest production of games.

As for the idea, in the local market today, there is no game about the battles in Syria between the Syrian Arab army and the allied forces on the one hand and terrorist groups on the other, making it difficult to find a counterpart or a similar game to compare it with.

If we delve deeper into the concept of comparison and competition up to the point of the “soft war”, based on the idea of ??the game, its objectives and its design, we can classify the game as a competition for games in the soft war category. We are used to playing electronic games. We are used to playing the American soldier fighting the Russians or the Arabs and the terrorists. This generates the conviction within the player that America is the spearheading the defense of human rights in the region and is the first to counter terrorism. Of course, the reality is contrary to that. America, which previously created “al-Qaeda” and later the Takfiri organizations in the world and foremost “Daesh”, cannot be the sponsor for peace in the region. Today, in the Sacred Defense Video Game, we show the truth that the axis of resistance in general and Hezbollah fighters in particular are the ones protecting their land with their weapons. They are really fighting terrorism in the region and limiting its expansion.  The game instills the belief that we can protect our land and sanctities and that we do not need America’s support in fighting terrorism.

* Simulation of the senses:

The Sacred Defense Video Game activates most of the player’s senses and energies. That is why it is categorized as interactive. The individual uses his sight to see Mujahid Ahmad, his movements, his enemies and the buildings surrounding him. He uses his hearing to hear the sound effects of bombings and firing as well as directions from the operations room. He uses his hands to move the player and shoot with weapons via the Mouse – Keyboard. He also uses his mind to move, think, pay attention, plan and attack and defend.

* Soundtrack and Video:

The game contains several music tracks (the sound of danger when infiltrating, etc.) and sound effects (the whizzing of the bullet, artillery shelling, detonation, wailing, etc.). It also contains graphic plates between levels that help the player understand the reasons and objectives of the mission.

*Artificial intelligence:

Enemies in the game are characterized by artificial intelligence close to reality. The enemy’s artificial intelligence enables them to take a series of steps when sensing danger. They first defend, launch the warning, are alert and identify the source of danger, infiltrate to gather information, then encircle and attack.

The movement of the enemy towards Mujahid Ahmad during the battles occurs according to a correct tactical military mechanism such as the movements, firing and securing.

* The levels of the game:

The levels of the game are summarized as follows:

First: the level of the visit to the shrine. There is spiritual mobilization and an introduction into the scenario of battles by watching the crimes of aggression on the sanctities that are presented through a video clip.

It is followed by the first battle to defend the holy shrine and repel the attack starting from the parking lot. This is followed by the Hejira battles, which come in two levels; the first involves the destruction of the mortars that are firing missiles towards the shrine, and the second involves taking control of the command center. Then comes the Qusayr battle, which also consists of two levels; the first involves freeing civilian hostages held by the Takfiri groups, and the second involves the complete control of the area.

The most important battle in the game is the battle to eliminate al-Hindawi or “Abdul Salam Abdul Razzaq al-Hindawi”, who is also known as Abu Abdo. He is known for his involvement in transporting suicide bombers and preparing car bombs and sending them to Lebanon. In this battle, the player feels that he is a partner in eliminating terrorist leaders and those who are directly responsible for terrorizing civilians in all Lebanese areas. The player is also a partner of the Mujahideen in providing a sense of stability and security among the Lebanese after rolling back the advances of the terrorist groups from the eastern border of Lebanon.

The last battle is the battle of Ras Baalbek, which embodies the defense of the Lebanese territories from the Takfiri terrorist attacks, originating from Syrian territory. During the battle, the Lebanese and Hezbollah flags wave alongside the Mujahid in his bunker. While repelling the attack, the player feels that he is the partner of the Mujahideen and the Lebanese Army in protecting the homeland as he is participating with the army in the “Dawn of the Outskirts” offensive as well as the mujahedeen in the “If you come back, we’ll come back” battles.

In these six levels, Mujahid Ahmad can protect the land and the sanctities from the Takfiri threat. And here lies the embodiment of the Islamic Resistance fighters’ true Jihadi and combatant spirit at the frontlines.

Until a new triumph on the road to Al-Quds and the decisive victory…

Source: al-Ahed

Either America or Al-Quds إما أميركا… وإما القدس!

Either America or Al-Quds

Ibrahim Al-Amin

What Donald Trump did yesterday might be the best opportunity to stabilize the situation originating from the settlement colonial project called “Israel”. Yesterday, dissolutely and rudely, America has told us – despite the will of some of its allies and partners in the colonial project – what it has been telling us throughout the ages and eras that it is the source of our oppression, misery and injustice.

This means, we will not recover an inch of Palestine unless we declared an all-out war against it and work to turn its life into hell, its banner into a slogan of shame, and its army into a mobile monster in the world. Isn’t it time for the Arabs to realize that America, in short, is the origin of scourge and evil? As for “Israel”, let us leave it aside. Whatever is said about its “power, superiority and preparation”, it is but an American-British colony that cannot live one day without the protection, care and blind support of the West.

This colonial West, and specifically the United States of America, is the reason for the existence of the usurper entity. All its efforts forcibly extend “Israel’s” artificial existence, which is contrary to truth and logic and the movement of history, as it waits for its definite end.

This is the lesson the arsonist at the White House is teaching the Arab people today. Some Arab rulers have not understood for seventy years that “Israel” is nothing without the protection of the West and will not exist without America’s cover and support. “Israel” is no longer the source of fear and anxiety, after the destruction of its military legend by the popular resistance in Lebanon and Palestine. Nothing that it does alone can keep it alive, not even for one hour.

Today, the moment when someone amongst us Arabs proclaims the full submission to America under the banner of “peace” is nothing more than subordination and surrender. At the moment when the free world stands helpless and idly in the face of the cowboy’s madness, we have nothing left but to stand up for our dignity. We have to address the root of the problem and not its symptoms. We have no choice but to raise the slogan, voice, and fists as one and shout: “Death to America!” We have to declare an all-out war on America and its interests everywhere.

This move was necessary, even though it was expected a short while ago. This symbolic move for the Arabs and Muslims which is extremely dangerous and terrible and which Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri called “a new Balfour Declaration” was necessary for us to make sure that our real battle was with America before “Israel”; the America which was founded – like “Israel” – on the massacre and the destruction of an entire civilization, where the “Paradise of Freedom” was built on the ruins [of these civilizations]; America, which never flourished except through the exploitation of the world, the vulnerable people, and through colonial wars; America that covered up and covers up all of “Israel’s” crimes, massacres, and racist and settlement policies. It is useless to fight “Israel” and leave it [America]. Perhaps some Arabs need this extra lesson, rather this shock, this earthquake, giving Al-Quds to the invaders, so that they know that betting on America is a form of absurdity, suicide or conscious betrayal. Precisely today, all Arabs have to choose: either America or Al-Quds!

Whoever chooses Al-Quds must know that the battle requires an alliance with everyone who stands up to America. He has to understand that inciting people against America means inviting them to oppose and fight it by all means and reject all that comes from it, even if it comes wrapped in the delusions of the solution or the desired antidote.

Those who choose to belong to and defend Al-Quds must work unceasingly, with all their might, to kill every American soldier outside his country’s borders, to occupy, burn or destroy America’s embassies all over the world. Let us expel from our country every American employee, diplomat, politician or others, and everyone who receives a salary from the US government. Let us face their fake democracy, cut off all the projects of their mercenaries in our countries and the world that serve suspicious agendas that only serve “Israel”, behind false slogans about “human rights, development and progress”.

Those who choose Al-Quds must choose the time of total resistance, which obligates us to do something that is not simple, but possible, in order to abandon everything that is related to them. Those who choose Al-Quds must work to make the American people aware that their responsibility is great and that they will pay the price of the policies of the ones they chose to govern their country.

It is true that it is a long and arduous process, but it is a compulsory path for anyone who wants to get rid of “Israel’s” nightmare and its arrogant servants sitting on the throne of power in our country – the perpetrators of legitimacy, justice and freedom. What the rulers of the kingdoms of oppression did in the Arabian Gulf, and before them governments in the Mashriq [the region of the Arab world to the east of Egypt] and North Africa, would not have been possible if it hadn’t been for our silence to their conspiracy, the submission of some of us, accepting this and promoting the culture of surrender.

Today, Donald Trump opens the door to a new opportunity for the resistance movement in Palestine and the Arab world. “He is helping us” – with thanks – to redirect attention to the harsh truth, which is America’s direct influence or through “Israel” is the only purpose that is supposed to be confronted and to turn the table over the heads of its collaborators.

Source: Al-Akhbar Newspaper, Translated by website team

إما أميركا… وإما القدس! 

ابراهيم الأمين 

ما فعله دونالد ترامب، أمس، قد يكون الفرصة الأنسب لتثبيت الموقف من أصل المشروع الاستعماري الاستيطاني الذي يحمل اسم «إسرائيل». أميركا التي عادت فقالت لنا أمس، بفجور وفجاجة، وضد إرادة جزء من حلفائها وشركائها في المشروع الاستعماري، ما تقوله لنا على امتداد الحقبات والعهود، بأنّها مصدر قهرنا وبؤسنا وظلمنا.

أي أننا لن نسترجع شبراً من فلسطين إلا إذا أعلنّا حرباً شاملة عليها، وإذا عملنا على تحويل حياتها إلى جحيم، ورايتها إلى شعار العار، وجيشها إلى وحش متنقل في العالم. أما آنَ أن يعي العرب أن أميركا، باختصار، هي أصل البلاء وأصل الشر؟ أما إسرائيل، فلنتركها جانباً، إذ مهما قيل عن «قوّتها وتفوقها وتحضّرها»، فليست سوى مستعمرة أميركية – بريطانية، لا يمكن أن تعيش يوماً واحداً بلا حماية الغرب، ورعايته، ودعمه الأعمى.

هذا الغرب الاستعماري، وتحديداً الولايات المتحدة الأميركيّة، هو علّة وجود الكيان الغاصب، وكل ما يبذله من جهود، يمدّد قسراً وجود إسرائيل الاصطناعي، المخالف للحق وللمنطق، ولحركة التاريخ، في انتظار أن تنتهي إلى حتفها الأكيد.

لم يعد أمامنا سوى رفع الشعار
والقبضات والهتاف الواحد: الموت لأمريكا!

هذا هو الدرس الذي يلقنه اليوم للشعوب العربيّة، مشعل الحرائق المعتوه في البيت الأبيض. بعض الحكام العرب الذين لم يفهموا منذ سبعين عاماً، أن «إسرائيل» هذه، ليست شيئاً من دون حماية الغرب… ولن يكون لها وجود من دون غطاء أميركا ودعمها. «إسرائيل» هذه، لم تعد مصدر الخوف والقلق، بعد تحطّم أسطورتها العسكريّة على صخرة المقاومة الشعبيّة في لبنان وفلسطين… وكل ما يمكن أن تقوم به، وحدها، لا يستطيع أن يبقيها، ولو لساعة واحدة، على قيد الحياة.

اليوم، في اللحظة التي يطلع بيننا، نحن العرب، من يعلن الخضوع الكامل لأميركا، تحت راية «سلام» ليس إلا تبعيّة واستسلاماً… وفي اللحظة التي يقف فيها «العالم الحرّ»، عاجزاً ومكتوف اليدين، أمام جنون الكاوبوي، لم يعد أمامنا سوى أن ننتفض لكرامتنا، أن نذهب إلى معالجة جذر المشكلة لا عوارضها. لم يعد أمامنا من خيار، سوى أن نرفع الشعار والصوت والقبضات والهتاف الواحد: «الموت لأمريكا»! أن نعلن الحرب الشاملة على أميركا ومصالحها في كل مكان.

كان لا بد من هذه الخطوة، وإن كانت متوقّعة من زمن غير قصير، هذه الخطوة العالية الرمزيّة بالنسبة إلى العرب والمسلمين، البالغة الخطورة والفظاعة، التي نعتها الرئيس نبيه برّي بـ «وعد بلفور جديد»… كان لا بدّ منها لنتأكد من أن معركتنا الحقيقية هي مع أميركا قبل إسرائيل. أميركا التي تأسست مثل إسرائيل على المجزرة، وعلى إبادة حضارة كاملة لتبني على أنقاضها «جنّة الحريّة». أميركا التي لم تزدهر يوماً إلا عبر استغلال العالم، والشعوب المستضعفة، وعبر الحروب الاستعماريّة. أميركا التي غطّت وتغطّي على كل جرائم إسرائيل، ومجازرها، وسياساتها العنصريّة والاستيطانيّة… لا يجدي أن نحارب إسرائيل ونتركها. وربما كان بعض العرب يحتاج إلى هذا الدرس الإضافي، بل قل هذه الصدمة، هذا الزلزال، إهداء القدس إلى الغزاة، حتى يعرف أن الرهان على أميركا ضرب من ضروب العبث أو الانتحار أو الخيانة الواعية. اليوم تحديداً، بات على كل العرب أن يختاروا: فإما أميركا وإما القدس!

إنّ من يختار القدس، عليه أن يعلم أن المعركة تتطلب التحالف مع كل من يقف في مواجهة أميركا. وعليه أن يعي، أن تحريض الناس على أميركا، يعني دعوته إلى معارضتها ومقاتلتها والانتفاض عليها بكل الوسائل. ورفض كل ما يأتي منها، حتى ولو كان مغلفاً بأوهام الحل، أو الترياق المنشود.

إنّ من يختار الانتماء إلى القدس والدفاع عنها، عليه العمل من دون توقف، وبكل ما أوتي من قوة، لقتل كل جندي اميركي خارج حدود بلاده، ولاحتلال سفارات أميركا في كل العالم أو إحراقها وتدميرها. لنطرد من بلادنا كل موظف أميركي، دبلوماسي أو سياسي أو خلافه. وكل من يتقاضى راتباً من الحكومة الأميركية. لنواجه ديموقراطيتهم الزائفة، نقطع السبل أمام كل مشاريع مرتزقتهم المنتشرين في بلادنا والعالم، في خدمة أجندات مشبوهة لا تخدم إلا إسرائيل، خلف شعارات مزيّفة عن «حقوق الإنسان والتنمية والتقدم».

إنّ من يختار القدس، عليه أن يختار زمن المقاومة الشاملة، التي تلزمنا بعملية ليست بسيطة، لكنها ممكنة، من أجل التخلي عن كل ما له صلة بهم. ومن يختار القدس، عليه العمل على إشعار الشعب الأميركي بأن مسؤوليته باتت عظيمة، وأنه سيكون من يدفع ثمن سياسات من يختارهم لحكم بلاده.

صحيح أنها عملية شاقة وطويلة، لكنها مسار إلزامي لكل من يريد التخلص من كابوس إسرائيل، ومن خدمها الأذلاء المتربّعين على عروش السلطة في بلادنا، مغتصبي الشرعية والعدالة والحريّة. وما فعله حكام ممالك القهر في الخليج العربي، وقبلهم حكومات في المشرق وشمالي إفريقيا، لم يكن ممكناً لولا صمتنا عن تآمرهم، ولولا خنوع بعضنا، وقبول هذا البعض، بل الترويج، لثقافة الاستسلام.

اليوم، يفتح دونالد ترامب الباب أمام فرصة جديدة لتيار المقاومة في فلسطين والعالم العربي. «يساعدنا» مشكوراً على إعادة توجيه الأنظار صوب الحقيقة القاسية، وهي أن نفوذ أميركا المباشر أو من خلال إسرائيل، هو الهدف الوحيد المفترضة مواجهته، وقلب الطاولة على رؤوس المتعاونين معه.

Related Videos

Related Articles

• القدس عاصمة فلسطين رغم أنف ترامب… والأيّام بيننا
• ترامب يُطوِّب القدس لغير أهلها: «بلفور» أميركي جديد
• فصائل المقاومة: نحو إعادة الزخم لـ«انتفاضة القدس»
• القدس تُسقط خيار التسوية… وتكشف التواطؤ السعودي
• إسرائيل: ترامب تشاور مع زعماء عرب… واطمأن إلى ردود فعلهم
• السلطة تتذرع بـ«أزمة القدس» لتهرب من المصالحة… والقاهرة غاضبة

القدس عاصمة فلسطين رغم أنف ترامب… والأيّام بيننا

 

ديسمبر 7, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– الوجه الأوّل لقرار الرئيس الأميركي باعتماد القدس عاصمة لـ«إسرائيل» هو الإسقاط النهائي لفرضية مزعومة قادت العالمين العربي والإسلامي منذ أربعة عقود، أطلقها الرئيس المصري الراحل أنور السادات غداة توقيعه على اتفاقيات كامب ديفيد وعنوانها أن تسعة وتسعين في المئة من أوراق اللعبة بيد أميركا، وأن الانضمام إلى المعسكر الذي تقوده واشنطن يمنح العرب قدرة التأثير لفرض تنازلات على «إسرائيل» لنيل بعض الحقوق العربية، وأهم الحقوق العربية بلا نقاش يتصل بمصير القدس. وها هو الرئيس الأميركي يقول للذين عمّموا هذه الفرضية وسوّقوا لها، وخدعوا الشعوب العربية والإسلامية باسمها، أن السياسة الأميركية في المنطقة عندما تتصل بالصراع مع «إسرائيل» فهي «إسرائيلية» صرفة، وأن كل تمايز ظاهر لا يعدو كونه تعبيراً عن تقاسم أدوار أميركي «إسرائيلي» تحتاجه «إسرائيل» للجم الموقف العربي، عندما يمتلك بعض عناصر القوة، التي يحتاج التعامل معها إلى مجموعة من المناورات التي يشكل الموقف الأميركي محورها.

– الوجه الثاني الذي يكشفه القرار هو أن القضية ليست كما سيحاول الكثيرون الترويج اليوم، بأنها قضية رئيس متهوّر وغير متوازن، فالقرار إجرائي لرئيس أميركي يوقّع على قانون عمره عقدان ونيّف من إقراره في الكونغرس بمجلسيه، النواب والشيوخ، وبحزبيه الجمهوري والديمقراطي، ليكون الإطار القانوني والتشريعي للخطوة متى حان وقتها، والوقت هو إما انتزاع توقيع عربي وفلسطيني على صفقة سلام تحقق الأمن والتفوق لـ «إسرائيل»، وتمنح الشرعية الشعبية لهذا الأمن ومعه التطبيع، أو اليأس من قدرة جماعة أميركا من تأمين الشرعية المطلوبة للأمن «الإسرائيلي» والعجز عن تقديم التغطية اللازمة للتطبيع الشعبي، فيصير القرار شرطاً مسبقاً لضم هؤلاء العرب إلى المظلة الأميركية، بتحالف معلن مع «إسرائيل»، ليقول إن لإنهاء عنوان الصراع مع إسرائيل شرطاً واحداً هو الشرط «الإسرائيلي»، ومَن يريد التغطية الأميركية فليأت إلى هذا الشرط، طالما لم يعد هؤلاء يملكون عناصر القوة التي تضبط الشارع وتقوده، فيطبّع إذا طبّعوا، ويوقف المقاومة إذا قرّروا، فهذا ليس سلاماً بل تحالف حرب مع محور يملك القدرة على مقاومة التطبيع ومقاومة الاحتلال، ومثلما يفرض القوي شروط السلام يفرض شروط التحالف.

– الوجه الثالث للقرار الأميركي هو أنه يسقط كل حديث عن الدور الذي يمكن للعملية السياسية والرهان عليها أن تفعله، فلا تزال أميركا العضو الذي يملك حق النقض في مجلس الأمن، والأمم المتحدة مشلولة القدرة على السير في أي خطوات جدية بعيداً عن السياسة الأميركية، ولا تزال واشنطن تقود حلف الناتو والعالم الغربي ومهما كان التمايز الأوروبي فهو باقٍ بلا فعالية، والسعي لتطوير المواقف الداعمة لحقوق الفلسطينيين مطلوبة ومهمة، لكن الرهان على اعتبارها طريقاً لعملية سياسية مجدية مجرد وهم، فحدود ما تفيد فيه هو أن تشكل مناخاً يجري استثماره للتعاطف مع النضال لنيل الحقوق. وهو نضال لم تعد الأوهام حول العملية السياسية ميدانه، فلا الذهاب للمحاكم الدولية ولا الرهان على تصويت في الجمعية العامة للأمم المتحدة، والاعترافات بدولة فلسطين، ستفرض حقائق جديدة تتخطى كونها حبراً مفيداً على ورق مفيد، إذا رسمت الحقائق في الميدان، وتصير أقل من قيمة الحبر الذي كُتبت به إذا تركت «إسرائيل» وحدها ترسم الحقائق في الميدان.

– الوجه الرابع لقرار الرئيس الأميركي هو ما يمنحه من صدقية للذين آمنوا واستثمروا على خيار المقاومة، وقالوا عبره إنه الطريق لاسترداد الحقوق، ووظفوا السياسة في خدمته، بدلاً من توظيف في خدمة السياسة. وها هي الحقائق الجديدة تقول، إن إضعاف شوكة أميركا وحلفائها في المنطقة، إضعاف لـ»إسرائيل»، وإن هذا التنمّر الأميركي لا يلغي حقيقة أن أميركا هزم مشروعها، وأن «إسرائيل» تحت تهديد وجودي، وأن كليهما في حال ذعر من المستقبل، وأن ترسيم حدود الغيتو «الإسرائيلي» علامة الفشل في خلق حقائق تحمي صفقة القرن التي وجدوا لها الشريك العربي لبيع فلسطين، لكنهم لم يجدوا لهذا الشريك القدرة على تأمين أمن «إسرائيل» ولا على ضمان تشريع التطبيع معها شعبياً، ولأن مصير شرعية الاحتلال لفلسطين والقدس في قلبها، يرسم في الميدان، وأسياد الميدان لم يعودوا جماعة أميركا و»إسرائيل»، ولا الواقعين في حبائلهم، أو المصدّقين خداعهم وأكاذيبهم، بل الذين يخطّون بدمائهم وتضحياتهم مستقبل المنطقة، اقتراباً من فلسطين، بعدما قالت تجاربهم إن وصفتهم المقاومة قادرة على التحرير وقادرة على النصر.

– الوجه الخامس الذي يضعه القرار الأميركي على الطاولة، هو أن الحرب الدائرة مباشرة وبصورة غير مباشرة في المنطقة، بين محور المقاومة من سورية إلى العراق ولبنان واليمن، والمحور التابع لأميركا، هي حرب حول فلسطين، ورسم لأحد خيارين لمستقبلها، التهويد، كما يقول القرار الأميركي، أو التحرير، كما تقول وصفة المقاومة، وبالتالي للواقفين في المنطقة الرمادية بين الخيارين، والمعنيّون منهم بمستقبل فلسطين بصورة خاصة، يقول إن زمن الرمادي يعني شيئاً واحداً التموضع تحت راية حلف تضييع فلسطين، والمشاركة بالتنازل عن القدس، وكل موقف فلسطيني خصوصاً، لا يعلن أن طريق المقاومة بات خياراً أحادياً، جزء من حملة تضييع فلسطين والقدس، مهما تحدّث عن خطورة قرار ترامب وعن تعريضه المنطقة للأخطار، وتهديده العملية التفاوضية، فكله كلام بكلام، لأن العبرة بالخلاصة، مزيد من الكلام أم مزيد من الأفعال، وللفعل المجدي طريق وحيد هو المقاومة بأشكالها كافة، والفلسطينيون أساتذتها.

– القدس عاصمة فلسطين، حقيقة تاريخية أبدية، رغم أنف ترامب…والأيام بيننا لتقول مَن سيكتب تاريخ المنطقة ومستقبلها، وأن مَن يضحك اليوم قد يبكي غداً ومَن يبكي اليوم قد يضحك غداً، ويضحك كثيراً مَن يضحك أخيراً.

Related Videos

Related Articles

• إما أميركا… وإما القدس!
• الموت لأمريكا
• الرئاسة السورية: القدس ستبقى عاصمة فلسطين
• … ونحن نعلن القدس عاصمة فلسطين
• ترامب ينفذ قانون الكونغرس: «القدس مدينة موحّدة غير قابلة للتقسيم عاصمة لإسرائيل»
• ترامب نسّق قراره مع دول عربية و«العرب والأتراك يهدّدون بمسدس فارغ»