الانحطاط الاستخباريّ الإسرائيليّ:
من تقرير فينوغراد إلى تقرير أمان

ناصر قنديل

فضلنا أن ننتظر نشر النص الكامل لما عُرف بالتقرير السريّ لوكالة «أمان» الاستخباريّة عن شخصية الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله، قبل أن نعلق أو نحلل ونفهم التقرير وإيحاءاته ووظيفته، وما يعكسه من مستوى تماسك أو ارتباك، قدرة على امتلاك مجسّات الإنذار المبكر، أم وقوع في البروباغندا المبتذلة، نجاح في فك شيفرة حزب الله وقائده، أم تغميس خارج الصحن لزوم تعزية الذات المهزومة، توصيف يحاكي ما يمثله العدو الأول للكيان بمقدار من معايير العلم، أم شعوذة تعبّر عن انحطاط مستوى التقييم الاستراتيجي ما يعني أبرز مؤشرات أفول الدول القائمة على القوة، خصوصاً أن التقرير هو الأول من نوعه عملياً، وهو من صناعة المؤسسة النخبوية الصانعة لمعطيات صناعة القرار الاستراتيجي في كيان الاحتلال، التي تتقدّم أمان صفوفها الأولى، وفي أجهزة استخبارات الدول التي تشكل الحروب مكوناً عضوياً من مكانتها، وتشكل الاستخبارات عصب المعطيات والمقدمات التي تبني عليها قراراتها، ومنها كيان الاحتلال، ثمة وحدات متخصصة برصد شخصيات «العالم الآخر»، سواء الأعداء أو الحلفاء، ويصل بعضها إلى بناء نماذج محاكاة تتمثل الشخصية المعنية وتحاول تلبّس قيمها ومفاهيمها وردّات فعلها، يتم اعتمادها للتنبؤ بمواقف هذه الشخصيات، بمثل ما قيل عن شخصيات كانت تلعب دور جمال عبد الناصر وياسر عرفات وحافظ الأسد، وشخصيات بريجنيف وأندروبوف، وكاسترو في دوائر الاستخبارات الإسرائيلية.

ليست القضية في المعلومات التي تمّ نشرها في التقرير، والتي يعرف أبسط الناس أنها دون مستوى الحديث عن ملف سري أو عمل استخباريّ، في الصحيح منها، وهو علني ومعلوم للعامة، أو أنّها جزء من حملة إساءة متعمّدة بتسويق صفات وخصال يعرف كل متابع أنها بعيدة كل البُعد عن شخصية السيد نصرالله، القضية تكمن أولاً وأخيراً في درجة الجدية التي يظهرها التقرير لفهم الخصم الأول، وسبر غور شخصية القائد الذي يعترف قادة كيان الاحتلال أنه مصدر القلق الوجودي لكيانهم، وليس المعيار هو النجاح أو الفشل، بمقدار ما هو الجدية، والاستناد إلى درجة من المقاربة الموضوعية العلمية التي يجب ان يتحلى بها العدو عندما يحلل نقاط قوة ونقاط ضعف عدوه. فعندما نقرأ تقرير فينوغراد الذي أعدّته لجنة التحقيق الخاصة بحرب تموز 2006، نقع على هذه الجدية وهذه المحاولة لمقاربة الوقائع بعيداً عن روح تزيين الهزيمة وتحويلها الى نصر، أو تهوين العدو والاستخفاف بمقدراته وإنجازاته، فقيمة تقرير فينوغراد تكمن في أنه أظهر أن الكيان الذي أصيب بفشل استراتيجي كبير في الحرب التي فشل بتحقيق أهدافها، لا يزال قادراً على التصرف بمعايير «الدولة»، أي فصل التقييم عن الموقف، وامتلاك مساحة للقراءة تحتكم لمعايير على درجة من محاكاة الوقائع بعيداً عن «النرجسية»، التي تختصرها معادلة إخضاع الوقائع للتمنيات والرغبات، وتجاهل الحقائق لخدمة السياسات.

بمعزل عن أي قراءة في المعلومات والتحليلات التي تضمّنها تقرير أمان حول السيد نصرالله، ستقدّم لأصحابها خدمة مجانيّة في النفي والتأكيد، تقول سيرة المواجهة بين الكيان وحزب الله، وفقاً للرواية الإسرائيلية الصادرة عن أعلى المستويات السياسية والعسكرية في مؤسساته، أن حرب عام 2006، التي يصنفها التقرير كنقطة صدمة في مسيرة حزب الله، هي نقطة التحوّل إلى قوة استراتيجية عظمى، بينما هي بداية عدّ تنازلي للقيمة الاستراتيجية للكيان وقدرته على شنّ الحروب. والمعيار هنا ليس بالرغبات بل بالوقائع، هل شكل القرار 1701 مدخلاً لإضعاف حزب الله كمصدر لقلق جيش الاحتلال على الحدود اللبنانية، كما قال قادة الكيان في تسويقه، أم أنه شكّل إطاراً لتعاظم مقدرات حزب الله كتهديد جدّي ووجوديّ للكيان. وهل شكلت الحرب في سورية سبباً لإغراق حزب الله في حرب استنزاف، كما راهن قادة الكيان، أم تحوّلت الى فرصة لتعملق حضوره الإقليميّ ومصدر شراكته في انتصارات كبرى، وامتلاكه خبرات استثنائية وتحالفات عابرة للمنطقة وما وراءها، كما تعترف تقارير المؤسسات الإسرائيلية واعترافات قادته؟ وهل ظهر حزب الله منذ حرب 2006 صاحب خطة لبناء المزيد من عناصر القوة التي تجعله أقرب لرفع درجة التهديد لأمن الكيان، بينما ظهر الكيان يراوح مكانه في السعي لردم الفجوة التي ظهرت بينه وبين الحزب في حرب تموز 2006 والآخذة في الاتساع لصالح الحزب، مع فشل سياسات ترميم قدرة الدرع، سواء على صعيد الجبهة الداخلية، أو على صعيد القوات البرية، أو على صعيد القبة الحديديّة؟ وماذا عن قطع حزب الله لأربع مراحل إضافية من التهديد بعد تموز 2006 يعترف بها كل قادة الكيان، القدرة على الدخول الى الجليل، الانتقال من صواريخ محدودة المدى والقدرة التدميريّة الى صواريخ ثقيلة بعيدة المدى، وثالثا الانتقال الى عهد الصواريخ الدقيقة، وأخيراً هل نجح حزب الله بالانتقال من حرب الجبهة الواحدة الى حرب الجيهات المفتوحة عبر تأسيس محور المقاومة الممتدّ بين لبنان وفلسطين وسورية والعراق وإيران وصولاً إلى اليمن؟

See the source image

يأتي تقرير أمان في غربة عن الواقع أمام حجم التحديات والتحولات التي تمثلها لصالح حزب الله وقائده، ليخبرنا عن شخصية مأزومة بعد صدمة 2006، متردّدة، نرجسيّة، وهو ما يصحّ فعلاً في حال الكيان وليس أفراد قياداته، بل روحه الجماعيّة، التي تبدو قد دخلت آخر مراحل الانحطاط التي تسبق عادة الأفول، عندما تعيش حالة اغتراب ومفارقة وانفصام تجعلها تزين الواقع لتعزي نفسها المأزومة والمهزومة، بعدما فشلت في تغييره، ويكفي كمثال أن نتذكر ونذكر، أن السيد نصرالله الذي يقول التقرير إنه خفّض لهجة تهديداته وصار يشترطها بشنّ حرب إسرائيليّة ويحصرها بحال الردّ على هذه الحرب، لم يغادر هذه المعادلة يوماً، ولم يتحدّث يوماً عن حرب يبادر اليها، بينما مَن فعل العكس هو الكيان، الذي كان يتحدث دائماً عن حرب استباقية تؤكد قدرة الدرع، ثم حرب استباقية ترمم هذه القدرة، وصار اليوم يتحدث بلسان كل قادته عن قدرته التدميريّة في أي حرب مقبلة يشنّها حزب الله، وحزب الله لم يقل يوماً إنه سيشنّ حرباً. وذروة الانحطاط في حال الدول والكيانات قبل الأفول، عندما تزيّف الحقائق لترضي غرورها وتطمئن ولو كان التهديد وراء الباب يقترب، وتصير القراءات التي يفترض أن تستند الى العلم مجرد ادوات لبروباغندا قائمة على الأكاذيب والتلفيقات.

السؤال الذي يطرحه التقرير، ماذا لو فعل حزب الله الشيء نفسه، أي قرأ كيان الاحتلال بالعيون الزائفة التي يظهرها التقرير في القراءة الإسرائيليّة؟ فالحزب يبني قوته بالتوازي مع الحفاظ على قراءة موضوعيّة لمصادر قوة الكيان، وسعي لاستكشاف نقاط الضعف، لبناء خططه على العلم، والعلم وحده. وهذه المفارقة التي تبدأ مع انتقال الكيان من مرحلة فينوغراد الى مرحلة أمان، تفتح سياقاً جديداً للتعبير عن تفوّق حزب الله، الذي بدأ أساساً كتفوق أخلاقي، في القضية والبنية والعقيدة والسياسة والقيادة، وفي آلية الأداء وقراءة العدو وفهمه. وهذا التفوّق ينمو كما تنمو فجوة القوة، ويستمر كما تستمر.

‫«إسرائيل» تقرأ «في عقل نصر الله»: فضيحة استخبارات وفضيحة صحافة

See the source image

فضيحة صحافة واستخبارات في «إسرائيل»: أهوَ عقل «أمان» أم عقل نصر الله؟

الأخبار

ابراهيم الأمين

السبت 13 آذار 2021

أتابع الإعلام الإسرائيلي منذ تسعينيّات القرن الماضي. كنّا نحصل على صحف العدوّ من خلال بريد خاص في قبرص. صديق لديه اشتراك في صحف «إسرائيل» يرسلها مع صديق يعمل في شركة طيران الشرق الأوسط، وينتظرها زميل تعلّم العبريّة عن بُعد. قبل أن يصل إلى بيروت مترجمون عاشوا في السجون الإسرائيلية، ثم انطلق عالم الإنترنت في بلادنا، وكانت «إسرائيل» سبّاقة، ما أفادنا في الحصول على كلّ دوريّاتها، سواء الصحافية أو نشرات دراسية أو خلافه. ولطالما تميّز الكثير من الصحافيّين والكتّاب في «إسرائيل» بمعرفة واسعة، والأهم، بدرجة عالية من الاستقلالية، برغم مقصّ الرقابة العسكريّة الصارم. وكان الأفضل في تلك الفئة من الإعلاميين الإسرائيليين، عدم الانجرار الى البروباغندا الرديئة، حتى لو اقتضت المصلحة العليا لبلادهم ذلك.

مفاجأة أمس، ليست سوى إشارة إضافية الى تدهور يحصل في «إسرائيل» على مستويات كثيرة، من بينها الصحافة نفسها. لا أعرف كيف قبلت إدارة التحرير في صحيفة «يديعوت أحرونوت» تلقّي هذه الإهانة المهنية ووافقت على إنتاج مادة كان يمكن لطالب في كلية الإعلام أن يعدّ ما هو أفضل منها لو طلب منه أستاذه إعداد بحث موجز عن شخصية عدو إسرائيل الأبرز، أي السيّد حسن نصر الله.
على مدى أيام، روّجت الدعاية الإسرائيلية لحدث صحافي سينشر يوم الجمعة (أمس) ويتعلّق بكشف شعبة «أمان» (الاستخبارات العسكرية في جيش العدوّ) معلومات مصنّفة تتعلق بالسيّد نصر الله. وتم أمس نشر التقرير المفصّل تحت عنوان «الملفّ السرّي لنصر الله، في أمان». ومع أن الموجز الذي سرّب في الأيام الماضية لم يكن يحمل عناوين مغرية، إلا أن الصدمة كانت في التقرير نفسه الذي كان من الأفضل نشره في موقع «ديبكا» وبقلم رئيس تحريره المشهور بنقص صدقيّته، غيورا شاميس، وليس عبر كاتبين مخضرمين وبارزين مثل يوسي يهوشع ورؤوفين فايس.

من المفيد الإشارة أولاً، إلى أن التقرير يستند إلى مقابلات مع عاملين في «أمان»، وهي أكبر الأجهزة الاستخبارية الإسرائيلية وأكثرها كلفةً من حيث الموازنة. ويتركّز نشاطها حول جمع وتحليل المعلومات العسكرية من خلال المصادر المختلفة، وتتولّى مهمة تشخيص الإنذار المبكر ضد الحرب والأنشطة العسكرية المعادية بشكل عام. إضافة إلى أنها مكلّفة بإعداد التقدير الاستخباري الاستراتيجي لوضعه أمام صانعي القرار في «إسرائيل». ولذلك يجري وصف «أمان» بأنه جهاز «التقدير القومي» لدى العدوّ، ولأوراقه دور بارز في صياغة سياسات تل أبيب تجاه الأطراف المعادية. ويشكّل قسم الأبحاث (الذي ينتمي إليه الضبّاط الذين أجروا المقابلة) نواة «أمان»، بوصفه الجهة التي تتجمّع فيها كلّ المواد الاستخبارية الواردة ليقوم بمعالجتها وتحليلها واستخلاص التقديرات اللازمة منها. ومن بين هؤلاء، عناصر من متخرّجي برنامج «حبتسالوت»، وهو البرنامج العَلَم لسلاح الاستخبارات الذي يجمع بين الخدمة الدائمة ودراسات العلوم السياسية وعلوم الشرق الأوسط، بالاندماج مع الأقسام التحليلية الآتية: علوم الكومبيوتر، الرياضيات، الاقتصاد والسياسة. ويتطوّع لاختبار برنامج «حبتسالوت» (تعني بالعربية زهرة الزنبق أو النرجس، سبق أن ذكرت في التوراة وطبعت على عملة الشيكل) نحو 50 متدرباً ومتدربة سنوياً، يتمّ العمل على تأهيلهم لدور ضباط الاستخبارات الرائدين الذين يتعاملون مع القضايا المركزية على جدول الأعمال الوطني والعسكري.

كان من الأفضل نشر التقرير نفسه في موقع «ديبكا» وبقلم رئيس تحريره المشهور بنقص صدقيّته، غيورا شاميس


حقيقةً، يحتار المرء في تقييم الصحافيين الذين نشروا التقرير للذين قدّموا لهم المعلومات. كان عليهم التدقيق فعلياً عمّا إذا كانوا أمام محلّلين وضبّاط جهاز محترف، أم أمام مجموعة هواة يحترفون الرصد الإعلامي. وبداهةً، كما يحلو لهم القول تكراراً، كان على الصحافيين إدراك أن «إسرائيل» في قلب معركة محتدمة وقاسية جداً. وفي هذه الحالة، لا تخسر الاستخبارات معلومات ذات قيمة من دون ضمان نتائج توازي أهمية المعلومة. وهذا ما ظهر في مضمون التقرير الذين يمكن الجزم بأنه «يخلو من أي معلومة ذات طابع استخباري»… لم تقدم لكم «أمان» أي معلومة ذات قيمة استخبارية، وهو أمر بالمناسبة يمكن فهمه لمن يعيش في قلب صراع بهذا الحجم. وحتى لا يتكرر الاستخفاف بكم مرة جديدة، سأروي لكم ماذا يجري من صوبنا نحن. هل تعتقدون مثلاً أن أجهزة الأمن السياسية والعسكرية التابعة للمقاومة، يمكنها أن تتسلّى بما يؤذي احترافيّتها عبر ضخّ معلومات ساذجة وسخيفة في الإعلام بقصد التبجّح؟ كان يفترض بصحافيّي العدوّ المحترفين ألّا يقعوا في هذا الفخ، وأن تتصرّفوا ــــ وإن كان هذا الكلام لا يُسعدكم ــــ بمنطق التماثل. وأنا أفيدكم هنا، بأنه لا يجدر بكم تخيّل أن حزب الله مستعدّ لمنحنا مقابلة مع متخصّصين في رصد قيادات العدو الاستراتيجيين، وتوفير تحليلهم ومعطياتهم لنا… أبداً هذا لن يحصل!

لكن، لنعد قليلاً إلى يوم قبل نشر التقرير، حين جرى حوار في القناة 12 الإسرائيلية حول التقرير. وفيه يسأل المحاور عن الهدف من التقرير، فيأتي الجواب مباشرة ومن دون تحضير على لسان يعقوب أخيمئير، وهو صحافي مخضرم ومقدم برامج سابق في قناة «كان»: التبجّح، التبجّح…

يحاول آفي بنياهو، وهو ناطق باسم الجيش الإسرائيلي سابقاً كبحَه بالردّ: كلا. لكن أخيمئير يكمل حديثه: كل أسبوع هناك مسرح، يقول لنا نجحت ونجحنا وفتحنا ملف نصر الله، كفى، حقاً كفى!
لكن بنياهو يحاول رتق الموقف: من الممكن أننا نريد أن نريه إلى أيّ مدى هو مكشوف، ومن الممكن أن هناك أموراً أخرى مكشوفة، كي يعلم بألّا يتعاطى معنا. كل ذلك عمل استخباري، تخفيض التصنيف الأمني لمعلومات استخبارية من أجل احتياجات عملانية، أفترض أنه يوجد هنا اعتبار من هذا النوع، لم يقم أيّ أحد بأيّ أمر سياسي إن قام طاقم من عناصر الخدمة النظامية في وحدة الأبحاث في أمان..

ومع ذلك يعود أخيمئير ليصدم الحضور: أكره هذا التبجّح كثيراً، بالتأكيد الأسبوع المقبل أيضاً سيكون هناك «انتصرنا» مرة أخرى…
الأمر هنا ليس سباقاً بين من يسجّل النقاط على الآخر. المسألة هنا في التواطؤ السيئ بين الصحافة وأركان المؤسسة العسكرية والأمنية في «إسرائيل» لمواجهة «عجز ما» أو حتى «عقدة نفسية». وهو عجز يتّصل بعدم قدرة العدوّ، ليس على عدم تحمّل تعاظم قوة المقاومة العسكرية وحسب، بل أيضاً على عدم تحمّل الموقع المتقدّم جداً الذي يحتلّه نصر الله في الوعي عند الجمهور الإسرائيلي، وليس حصراً عند أهل القرار في «إسرائيل». ويبدو أن حجم الأضرار والخشية لدى الجمهور الإسرائيلي، هو ما دفع بالقيادة العليا للجوء إلى الاستخبارات العسكرية، من أجل الترويج لبعض المفردات حول شخص السيد نصر الله، وإنْ مع إقرار لا بدّ منه، بصدقيّته وجدّية تهديداته وقدرته على تنفيذها، وتحديداً ما يتّصل باستهداف العمق الإسرائيلي.

ماذا يريدون أن يقولوا لنا؟ هل هي رغبة في ادّعاء المعرفة لدى الاستخبارات العسكرية، الى حدّ الزعم بأنه لم يبق شيء لا تعرفه «إسرائيل»، حتى لو كان في خانة النيّات المبيّتة، ومن دون أن يسأل من يفترض أنه يجري مقابلة: كيف لإسرائيل ألّا تُجهز على قيادة حزب الله دفعة واحدة ومن دون بصمة، طالما هي قادرة على معرفة النيّات في الصدور، وليس حصراً أماكن وجود قادة حزب الله وتدابيرهم…

ماذا يعني أن تخرج المقابلة مع 15 ضابطاً ومتخصّصاً وباحثاً ــــ يعملون ليل نهار لجمع المعلومات عن نصر الله وتحليلها ــــ بهذه المعطيات التي لا تزيد عمّا هو موجود في الإعلام العربي عن حزب الله وأمينه العام وعن عائلته وما يرتبط به، صحيحة كانت أو مختلقة أو محوّرة، وجرى عرضها للجمهور الإسرائيلي في سياقات محدّدة وموجّهة، للإيحاء بالقدرة على تحصيل المعرفة والربط بين الأمور، ومن بينها مقابلة نصر الله مع «الأخبار» عام 2014.

«أمان» تعرف الكثير، غير ما أعطته للصحافيين الإسرائيليين. وحتى لا تخرجوا من المولد بلا حمّص، سأفيدكم بالآتي:
نصر الله لا يعيش تحت الأرض، وهو يسافر خارج لبنان، ويتنقّل بين المدن والقرى وفي الشوارع والأحياء. ولديه فرق متخصّصة في كلّ شيء، وجدول أعمال فيه من جو بايدن إلى مختار ميس الجبل ورئيس المجلس المحلّي في مستوطنة شلومي.. وبالمناسبة، يداه تلامسان الأشجار دوماً!

فيديوات متعلقة

Britain hopes to besiege Hezbollah in Lebanon on behalf of Israel

Posted on  by Elijah J Magnier

Elijah J. Magnier is a veteran war-zone correspondent and political analyst with over 38 years’ experience in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Extended field work in Lebanon, Bosnia, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya and Syria, created his extensive network of trusted military and political contacts. Magnier specialises in real-time reporting and in-depth analysis of political, strategic and military planning, terrorism and counter-terrorism.

By Elijah J. Magnier:

When the Syrian war broke out in 2011, the West – that was a direct participant in the war along with the Gulf countries and Turkey – believed that President Bashar al-Assad would fall after months, or a year or two: he would not last very long in power. Preparations began to lay siege to “Hezbollah” as a pre-emptive step after Assad’s overthrow because Syria was an essential member of the “Axis of the Resistance” and part of the main Hezbollah supply route. Britain took rapid steps to tighten control of the Lebanese-Syrian borders. The management of the Lebanese-Syrian borders was an old Israeli request as a basic during the Israeli 2006 war before it realised that it had not won the war and could not impose its conditions. In 2012, frenetic work began on establishing a military training program for the Lebanese Army in the two airbases of Hamat and Rayak and to enable the capacity of the Lebanese Army institutions. However, the first and last goal is not to strengthen the Lebanese Army. Hezbollah’s objective and its weapons break the balance of deterrence and cause terror to Israel, though not to Britain, which is geographically located very far from Lebanon. So how does the “Axis of Resistance” perceive this British plan against Hezbollah?No country has contributed a penny to support the Lebanese Army and enable it to preserve and protect its own borders with Israel. Rather, the West approved the deployment of the United Nations forces (UNIFIL) on the Lebanese borders to help Israel ensure that no obstacles, traps or sites could pose a threat to any Israeli advance inside Lebanese territory, as has happened over decades. Indeed, the goal of sending the UNIFIL forces – deployed inside the Lebanese territory only – was to help Israel prevent attacks from Lebanon and not the other way round. Moreover, the Lebanese Army is not allowed to possess anti-aircraft missiles or anti- ship missiles because they would be directed against Israel. No one but Israel is violating the country’s Lebanese airspace, waters, and sovereignty. The West is making sure no Israeli forces are under any threat from Lebanon, which enables them to freely violate its sovereignty at any time.

However, western support is pouring into the Lebanese Army to monitor its borders with Syria. Western countries provide all Lebanese security institutions with equipment and light weapons that allow urban warfare. Lebanon has more than 125,000 military and security personnel, a colossal number for any country globally, especially since Lebanon is under the burden of deteriorating economic conditions. The military and security apparatus in Lebanon splashes large quantities of money on trips abroad for their officers and recalls recruits when the need is minimal, particularly when the Army is not able to declare or stand up to any armies on either side of the border.

Billions of dollars have been spent in the hope that Hezbollah might be defeated in the Syrian war or in any future war with Israel. In this case, Hezbollah would obviously become vulnerable, its supplies interrupted and it would be easier to finalise the defeat by an attack from the Lebanese security forces. That was the idea after the Israeli war in 2006 and before Hezbollah’s full participation in the war in Syria in 2013.

Britain alone has trained 11,000 Lebanese soldiers and officers for urban warfare operations. It has also trained about 7,000 soldiers in “protecting” the Lebanese-Syrian borders and helped form the “Land Border Regiment Army”.

However, the current flowed beyond the desires of the UK-US-Israeli ship. The “Axis of the Resistance” was able to win the war in Syria, a victory that gave Hezbollah a significant experience in warfare of becoming a feared force. By raising the level of readiness, Hezbollah was able to store armed drones and tens of thousands of missiles including – according to Israeli sources – hundreds of precision missiles.

Its supply lines are the main artery for Hezbollah’s survival and existence. Following any war, belligerents need to rearm and later modernise their weapons to stimulate development in order to maintain the balance of deterrence. This requires keeping the flow of supplies secured and uninterrupted.

The experienced and well-equipped Hezbollah have threatened Israel – if it declares war on Lebanon -to strike specific military targets in Israel, including those located within civilian cities. Consequently, Hezbollah’s missiles have become a serious threat to Israel, which believes the threat must be removed or destroyed. However, waging war to destroy these missiles became an impossible task because in the meantime Hezbollah changed its military policy.

The 2006 war taught Hezbollah to relocate all missiles from villages in the south of Lebanon and place them in the distant mountains and valleys since their range reaches 500 km, a range that covers the entire geography occupied by Israel. These precision and long-range missiles are of great concern to Israel, the US and the UK.

Britain has – according to a commander in the “resistance axis” in Damascus – constructed 39 observation towers and 7 bases, and a military operations centre, along almost the entire border strip with Syria, starting from the Masnaa crossing to al-Qaa, a length of more than 100 kilometres.

In 2013, British Foreign Secretary Hugh Robertson visited Lebanon to oversee the construction of 12 border control towers and equip them with the latest electronic equipment and satellite communications connected to the Lebanese army command and control, according to a Lebanese Army General.

“All communications linked to satellites can be intercepted by the security and intelligence services operating in the region, including Israel, the US, the UK and France. These can monitor the movements of Hezbollah and its military supply lines along the borders. Because ISIS and Al Qaeda have been defeated in Lebanon and along the Lebanese-Syrian borders, the necessity to keep these satellite-links from the region is no longer an emergency. Smugglers from Lebanon and Syria continue non-stop their illegal activities through official and unofficial routes. Moreover, Syria has the right to demand the reports of these British observatory towers because they overlook Syrian territory. In fact, no country has the right to view these reports apart from Lebanon and Syria”, according to the source.

The “Axis of the Resistance” source believes that Britain’s goal is to cover border points to reveal Hezbollah’s supply lines and caches. These towers may become internationalised – in line with what some Lebanese call the internationalisation of the acute Lebanese crisis. Voices in Lebanon have been raised, asking to impose the siege on Hezbollah’s military movements, with the excuse of that they facilitate smugglers’ routes. They demand the total control by the Lebanese Army of all border crossings between Lebanon and Syria and vice versa.

There is little doubt that these towers gather intelligence information against Hezbollah and the Syrian Army – according to the source – especially with the project to build additional towers on the Lebanese borders overlooking the Syrian city of Homs. The sources believe that these towers could have a hostile role in any future battle between Israel and Lebanon. It is not excluded that the towers’ presence provides a cover for Israeli special units to destroy the missile caches because they provide visibility over vast and sensitive border areas, including the precision missiles of Hezbollah. Hence, the British positions created along the borders are is considered by the “Axis of the Resistance” to be provocative and hostile.

Israel succeeded in dragging Yasser Arafat into a civil war that matured through discontent with the Palestinian leader’s performance against the local Lebanese population, contributing to Lebanon’s invasion in 1982. As for Hezbollah, it succeeded in moving away from controlling Lebanese cities and became an integral part of society. Despite a certain domestic economic crisis, the US has spent ten billion dollars to confront Hezbollah through US allies in Lebanon, non-governmental organisations and individuals- but without succeeding in their objectives. Israel ceased temporarily using suicide drones after their detection during a failed attempt to destroy one of Hezbollah’s warehouses in the suburbs of Beirut. Israel fell under the hammer of highly effective deterrence on the border, with Hezbollah waiting to kill an Israeli soldier at any moment. Consequently, undeclared objectives to strike Hezbollah and control its missile caches are strongly maintained and developed by Israel and its western allies, the US and, in this case, the UK.

‘Israel’ Acknowledges: Hezbollah Precision Missiles Pose ‘Existential Threat’«إسرائيل» تعترف: صواريخ المقاومة تهديد وجوديّ

Ali Haidar translated by Al-Manar

 March 10, 2021

For the first time, the Zionist entity officially admits that Hezbollah’s precision missiles pose ‘existential threat’ to the occupation regime, Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported on Wednesday.

In an article, Lebanese journalist Ali Haidar said: “What marks this acknowledgement is that it was announced by Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz, who was briefing the Knesset House Committee, in a statement that is pre-written statement.”

The statement can be considered as a conclusion by decision makers in the Zionist entity on their estimation of the nature of Hezbollah’s retaliation to any possible Israeli aggression, Haidar noted.

“During a Knesset session discussing a draft law on ‘honoring’ Lebanese collaborators with Israeli enemy, Gantz said that Hezbollah’s precision missiles pose, with both quantity and quality, an existential threat to ‘Israel’,” the journalist, who is specialized with Zionist affairs wrote in Al-Akhbar.

Such remarks indicate the Israeli occupation’s acknowledgment of the nature of the change that emerged while talking on the “equation of power,” Haidar said, noting that they also indicate the Zionist decision makers’ concerns about Hezbollah and the Axis of Resistance’s rising capabilities in confronting the Israeli enemy.

The remarks by the Israeli DM also imply an Israeli acknowledgement that Hezbollah “is already done” with developing precision missiles, as announced by the Lebanese Resistance leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah in 2018, according to the journalist.

“This indicates that ‘Israel’ has been now adapted to the fact that Hezbollah managed to cross the red line set by the occupation regime on the issue of precision missile.”

On the other hand, Haidar noted that such acknowledgement doesn’t contradict with Israeli attempts to invest with such threat in order to send messages “internally and externally.”

“Internally, Israeli officials try to justify the occupation’s offensive retreat so far, as they also attempt to prepare the Israeli public to accept the high price which will be paid by the Israeli military in case of any confrontation,” Haidar wrote.

On the external message delivered by the Zionist entity, the journalist considered that the Israeli enemy often doesn’t acknowledge existential threats. “However, Israelis have realized that equations set before Hezbollah’s precision missiles are totally different from those equations set after developing precision missile.”

The journalist also highlighted that the term “existential threat” indicates that Hezbollah’s precision missile also pose strategic threat to the so-called Israeli national security “in the present equations and not in the future ones.”

“This acknowledgment reveals how much Hezbollah’s capabilities represent threats to Israeli decision makers,” Haidar concluded his article.

Source: Al-Akhbar Lebanese daiy

«إسرائيل» تعترف: صواريخ المقاومة تهديد وجوديّ

الأخبار

«إسرائيل» تعترف: صواريخ المقاومة تهديد وجوديّ
(أ ف ب )

علي حيدر

الأربعاء 10 آذار 2021

للمرة الأولى، تقرّ «إسرائيل»، رسمياً، بأن الصواريخ الدقيقة التي يمتلكها حزب الله تشكّل «خطراً وجودياً على إسرائيل». ما يضفي على هذا الموقف خصوصية إضافية أنّ من أقرّ به هو وزير الأمن المسؤول عن الجيش، وأن هذا الموقف يعدّ خلاصة تقدير جهات القرار في كيان العدوّ لطبيعة ردود الحزب على أيّ عدوان على لبنان، يمكن أن تتورط فيه إسرائيل نتيجة تقديرات خاطئة

خصوصية الاعتراف الإسرائيلي، الأول من نوعه، بـ«الخطر الوجودي» لصواريخ حزب الله الدقيقة، أنه جاء على لسان المسؤول الأول عن جيش العدو أمام الحكومة والمجلس الوزاري المصغّر والرأي العام. والأهم أنه لم يأت رداً على سؤال صحافي محرج، أو نتيجة عدم الدقة في التعبير خلال سجال، بل عبّر عنه وزير الأمن بني غانتس في كلمة معدّة سابقاً، وأمام الهيئة العامة للكنيست، في سياق نقاش لتعديل قانون عملاء جيش أنطوان لحد وأسرهم من أجل منحهم «وسام المعركة».

غانتس أقرّ بأن الصواريخ الدقيقة التي يمتلكها حزب الله تشكل، في مرحلة من مراحل تطورها كمّاً ونوعاً، «خطراً وجودياً على إسرائيل». ومهّد لهذا الموقف غير المسبوق، بالحديث عن سعي حزب الله إلى تعظيم قدراته الصاروخية مدى ودقةً، مؤكداً أن «إسرائيل» لن تسمح بهذا التعاظم «بشكل يصبح خطراً وجودياً» عليها.
وإلى ما ينطوي عليه هذا الموقف من إقرار على لسان وزير جيش العدو، فإنه يكشف أيضاً عن أكثر من رسالة وتقدير إزاء معادلات الكباش المحتدم بين حزب الله وكيان العدو ونتائجه، على المستويين الاستخباري والردعي، وفي مجال سباق تطور القدرات. كما يؤشر، صراحةً، الى إقرار جيش العدو وقيادته السياسية بحجم التحوّل الذي طرأ على معادلة القوة، وإلى المخاوف التي تهيمن على مؤسسة القرار السياسي والأمني إزاء مستقبل تطوّر قدرات حزب الله ومحور المقاومة في مواجهة الأخطار التي يُشكِّلها كيان العدو، وفي تعزيز معادلة الردع الإقليمي.

لم يكن حزب الله لينجح في تحقيق هذا الإنجاز الاستراتيجي في سياق المعركة الدائرة مع كيان العدو، بأجهزته العسكرية والاستخبارية، لولا أنه انطلق من رؤية عميقة ودقيقة للبيئة الاستراتيجية التي يتحرك فيها، بشقيها الخارجي والداخلي، ولولا أنه واجه استراتيجية العدو الإسرائيلي، ومعه الولايات المتحدة، باستراتيجية مضادة يمكن رسم بعض معالمها من خلال الوقائع والأداء سابقاً وحالياً. أيّ عملية بناء وتطوير للقدرات الصاروخية والعسكرية في مواجهة عدوّ متفوّق كمّاً ونوعاً، ويشكل تهديداً استراتيجياً ووجودياً، لم تكن لتتحقّق لولا دقّة الأولويات التي تبنّتها مقاومة حزب الله، ووفّرت لها المظلّة التي تحتاج إليها لتطوير قدراتها الدفاعية والردعية، مع الالتزام التام بكل مقتضياتها المحلية والإقليمية.

ففي مواجهة خيارات العدو العملانية الوقائية، تحت عنوان «المعركة بين الحروب»، نجح حزب الله أيضاً في إرساء معادلة ردع كبحت جيش العدو عن شنّ اعتداءات تهدف الى إرباك عملية تطوير القدرات العسكرية والصاروخية. ومن البديهي أن كل ذلك لم يكن لينجح، أيضاً، لولا الحصانة الاستخبارية التي نجح حزب الله في فرضها على كل هذا المسار، إلى حدّ إقرار وزير الأمن الإسرائيلي السابق نفتالي بينت بأنّ «إسرائيل لم تكن على علم بـ 80% من عمليات نقل الصواريخ إلى حزب الله في لبنان» (الأخبار ــــ الخميس 13 شباط 2020). وفي هذا، أظهر حزب الله إبداعاً في مواجهة التفوّق التكنولوجي والعسكري للعدوّ، وفي ظلّ ما يتمتّع به الأخير من تحالفات إقليمية ودولية توفّر له الدعم الاستخباري والعملياتي في مواجهة محور المقاومة، ومن ضمنه حزب الله.

الاعتراف الإسرائيلي إقرار بتجاوز ما سبق أن اعتبره قادة العدو «خطاً أحمر»


معالم الاستراتيجية التي غيَّر حزب الله ــــ بحسن تطبيقها ــــ معادلات القوة مع كيان العدو، أجملها قائد المنطقة الشمالية، اللواء أمير برعام، بشكل صريح، عندما أقرّ بأنّ من سبقوه في منصبه، فشلوا في إحباط عملية تطوير قدرات حزب الله، لأنهم «لم يروا كينونة الموضوع» (مقابلة مع صحيفة «إسرائيل اليوم»، يوآف ليمور، 17/9/2020). بهذا، اعترف برعام بنجاح حزب الله في تضليل قادة العدو وأجهزته السياسية والاستخبارية على المستويات الاستراتيجية والعملياتية والتكتيكية، في كل ما يتعلق بخطته لتطوير قدراته المتنوعة. بعبارة أكثر دقة، لم ينجح قادة العدو وأجهزته الاستخبارية في قراءة وتقدير المدى الذي يمكن أن يبلغه الحزب في تطوير قدراته، ولا في اكتشاف الخطة التي نفّذها على مدى السنوات الماضية، رغم أنه كان منخرطاً في مواجهة تهديدات وجودية للمقاومة ولبنان والمنطقة.

تجدر الإشارة الى أن عدم إدراك قادة جيش العدو لـ«كينونة» مشروع حزب الله وخطّته والمسار الذي انتهجه، بلغ مرحلة بات فيها يُقيِّد مفاعيل تفوّق جيش العدو النوعي في أكثر من مجال. وهو الهمّ الذي أعلنه رئيس أركان الجيش أفيف كوخافي، في أول جلسة لهيئة أركان الجيش بعد تولّيه منصبه (16/2/2019)، عندما حذّر من تداعيات نجاح حزب الله في تقليص «الفجوة بينه وبين الجيش الإسرائيلي الذي عليه التحرّك لتغيير المسار وبسرعة…».

في سياق متصل، تجدر الإشارة، أيضاً، الى أن إقرار غانتس بحجم التهديد الذي يمثّله تطوّر قدرات صواريخ حزب الله الدقيقة على الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي ووجود «إسرائيل»، ينطوي على إقرار، بمفعول رجعي، بما أعلنه الأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصر الله عام 2018، عن «إنجاز» الأمر في ما يتعلّق بامتلاك الصواريخ الدقيقة. كما يكشف عن مستوى من تكيّف إسرائيل وتسليمها، حتى الآن، بنجاح الحزب في تجاوز ما سبق أن اعتبره قادة العدو «خطاً أحمر» يُمنع تجاوزه.

ولا يتعارض هذا الإقرار ورسائله مع محاولة العدو توظيف هذا التقدير حول الطابع الوجودي لصواريخ حزب الله الدقيقة، في أكثر من اتجاه. على المستوى الداخلي، من الطبيعي أن تعمد قيادة العدو الى تبرير انكفائها عن المبادرة العملانية حتى الآن، في وقت تتحدث فيه عن استمرار تعاظم القدرات النوعية للحزب. وعلى خط مواز، تعمل على تهيئة جمهورها لتقبّل الأثمان التي ستدفعها الجبهة الداخلية في أيّ مواجهة مفترضة. بذلك، فإن غانتس يدعو الجمهور الى التواضع في تحديد سقف توقّعاته إزاء ما يمكن أن يحقّقه الجيش على المستوى العملياتي. ومن الواضح أنّ هذا الإقرار ينطوي، أيضاً، على توجيه رسائل إلى الخارج، بأنّ «إسرائيل» عادة لا تسلّم بالتهديدات الوجودية… لكنّ كيان العدو، بكل أجهزته يدرك أن معادلات ما قبل الصواريخ الدقيقة تختلف جذرياً عما بعدها. وهذه الحقيقة سبق أن أقرّ بها رأس الهرم السياسي، بنيامين نتنياهو، عندما كان لا يزال يراهن على إمكانية إحباط تطوير قدرات حزب الله، بالقول إن امتلاك حزب الله صواريخ موجّهة ودقيقة يؤدّي الى «تغيير قواعد اللعبة… ويشكل خطراً كبيراً على إسرائيل» (موقع مكتب رئيس الحكومة، 10/12/2017).

يبقى مفهوم أساسي لا بدّ من إيضاحه، وهو أن «الطابع الوجودي» الذي وسم به غانتس الخطر المحدق بمستقبل إسرائيل، نتيجة امتلاك حزب الله الصواريخ الدقيقة، يؤشر أيضاً الى حجم التهديد الاستراتيجي الذي تشكّله هذه الصواريخ على الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي في المعادلات الحالية (وليس المستقبلية كما هي حال التهديد الوجودي). والأهم أن مواقف وزير الأمن التي تتّصل بما تواجهه إسرائيل من تهديدات، تعبّر عن الخلاصة التي انتهت إليها جلسات تقدير الوضع التي يعقدها مع الجيش والاستخبارات العسكرية، ومن ضمنها تقدير حجم المخاطر ومساراتها المستقبلية.

في ضوء ذلك، يكشف هذا الإقرار ــــ الخلاصة، عن حجم مفاعيل حضور قدرات حزب الله لدى جهات القرار، لجهة تقديرها لطبيعة ردود الحزب على أيّ عدوان يمكن أن تتورّط فيه إسرائيل نتيجة تقديرات خاطئة.

Sayyed Nasrallah Has Consecrated “Spider Web” Theory in Confrontation with ‘Israel’: Zionist Studies Institute

March 5, 2021

Capture

The Zionist circles continued scrutinizing the recent speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah in which his eminence warned the Israeli officials against waging an all-out war on Lebanon.

Experts at the Zionist Institute for “National Security” Studies considered that Sayyed Nasrallah is determined to maintain the balance of deterrence by striking the Israeli cities in response to any aggression on the Lebanese cities and killing an Israeli soldier whenever ‘Israel’ kills any of Hezbollah fighters.

The experts also indicated that Hezbollah aims at accumulating its military power and focuses on obtaining precision-guided missiles, adding that such capabilities will inflict heavy losses upon the Israeli ‘home front’ during any upcoming war.

The Zionist experts stressed that Sayyed Nasrallah has consecrated the “Spider Web” theory in the confrontation with ‘Israel’, adding that this notion managed to target the collective conscience of the Israelis.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Hezbollah “Will Make Israel See Stars” in Case of Any Attack on Lebanon: Sheikh Qassem

 March 4, 2021

Hezbollah deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem warned that the Resistance movement will make the Zionist occupation ‘see stars’ if it attacks Lebanon.

In an interview with Al-Mayadeen on Wednesday night, Sheikh Qassem said Hezbollah “remains in state of defense, but we will make ‘Israel’ see stars if it attacks” Lebanon.

“Hezbollah clearly declares that it has no intention of starting a war. Israel must understand that the arena is not open to it, and today the battle will be within the Israeli entity.”

On Hezbollah’s retaliation to the killing of one of Hezbollah fighters in Syria last summer, Sheikh Qassem stressed that the equation set by Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah is still in place.

“When they attacked a brother of ours in Syria, we decided that we will respond to this attack, and such decision is still in place,” Hezbollah deputy chief added.

Meanwhile, Sheikh Qassem revealed that the US Embassy in Beirut has contracted two Lebanese media outlets in a bid to tarnish Hezbollah’s image.

“The US Embassy in Beirut is paying much money to these two media outlets in order to publish daily reports on Hezbollah,” Sheikh Qassem told Al-Mayadeen.

On the issue of Beirut Port blast, Sheikh Qassem said the investigation is ongoing and is aimed at trying to determine whether the incident was caused by an act of sabotage, errors or an Israeli attack.

Investigations conducted by the US, France and Germany that were leaked found “mistakes committed, not an intentional criminal act.”

He demanded that the investigations be revealed so that families can receive compensation from insurance companies and stressed that it’s not Hezbollah’s job to announce the results of the investigation, but rather the job of the judiciary and concerned authorities.

In this context, Sheikh Qassem pointed to “a group of Lebanese politicians whose primary job is to link any incident directly to Hezbollah to discredit him.”

Touching upon the issue of forming government, he stressed that the problem lies in disagreements between President Aoun and Designate-PM Saad Hariri, stressing an urgent need to solve this crisis.

In this regard, Sheikh Qassem voiced Hezbollah’s continuous readiness to help solve disagreements between Aoun and Hariri.

Source: Al-Manar English Website and Websites

«إسرائيل» ترضخ للصواريخ الدقيقة

«إسرائيل» تحرّك «الخطّ الأحمر»: لن نتحمّل أكثر من ألف صاروخ دقيق في لبنان!

قضية اليوم 

يحيى دبوق 

الجمعة 26 شباط 2021

«إسرائيل» تحرّك «الخطّ الأحمر»:  لن نتحمّل أكثر من ألف صاروخ  دقيق في لبنان!

بعد التقليل من أهمية تهديد الصواريخ الدقيقة لدى المقاومة للجمهور الإسرائيلي، لجأ العدو إلى «تجزئة» هذا التهديد، قبل أن يبدأ بخفص سقوفه: في البداية، تحدّث عن وجود عدد ضئيل من الصواريخ، ثم تحدّث عن عشرات الصواريخ، قبل أن يرجّح وجود المئات منها في حوزة المقاومة. آخر ما «كشفه» العدو الذي يرفض تكبيل يديه تجاه أعدائه، هو أنه لن يتحمّل وجود أكثر من 1000 صاروخ دقيق في لبنان! العدّاد، بطبيعة الحال، مرشّح للارتفاع مستقبلاً

هي نتيجة مألوفة ومتوقّعة، وباتت طبيعية جداً، في معادلة بناء القوة العسكرية للمقاومة. تسعى إسرائيل لـ«الحؤول دون»، وتهدّد بأنها «لن تسمح وإلّا»، ومن ثم تتراجع لتتعايش قسراً مع واقع جديد بات يكبّل يديها أكثر في مقاربة الساحة اللبنانية عسكرياً. هذه هي حال إسرائيل مع سلاح حزب الله الدقيق، بل وفائق الدقة، كما يرد أخيراً من تل أبيب.

ما ورد في الإعلام العبري، وعلى لسان جهات رفيعة المستوى، يدفع إلى التهكّم. وفقاً لهذه الجهات: امتلاك حزب الله سلاحاً صاروخياً دقيقاً، وتحديداً ما بين 500 و1000 صاروخ هو سقف أعلى، إن جرى تجاوزه، فيلزم «إسرائيل» بالعمل.
حديث «الجهات الرفيعة المستوى» غير معلوم إن كان تهديداً أم «تعزية ذات». والمفارقة أنه يأتي بعد يومين فقط من حديث آخر لرئيس حكومة العدو بنيامين نتنياهو، أكّد فيه أنه «لن نساوم على تطوير صواريخ عالية الدقة، في سوريا ولبنان».

في السابق، قيل الكثير إسرائيلياً عن الصواريخ الدقيقة. الويل والثبور لحزب الله وللبنان وللبنانيين، إن أبصر «مشروع الدقّة» النور وخرج من مرحلة «التفكير به» إلى مرحلة الإنتاج، وأي خطوة في هذا الاتجاه وفقاً للتهديدات «تُلزم إسرائيل بالعمل».

التهديد كان قاطعاً، وعلى لسان كبار المسؤولين الإسرائيليين، بل كان التهديد في حينه جزءاً لا يتجزأ وحاضراً دائماً لدى أيّ موقف أو تصريح يصدر عن شخصيات أو محافل أو مصادر في «إسرائيل»، تتناول الشأن اللبناني. أيضاً، رسائل التهديد نُقلت إلى لبنان عبر زائريه من شخصيات رسمية وغير رسمية وفدت إلى لبنان، ومنها من جاء خصّيصاً كي ينقل التهديد ويؤكد جديته، بأن «إسرائيل» لن تهتم ولن تقف أمام ما سيجري لاحقاً لأنها قرّرت أن تتحرك لضرب «مشروع الدقة»، إن لم يتوقف.

استمر «مشروع الدقة»، فيما استمرت «إسرائيل» بإيصال تهديداتها علناً أو عبر آخرين. وفي السياق، كانت تعمد بين الحين والآخر إلى طمأنة جمهورها عبر إنكار الواقع باللعب على الكلمات بأن «مشروع الدقة» لدى حزب الله هو «مجرد فكرة» لم تجد تعبيراتها العملية، وبالتالي لا إنتاج لصواريخ دقيقة حتى الآن. السبب كما كانت الأذن الإسرائيلية تسمع، هو إصرار تل أبيب وعملها على الحؤول دونه. وكان هذا الموقف، الموجّه إلى الداخل، خليطاً من الأماني وإنكار الواقع وقلة الحيلة وارتفاعاً غير معقول وغير محتمل لمقاربة متطرّفة، قد تقدم عليها «إسرائيل» في مواجهة «الدقة».

في السياقات، لجأت «إسرائيل»، إضافة إلى التهديدات، إلى العمل على إدخال الآخرين في المعركة ضد «الدقة». والجهة التي كان يُعول عليها كثيراً، هي الولايات المتحدة الأميركية، التي سارعت بطبيعة الحال إلى تبني مقاربة «إسرائيل» والاصطفاف خلفها وإلى جانبها، في المعركة على الصواريخ الدقيقة. فواشنطن معنيّة تماماً، كما تل أبيب، في الحؤول دون امتلاك الحزب هذا النوع من الاقتدار العسكري. ليس هذا القرار محصوراً بما يتعلق بأمن «إسرائيل»، وهو أولوية واضحة جداً لديها، بل أيضاً بما يتصل بأجندتها الخاصة بها في المنطقة، التي لا يمكن أو يصعب تحقيقها، مع تعاظم قدرة أعدائها على الإيذاء، إن لها مباشرة أو لأتباعها، الأمر الذي يعني السياسة الأميركية في الإقليم على أكثر من صعيد.

المساندة الأميركية كانت تهديدية واستخبارية، مع العمل على الداخل اللبناني كي يكون وقوداً للمعركة ضد حزب الله. ووسّعت «إسرائيل» مواكبة تحرّكها الدعائي الذي وصل إلى منابر دولية لعرض «المظلومية» وللحديث عن أماكن مختلفة في لبنان ينشط فيه «مشروع الدقة». والمفارقة أنه في الوقت الذي كانت فيه الحملة تستعر ضد الصواريخ الدقيقة، كان يقال للجمهور الإسرائيلي إن مشروع الدقة «مجرّد فكرة».

سعت إسرائيل أيضاً لتحقيق غايتها عبر تحريض اللبنانيين وبيئة حزب الله المباشرة على المقاومة، عبر سرديات مختلفة. من بينها تقارير شارك فيها رئيس حكومة العدو، بنيامين نتنياهو، بشكل استعراضي، عما قيل إنها مصانع للصواريخ الدقيقة تنشط بين الأحياء السكنية. الغاية كانت الإشارة إلى الجمهور اللبناني أن حزب الله يتسبّب بتهديد له، عبر «زرع المصانع» بين المدنيين التي ستكون عرضة لهجمات إسرائيلية تدميرية. كان الأمل بأن يؤدي ذلك إلى انقلاب في لبنان والبيئة المباشرة للمقاومة على حزب الله وإن بوصفه مقاومة. وهو كما العادة، خطأ تقديري متوافق جداً مع أخطاء تقديرية إسرائيلية سابقة تتعلّق بالعلاقة بين حزب الله وجمهوره.

في كل سياقات «مشروع الدقة»، كانت إسرائيل تعمل وتعد العدّة، العسكرية والأمنية ورواية ما بعد الفعل على السواء، ضد الصواريخ الدقيقة لحزب الله. وكانت المحاولة الفاشلة في حي ماضي (شارع معوض)، في الضاحية الجنوبية لبيروت في آب 2019، واحداً من مساعي «إسرائيل» الأمنية التي تحولت نتيجة الفشل العملياتي من عمل أمني بلا بصمات دالة عليها، إلى عمل عسكري صاخب، أدى لاحقاً بعد الرد عليه إلى تكريس أكثر للردع في مواجهة العدو. كانت تل أبيب، حينذاك، أمام استحقاق غير سهل وما زالت، مع سجلّات وفرضيات وأفكار مختلفة وأحاديث عن ضغوط يعاني منها حزب الله، وأخرى ترى أن رد الحزب ليس أمراً حتمياً، أو أنه سيقتصر على أهداف عسكرية إسرائيلية وحسب، بما بات يُعرف بـ«جولة أيام قتالية». وحين كانت «إسرائيل» تجادل نفسها، كان إنتاج الصواريخ الدقيقة مستمراً.

لا يخفى أن أسهم العمل العدائي الأمني، وفي أحيان العسكري، كانت ترتفع ربطاً بمتغيرات تطرأ على الساحة اللبنانية والإقليمية، ظنت محافل القرار في تل أبيب أن بإمكانها لجم حزب الله أو تخفيف رده على اعتداءات قد تلجأ إليها ضد اقتداره العسكري الدقيق. في حينه، كانت أسهم الحرب مرتفعة، وألزمت المقاومة، كما بات معروفاً، باستنفار وحداتها المختلفة. كان الجانبان في تموضع حربي واضح. وكما العادة، عندما تدرك «إسرائيل أنها أخطأت تقدير فاعلية «الظروف» التي ترى أنها تضغط على حزب الله، تتراجع إلى الخلف، لتعود إلى سياسة التهديدات بلا أفعال.

التوثّب كان سمة السنوات الماضية، تماماً كما كان التوثّب المقابل للرد وربما المواجهة الواسعة اللاحقة على الرد. لم تكن المعركة تتوقّف. انتظرت «إسرائيل» الفرصة التي لم تأت. بل إن جاءت كما قدّرت، فوّت عليها حزب الله الفرصة، عبر إظهار إرادة وجدية الرد والذهاب بعيداً في أعقابه، مهما كانت التبعات.

معقولية الحرب، أو الأيام القتالية التي تؤدي إلى حرب، كانت تعلو وتنخفض وفقاً لتقدير توثّب العدو وقرار المواجهة لديه. ما حال دون المجازفة، ولا يزال، هو الكلفة والثمن اللاحقان على الاعتداءات، الأمر الذي أبعد العدوان، وإنْ أبقاه على طاولة اتخاذ القرار في تل أبيب من دون إبعاده بالمطلق.

في السياقات أيضاً، عمدت «إسرائيل» إلى تجزئة تهديد الصواريخ الدقيقة، وإن ظهّرت أن خطها الأحمر ثابت: لن نسمح بالسلاح الدقيق. الهدف كما كان واضحاً، وهو الداخل الإسرائيلي لطمأنته. قيل في البدء إن حزب الله نجح في توفير أجزاء من مكوذنات تصنيع الصواريخ الدقيقة، لكن ما زالت مكوذنات أخرى غير متوفرة. كان الهدف هو التأكيد على أن «مشروع الدقة»، رغم نجاحات حزب الله بالتزوّد بمكوّناته، ما زال «مجرد فكرة». من ثم تجاهلت إسرائيل وامتنعت عن الحديث عن المكوّنات، وعمدت إلى تجزئة التهديد الصاروخي الدقيق نفسه. وكانت هذه التجزئة تمهيداً لاقرار إضافي لم يعد الواقع يسمح بتجاوزه: هناك نوعان من التهديد الدقيق. يتعلق الأول بصواريخ موجودة في لبنان يُعمل على تطويرها كي تصبح دقيقة ومجنّحة وما إلى ذلك، والثاني يتعلق بتصنيع صواريخ تكون من الأساس دقيقة. وهنا جاءت التوليفة: الجزء الثاني أكثر تهديداً من الجزء الأول، وإن كان الجزءان تهديداً لا يُحتمل من ناحية «إسرائيل».

أعقب التجزئة إقرارٌ لاحق بأن حزب الله نجح في تطوير وتصنيع عدد محدود جداً من الصواريخ الدقيقة، التي لا تتجاوز عدد أصابع اليدين. ثم أعقب ذلك حديثٌ عن عشرات الصواريخ… ولاحقاً عن مئات. وما سيَرِدُ من المقبل من الأيام، واضح جداً وقابل للتقدير.

وللدلالة على حجم التهديد من ناحية إسرائيل، نعيد التذكير بأنه «يكفي أن يكون لديك عشرون صاروخاً دقيقاً لتغيّر وجه المعركة»، بحسب ما ورد على لسان أحد قادة العدو العسكريين، قائد المنطقة الشمالية السابق في جيش الاحتلال، اللواء يؤال سترايك، لدى إجابته على واحد من أسئلة الدقّة المتداولة في الكيان.

لفترة طويلة، واظبت «إسرائيل» على القول لجمهورها إن مشروع الصواريخ الدقيقة ليس أكثر من «فكرة»


في أخبار اليومين الماضيين، مفارقة مع ما ورد أمس. إذ أكد رئيس حكومة العدو، بنيامين نتنياهو أنه لن يسمح بصواريخ «عالية الدقة» في سوريا ولبنان. والمفارقة ليست إجمال سوريا في التهديد، بل إيحاؤه أن السلاح الدقيق غير موجود و«إسرائيل» لن تسمح بوجوده.

مع ذلك، معاينة كلمات نتنياهو كما وردت بالعربية على الموقع الرسمي لرئاسة حكومة العدو، من شأنها الإشارة أيضاً إلى نوع آخر من التجزئة، وإن من نوع آخر أكثر دقة. وفقاً لتهديده، «إسرائيل» لن تسمح بصواريخ «عالية الدقة». و«العالية» هنا هي الجديد في كلامه، فهل يقصد التفريق بين صاروخ دقيق مع هامش خطأ مترٍ أو مترين، وآخر مع هامش خطأ سنتمترات؟

ولكي لا نقع في خطأ التقديرات، والركون إلى امتلاك القوة و«إنتاجات» مشروع دقة الصواريخ وغيره من الوسائل القتالية الدقيقة، على أهمية ذلك، يشار إلى أن أصل امتلاك صواريخ متطورة لا يعني – ولا يمكن أن يعني – شيئاً من ناحية «إسرائيل»، إنْ لم تكن إرادة استخدام هذه القدرة موجودة، وهو ما تدركه تل أبيب جيداً، خاصة ما يتعلق منه بالموقف الدفاعي لحزب الله. وعلى هذه الحيثية تحديداً تدور معركة «إسرائيل» وتطلعاتها. وهي تتحيّن الفرصة لاستغلالها إنْ لاحت لها: متى؟ وكيف؟ وما هي مدة تأثير أي ضغوط على حزب الله أو أزمات أو غيرها مما يمنعه من تفعيل إرادة الرد على اعتداءات «إسرائيل»، الأمر الذي يتيح لها التحرك والاعتداء؟ المعركة الحالية بين الجانبين هنا، بعد أن كاد ما يغايرها ينتفي وبلا جدوى ملموسة في تحقيق النتيجة ضد حزب الله.

إذاً هي معركة على قراءة وتقدير نيات حزب الله وإرادته، وعلى قراءة وترقّب أي ظرف يمنعه من تفعيل قدراته رداً على «إسرائيل». في معركة كهذه، الخطأ وارد، ووارد جداً. إلا أنها طبيعة الأمور ونتيجة ملازمة لتوثّب دائم لدى عدو لا يرضى أبداً بتكبيل يديه ومنعه من فرض إرادته على الآخرين. فهل ما كفل إلى الآن منعَه عن الاعتداء العسكري، ينسحب أيضاً على المرحلة الراهنة؟

فيديوات ذات صلة

مقالات ذات صلة

Israeli Enemy Fortifies Dimona Nuclear Facility for Fear of Hezbollah, Iran Precision-guided Missiles: Zionist Media

February 26, 2021

manar-02168940016143350723

Zionist media outlets revealed on Friday that the new construction project at Dimona nuclear facility in Negev desert aims at fortifying it from the precision-guided missiles of Hezbollah and Iran, clarifying that the project includes moving the plants to underground floor to protect them from the rocketry fire.

A secretive Israeli nuclear facility at the center of the Zionist entity’s undeclared atomic weapons program is undergoing what appears to be its biggest construction project in decades, satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press show.

A dig about the size of a soccer field and likely several stories deep now sits just meters (yards) from the aging reactor at the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center near the city of Dimona. The facility is already home to decades-old underground laboratories that reprocess the reactor’s spent rods to obtain weapons-grade plutonium for Israel’s nuclear bomb program.

Source: Al-Manar Eglish Website

Secretive Israeli Nuclear Facility Undergoes Major Project: AP

February 25, 2021

A secretive Israeli nuclear facility at the center of the Zionist entity’s undeclared atomic weapons program is undergoing what appears to be its biggest construction project in decades, satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press show.

A dig about the size of a soccer field and likely several stories deep now sits just meters (yards) from the aging reactor at the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center near the city of Dimona. The facility is already home to decades-old underground laboratories that reprocess the reactor’s spent rods to obtain weapons-grade plutonium for Israel’s nuclear bomb program.

What the construction is for, however, remains unclear. The Israeli government did not respond to detailed questions from the AP about the work. Under its policy of nuclear ambiguity, ‘Israel’ neither confirms nor denies having atomic weapons. It is among countries that have never joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty, a landmark international accord meant to stop the spread of nuclear arms.

The construction comes as ‘Israel’ — under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — maintains its scathing criticism of Iran’s nuclear program, which remains under the watch of United Nations inspectors unlike its own. That has renewed calls among experts for ‘Israel’ to publicly declare details of its program.

What “the Israeli government is doing at this secret nuclear weapons plant is something for the Israeli government to come clean about,” said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association.

For decades, the Dimona facility’s layout has remained the same. However, last week, the International Panel on Fissile Materials at Princeton University noted it had seen “significant new construction” at the site via commercially available satellite photos, though few details could be made out.

Satellite images captured Monday by Planet Labs Inc. after a request from the AP provide the clearest view yet of the activity. Just southwest of the reactor, workers have dug a hole some 150 meters (165 yards) long and 60 meters (65 yards) wide. Tailings from the dig can be seen next to the site. A trench some 330 meters (360 yards) runs near the dig.

Some 2 kilometers (1.25 miles) west of the reactor, boxes are stacked in two rectangular holes that appear to have concrete bases. Tailings from the dig can be seen nearby. Similar concrete pads are often used to entomb nuclear waste.

Source: Al-Manar English Website

Related Videos

Relater Articles

Hezbollah Obtained Technology to Develop Precision-guided Missiles, Israeli Attacks to Block Rocket Flow into Lebanon ‘Useless’: Zionist Report

February 25, 2021

The Israeli occupation army threatened to move against Hezbollah if it obtains between 500 and 1000 precision-guided missiles, according to a report published by the Zionist newspaper, ‘Israel Hayom‘.

The paper quoted an Israeli military officer as describing Hezbollah rocketry power as second to Iranian nuclear program in endangering the Zionist security and highlighting that the enemy’s army is taking the necessary steps to prevent the Lebanese Resistance from gaining such missile capabilities.

The report mentioned that most of the Israeli air raids on Syria aimed at blocking the flow of the precision-guided missiles into Lebanon, adding that Hezbollah overcame this challenge by obtaining the technology used to develop such rockets.

For his part the Former Israeli military intelligence chief, Amos Yadlin, considered that the Zionist army should deal blows to Hezbollah rocketry power without engaging in all-out wars.

Source: Al-Manar Eglish Website

Zionist Entity Admits Failure in Preventing Hezbollah from Possessing Precision Missiles

Hezbollah missiles

Sourt

Source

The Zionist entity finally acknowledged it has failed in preventing Hezbollah from having precision guided missiles, Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported on Monday.

In an article published on Monday, Al-Akhbar’s Yahya Dbouk reported, citing Israeli intelligence, that Hezbollah’s arsenal of now includes hundreds and not dozens of precision guided missiles.

“After a long time of denial, Israeli enemy’s intelligence has finally admitted that Hezbollah now possesses hundreds of precision missiles that are capable of hitting sensitive sites across the Zionist entity.

Hezbollah’s movements to develop its arsenal were “despite hundreds of strikes in Syria, which were aimed at preventing Hezbollah from transferring such missiles,” Dbouk said, noting that this “will have high influence on decision makers in Tel Aviv.”

“According to estimations by Israeli intelligence quoted by Israeli Channel 13, Israeli enemy’s efforts to prevent Hezbollah from having precision missiles have failed.”

“Syria strikes did not prevent Hezbollah from developing its capabilities to manufacture and install mid-range and long-range precision guided missiles, according to Israeli estimations, ” Dbouk said.

Source: Al-Akhbar Lebanese daiy

«إسرائيل» تعترف بعد طول إنكار: حزب الله يملك مئات الصواريخ الدقيقة

يحيى دبوق الإثنين 18 كانون الثاني 2021

«إسرائيل» تعترف بعد طول إنكار: حزب الله يملك مئات الصواريخ الدقيقة
(هيثم الموسوي)

بعد مدة طويلة من الانكار، أقرّت استخبارات العدو الاسرائيلي بأن حزب الله تمكّن من امتلاك عشرات الصواريخ الدقيقة، التي تصنّفها «اسرائيل» خطراً استراتيجياً لا يمكن التعايش معه. في السابق، كان العدو يتحدّث في احسن الاحوال عن عشرات الصواريخ، التي يمكنها اصابة المواقع الاستراتيجية والحساسة في الكيان. اليوم، اعترف بأن ترسانة المقاومة من السلاح الدقيق الاصابة، باتت تحوي مئات الصواريخ، رغم مئات الغارات التي شنها جيش الاحتلال في سوريا، لمنع نقل هذه الصواريخ او مكوناتها الى لبنان. اعتراف سيكون له اثر عميق على صانع القرار في تل ابيب، وخاصة لجهة الانكفاء عن العمل العسكري ضد لبنان.

أشارت التقديرات الاستخبارية الإسرائيلية إلى نجاح حزب الله في التزوّد بمئات من الصواريخ الدقيقة، التي عدّت حتى الأمس القريب خطاً أحمر لا يمكن لتل أبيب أن تسمح بتجاوزه. هذا الإقرار جاء بعد إنكار طويل، سعت تل أبيب خلاله عبر وسائل مختلفة وفي أكثر من اتجاه، للحؤول دون تحقّقه، لكن من دون جدوى.
هل يعني ذلك اقتراب موعد تنفيذ العدوّ تهديداته والتسبّب بمواجهة عبر استهداف عسكري مباشر لما يعرفه عن هذا السلاح، وخاصة أن المواجهة العسكرية الواسعة كانت محلاً لمناورة ضخمة نفّذها جيش الاحتلال في الفترة الأخيرة؟ أم أن السلاح الدقيق نفسه (وأخواته) الذي سعت «إسرائيل» إلى منع المقاومة من اقتنائه، هو نفسه عاملٌ مؤثر في تعزيز واقع انكفاء العدو عسكرياً عن لبنان، بعدما تحول «مشروع الدقة» المتعلق بصواريخ حزب الله إلى «ترسانة دقة»؟

وفقاً للتقديرات الإسرائيلية المنشورة في الأيام القليلة الماضية، والنشر في ذاته لافت (القناة 13 العبرية)، فشلت مساعي «إسرائيل» في منع حزب الله من التزود بالسلاح الصاروخي الدقيق. وهو فشل جاء بعد الضربات التي شنتها في سوريا والتي استهدفت إرساليات صاروخية دقيقة ووسائل نقل تتعلق بمكونات ما تسميه «مشروع الدقة»، وهي ضربات وفقاً للتقدير الإسرائيلي «لم تمنع حزب الله من تطوير قدرة ذاتية على تصنيع وتركيب صواريخ دقيقة متوسطة وبعيدة المدى».
الإقرار في ذاته، بعد إنكار، لا يغيّر واقع امتلاك حزب الله هذا النوع من الصواريخ، التي تؤكد التقديرات في تل أبيب أنها قادرة على «شل منظومات استراتيجية في إسرائيل». إذ سبق لحزب الله، على لسان أمينه العام السيد حسن نصر الله، أن أكد في أكثر من مناسبة، في الأشهر الأخيرة، النجاح في امتلاك ما يكفي من صواريخ دقيقة. وفي حينه حاولت «إسرائيل» الإبقاء على إيحائها بأن «دقة الصواريخ» مجرد فكرة وطموح لدى حزب الله لم تترجم ميدانياً نتيجة الجهود الإسرائيلية لصدّه، وهذا هو الهدف من إصرارها على مصطلح «مشروع الدقة». فما الذي تغيّر الآن؟

هذا التطور من شأنه تخفيف مستوى دافعية «اسرائيل» للاعتداء على لبنان، وإنْ كان لا يلغيه


الإقرار بعد إنكار، من شأنه أن يشير إلى اتجاه ومستويات المواجهة بين الجانبين للفترة المقبلة، وتحديداً من ناحية «إسرائيل»، التي باتت في موقع المتخلّف عن وعود أطلقها صنّاع القرار في تل أبيب، وفي المقدمة رئيس حكومة العدو بنيامين نتنياهو، بأن «إسرائيل لن تسمح» لحزب الله بالتزوّد بالسلاح الدقيق، وأن «كل الخيارات مطروحة على الطاولة».

وهذا التغيير، أي امتلاك حزب الله صواريخ دقيقة بالمئات وهو مقبل على مراكمة المزيد منها، يعدّ سبباً في دفع «إسرائيل» إلى «اتخاذ قراراتها»: إما السعي إلى الصدّ والمنع، ولاحقاً محاولة تدمير الصواريخ مادياً، رغم ما يمكن أن يعقب ذلك من مواجهات يقدَّر بقوة أن تتحوّل إلى مواجهة شاملة؛ وإما الانكفاء، لأن استهداف بعض الصواريخ الدقيقة لا يلغي وجود بعضها الآخر الذي يتعذّر تحييده، ويمكن لحزب الله استخدامه في المقابل رداً على الاعتداء نفسه، وهو قيمة إضافية عسكرية مؤثّرة تضاف إلى القدرة العسكرية «التقليدية» التي كانت كافية في ذاتها لمنع «إسرائيل» من تفعيل خياراتها العسكرية ضد لبنان.
عملياً، قد تكون الدائرة مفرغة: الصاروخ الدقيق الذي يدفع «إسرائيل» إلى مباشرة اعتدائها العسكري، هو نفسه الذي يتسبب في امتناعها عن الاعتداء. كانت هذه المعادلة

قائمة ومؤثرة بين الجانبين في «السلاح التقليدي» الذي تراكم بعشرات الآلاف، رغم التهديدات الإسرائيلية. وهي معادلة باتت معززة أكثر مع السلاح الصاروخي الدقيق، القادر على الإيذاء المركّز والموجّه، وبما يتيح للمقاومة، كما يرد في التقرير العبري، إصابة مبنى الكريا في تل أبيب (وزارة الأمن وأركان الجيش).

ما تقدّم يعني أن العدو الذي سعى طويلاً للحؤول دون امتلاك المقاومة للصواريخ الدقيقة، بات معنياً الآن بمنع مراكمة إضافية عددية لهذه الصواريخ، مع سعي للحؤول دون استخدامها الفعلي. وهو تطوّر من شأنه تخفيف مستوى دافعية «إسرائيل» للاعتداء، وإن كان لا يلغيه. فخيارات «إسرائيل» الواقعية والهادفة إلى منع حزب الله من امتلاك «الدقة» شيء، وخياراتها في منع استخدامه لهذه الصواريخ التي باتت موجودة، شيء آخر. بل إن واحداً من محددات معظم الخيارات المتاحة، بداهة، أن تسعى «إسرائيل» إلى مواجهة هذه الصواريخ عبر امتناعها عن فعل ما يتسبب في دفع حزب الله لاستخدامها ضدها، الأمر الذي يؤدي بالتبعية إلى مواصلة انكفائها عن شن الاعتداءات المباشرة في الساحة اللبنانية.

وكان السؤال ليكون منطقياً أكثر، إزاء المواجهة واحتمالاتها، في الفترة التي سبقت امتلاك حزب الله الصواريخ الدقيقة، إذ إنّ ما بعدها مغاير لما قبلها. في التفصيل، يشار الى أن تحمّل «إسرائيل» تكلفة المواجهة المحتملة كنتيجة معقولة ومقدّرة لمحاولة منع حزب الله من امتلاك «الدقة»، أكثر منطقية وأكثر ترجيحاً من تحمل تكلفة حرب عوائدها وفوائدها تقتصر على تحييد مؤقت وجزئي لهذا السلاح. يعني ذلك أن «إسرائيل» باتت الآن معنية أكثر من السابق ــــ نتيجة نجاح حزب الله في تدعيم جهوزيته ومستويات ردوده بالسلاح الدقيق ــــ بتحييد المواجهة ومنع مسبباتها. إذ لا يعقل أن تتسبب في تفعيل سلاح ما ضدها، في سياق مساعيها التي باتت مركّزة أكثر على منع تفعيله. وهو ما ينطبق بشكل كبير جداً على السلاح الدقيق في لبنان.

قد يناقش البعض في أن هذا التغيير، أي الصواريخ الدقيقة، من شأنه دفع العدوّ الى فعل ما كان يهدد به، وإن أدى ذلك إلى مواجهة بين الجانبين، فهذه ترجمة فعلية لتهديداته. والإقرار بعد إنكار، مقدمة للاعتداء الإسرائيلي المقبل على هذه الأسلحة، عبر تهيئة الرأي العام الداخلي والخارجي لتلقّي تبعاتها.

فكرة العدوان على لبنان «لأهداف انتخابية» خاصة بنتنيناهو هي فكرة بلا دعائم منطقية


بالطبع، هذه المجادلة لا تخلو من وجه صحة. فالعدو غير مأمون الجانب، وهو يتحيّن الفرصة لتوجيه اعتداءات حتى في الساحة اللبنانية، وخاصة إن كان هدف الاعتداءات تحييد تهديد استراتيجي على شاكلة وبمستوى السلاح الصاروخي الدقيق لدى حزب الله. لكن في المقابل، العوامل التي من شأنها منع تنفيذ الاعتداءات، أقلّه تلك المباشرة التي تستدعي في أعقابها ردوداً مقابلة وتبادل ضربات، ومن ثم مواجهة واسعة، أكثر ثقلاً وتأثيراً على طاولة القرار في تل أبيب، من العوامل الدافعة لشن الاعتداءات، وإن كانت تلك العوامل الدافعة للاعتداء حاضرة دائمة كما هي حالها منذ سنوات، ومدار تقدير وإعادة تقدير على مدار الساعة.

يضاف إلى هذه المجادلة أيضاً، عامل التأثير في القرار الإسرائيلي المرتبط بالانتخابات المبكرة المقرر إجراؤها في آذار المقبل، وخاصة أن نتنياهو، صاحب القرار السياسي في تل أبيب، مأزوم جداً في معسكره اليميني حيث التنافس على أشده على قيادة هذا المعسكر، ما يعني أنه يحتاج الى رافعة تأثير على الجمهور اليميني للالتفاف حوله في الانتخابات، وهو ما يتساوق مع أفعال عدائية وإنجازات عسكرية، من بينها «إنجاز» تحييد صواريخ حزب الله الدقيقة، وإن كان ذلك عبر اعتداءات عسكرية مباشرة.

في الشأن الانتخابي بوصفه عاملاً دافعاً لتحسين موقف نتنياهو انتخابياً، الحديث مكرر جداً وبات عادة متّبعة تلقائية لدى البعض عشية الاستحقاقات الانتخابية في الكيان. وهذه المجادلة بلا دعائم منطقية، إذ لا يعقل لنتنياهو وغيره، إن سُمح له في الأساس بتفعيل خيارات متطرفة في لبنان بناءً على مصالح شخصية، أن يدعم موقفه الانتخابي عبر مواجهة تؤذي «إسرائيل» والإسرائيليين، وإن كانت تؤذي في المقابل الجانب الثاني أكثر. كان ليكون الدافع معقولاً أكثر في ساحات أخرى، حيث يمكن للإنجاز العسكري إن حصل بلا تبعات وردود فعل مقابلة، ومن دون مخاطرة في الانجرار إلى مواجهة واسعة، وهو واقع منتفٍ تماماً في الحالة اللبنانية. ما يمنع «إسرائيل» من «المعالجة العسكرية» للتهديدات التي تصفها بالاستراتيجية في لبنان، يمنعها وبشكل أكثر تأكيداً، إن كان الهدف منها تحسين الموقف الانتخابي لهذا السياسي أو ذاك، وإن كان رئيساً للحكومة.

الواضح أن «إسرائيل» خسرت، باعترافها، معركة منع حزب الله من امتلاك السلاح الدقيق، الذي كانت وما زالت تؤكد أنه يمثل تهديداً استراتيجياً «لا يمكن تحمّله والتعايش معه». إلا أن التهديد في المقابل منعة للبنان، وخاصة أنه يتكاتف مع عوامل المنعة الموجودة التي دفعت العدو إلى تقييد هامش مناورته العدائية قبالة الساحة اللبنانية وحيّدت بالنتيجة رافعة الضغط العسكرية الموجودة لديها، لفرض إرادتها وأطماعها على لبنان.
إلا أن النجاح في معركة الدقة لا يلغي الحرب الدائرة بين الجانبين على تعاظم القدرة العسكرية لدى حزب الله، التي تهدف إلى إشباع الموقف الدفاعي في وجه العدو، المعني في المقابل بأن يسعى لمنع هذا التعاظم.

‘No. of Hezbollah’s precision missiles more than what Israel thinks’: Quds Force

January 7, 2021

Source

‘No. of Hezbollah’s precision missiles more than what Israel thinks’: Quds Force
Click the Pic

Description:

Brigadier General Mohammad Hejazi, Deputy Commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force, addresses Israeli speculations regarding Hezbollah’s game-changing precision-guided missiles.

Source: Al Mayadeen TV (You Tube)

Date: January 3, 2021(Important Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here: https://www.patreon.com/MiddleEastObserver?fan_landing=true)

Transcript:

– The Host:
With regards to a point that the Israeli occupation continuously talks about, and even further, (the Israelis) declare it as a ‘red line’ which that will not allow to be crossed by the other side (i.e. Hezbollah).

Particularly, (we’re referring here) to the precision-guided missiles. (The Israelis) accuse the IRGC, and they accuse the Quds Force, and allow me to say that they accuse you personally for having a role to play in this regard.

Should the Israelis really fear the (military) power of the resistance and its missiles?

– Brigadier General Mohammad Hejazi, the Deputy Commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC):

It would be sufficient (for you) to follow the reports and analyses of the Israeli experts so as to understand the level of the fear that they (the Israelis) have regarding this issue (i.e. Hezbollah’s precision-guided missile arsenal).

They declared (these concerns) time and again. In one (Israeli) analysis they said, “Every 200 precision-guided missiles equal thousands of non-precision missiles.” They made this claim.

And they (the Israelis) continuously declare that they will not allow this to happen, meaning the arrival of precision-guided (missiles) into Hezbollah’s hands. However, you (referring to the host, Ghassan Ben Jeddo) heard directly from Sayed Hassan Nasrallah that (these weapons) have indeed arrived and that they own these missiles (now).

And we know well that Sayed Hassan Nasrallah is an honest man that never speaks (falsely) for the (sake of) media (spectacle).

When he says that it (the precision missiles) is in our hands then this is certain, and its number is greater than what the (Israeli) enemy thinks.

Praise be to God, the resistance today has great capabilities, and if the enemy commits any foolishness, it will surely regret it.

Related Posts:

فشل مواجهة «السلاح الدقيق» لحزب الله: تعذّر خيارات «إسرائيل»

الأخبار

يحيى دبوق الأربعاء 6 كانون الثاني 2021

منذ عام 2016، بدأ العدوّ الإسرائيلي الحديث علناً عن سعيه إلى مواجهة مشروع «الصواريخ الدقيقة» لدى حزب الله. تل أبيب وضعت نصب عينيها منع الحزب من امتلاك صواريخ دقيقة، سواء عبر نقلها إلى لبنان، أو عبر تصنيعها فيه، أو تحويل مخزونه من الصواريخ غير الدقيقة إلى صواريخ دقيقة. المسعى الإسرائيي فشل. فهل من خيارات بديلة لدى العدو؟عودة إلى النقطة الصفر. مساعي «إسرائيل» وجهودها، المعلنة وغير المعلنة، فشلت في إيقاف تزوّد حزب الله بالصواريخ الدقيقة. والفشل هنا ممتدّ بمعنى أنه متواصل وبمستوى وتيرة التطوير والتصنيع اللذين تتحدث عنهما تل أبيب.

(هيثم الموسوي)

هل يستدعي ذلك أن «يدرس» العدو خياراته من جديد، أو ما تبقى منها، للحؤول دون تواصل الفشل ومراكمة المقاومة منبع قوة إضافية، من شأنها في حال تعاظمها أن تصعّب على «إسرائيل»، وبمستوى عالٍ جداً، المناورة على اختلافها في مواجهة لبنان، وربما أيضاً في الإقليم؟

الانتقال من التعاظم الكمّي الذي بات مُشبَعاً إلى مسار التعاظم النوعي الدقيق، وهو ما تسمّيه «إسرائيل» مشروع «دقة صواريخ حزب الله»، جاء نتيجة مخاض عسير وطويل وشاقّ، تخلّله جهد إسرائيلي في أكثر من اتجاه ومستوى، مع أفعال عدائية مباشرة وغير مباشرة، معلنة وغير معلنة، وكم هائل من التهديدات التي تواصلت وتركزت في العامين الماضيين، ولم يكن ينقصها شيء لرفع مستواها وتظهير جديتها بعد مشاركة الجانب الأميركي فيها وتبنيها بالكامل.
إلا أن المواجهة هي على خطّ تعاظم عسكري نوعي للمقاومة لم ينته. ويتعذّر تصور انتهائه. المعنى المقصود هو أن أسئلة الأمس هي نفسها أسئلة اليوم، وكذلك هي أسئلة المقبل من الأيام: هل تباشر «إسرائيل» حربها على لبنان، وهذه المرة لمنع التطور النوعي لسلاح حزب الله؟

في الأمس، كانت الحرب، والبحث في إمكاناتها، محلاً لأسئلة لا تنتهي: هل تبادر «إسرائيل» إلى شن الحرب في حال تجاوز عدد الصواريخ التي باتت في حوزة حزب الله الأربعين ألفاً؟ ثم تطورت الأسئلة إلى البحث في عتبة الستين ألفاً، فالثمانين، ومن ثم المئة ألف، فالمئة والسبعين ألفاً. لكن الحرب لم تنشب. وتوقفت «إسرائيل» عن العَدّ. والجانبان، انتقلا من معركة العدد والكم إلى معركة المدى والقدرة التدميرية، بين سعي المقاومة إلى مراكمة قوة تدميرية تصل إلى كل نقطة جغرافية في فلسطين المحتلة، وبين سعي مقابل إلى منع هذا التعاظم، الذي عُدّ في حينه تجاوزاً لكل الخطوط الحمر. وتكفي مراجعة التصريحات والتهديدات الإسرائيلية في العقد الأخير وما قبله، للعودة إلى أجواء توثب العدوّ نحو الحرب، وهي كانت لدى البعض وشيكة. فـ«إسرائيل» لا تقوى على التعايش مع تهديد من هذا النوع: قوة تدميرية كبيرة جداً، ووسائل صاروخية لإيصال هذه القوة إلى وسط فلسطين المحتلة وأقصى جنوبها.

اللواء يؤال سترايك: يكفي أن يكون لديك 20 صاروخاً دقيقاً لتغيّر وجه المعركة


مع ذلك، بلورت «إسرائيل» في حينه نظريات وآراء ومواقف عملياتية، لتبرّر فشلها في صدّ التعاظم النوعي التدميري الطويل المدى لحزب الله، ومن ثم التعايش مع هذا الفشل، عبر نظرية ردع المقاومة عن استخدام الترسانة التدميرية، وإن كانت المواجهة الإسرائيلية في الأساس هي لردع المقاومة عن امتلاك هذه القوة. فهذه القوة قادرة على ردع إسرائيل بمجرد امتلاكها مع الاستعداد لاستخدامها في مستوى دفاعي، (وهذه هي وجهة حزب الله واستراتيجيته في مواجهة العدو).

الا أن الكلام عن المدى والقدرة التدميرية تراجع كثيراً، أمام خيارات بديلة وجدت «إسرائيل» أنها كافية في ذاتها لإنهاء سلاح حزب الله، الكمّي والتدميري، بل أيضاً إنهاء حزب الله بوصفه مقاومة للاحتلال. كانت المسألة في متناول يد «إسرائيل» وكان عليها حصراً أن تنتظر النتائج. لكن مآل الحرب السورية ناقض أمل «إسرائيل» ومساعيها، فعادت المواجهة إلى النقطة الصفر. لكن هذه المرة مع تجاوز وتعايش قسري للكمّ والمدى والقدرة التدميرية، مع «ظهور» معركة أكبر من المعركتين الأوليين وأكثر تهديداً لـ«إسرائيل»: مشروع دقّة الصواريخ، تطويراً وتصنيعاً.

فشل الرهان السوري البديل

شكّلت الحرب على سوريا خياراً بديلاً لـ«إسرائيل»، يقيها مواجهة عسكرية مباشرة ضد المقاومة لصدّ ومنع أو حتى تأخير تعاظمها العسكري، في مستويات ما قبل الدقة. وهو خيار شبيه بخيار الرهان على تطورات الداخل اللبناني المشبع بالخصومة في وجه حزب الله، وتحديداً بعد خروج الجيش السوري من ساحة التأثير عام 2005، وهو الخيار الذي فشل واستتبع من «إسرائيل» والولايات المتحدة تفعيل الخيارات العسكرية عام 2006.

إلا أن الفشل الإسرائيلي في التصدي للتعاظم في مستوى (ونوع) تسلّحي ما، يستدعي بالضرورة تعاظم ثمن المقاربات المتطرفة للعدوّ إنْ قرر خوض المواجهة العسكرية من جديد مع فشل الخيارات البديلة. فإن كان الفشل ــــ الذي منيت به إسرائيل بعدما راهنت على الاشتباك الداخلي في لبنان لإضعاف حزب الله ــــ استدعى منها حرباً مع أول فرصة بانت لها عام 2006، إلا أن فشل الرهان على الخيار البديل الآخر لإضعاف حزب الله واجتثاثه عبر الحرب السورية، لم يستدع من إسرائيل مباشرة حرب في أعقاب الفشل الجديد. تكلفة الحرب باتت بمستوى أعلى وأكثر إيذاءً. وما كان يمكن الرهان عليه عسكرياً عام 2006، لم يعد بالإمكان الرهان عليه، باطمئنان، في أعقاب عام 2015، عندما تلمست إسرائيل فشل رهانها على الساحة السورية وانقلابها على محور المقاومة.

لكن ما بين الفشل والفشل، تعاظمٌ إضافيّ لقدرات حزب الله، يرفع من جديد تكلفة الحروب الإسرائيلية إن بادر العدو إليها. فكان الخيار الذي واجهت به تل أبيب حزبَ الله هو خليط مما تبقى من أشلاء خيارات سابقة، كان الهدف منها إشغال حزب الله بانتظار خيار بديل، هذه المرة وصل إلى طهران نفسها، والرهان كان على أن سقوط النظام الإسلامي في إيران يُسقط حزب الله، بل وكل قوس التهديدات القائمة في وجه «إسرائيل».

صاحَبَ الرهانَ على إسقاط إيران و/ أو إخضاعها عبر الحليف الأميركي وحصاره لها، تطورٌ هائل وبمستويات غير مسبوقة في سياق المواجهة بين الجانبين، ويتمثل في «مشروع الدقة» الذي بدأت إسرائيل تصرخ وتتحدث عنه علناً منذ عام 2016. وتهديد «الدقة» يصغر معه أي تهديد آخر على أهميته، مهما كان حجمه ومستوياته. و«يكفي أن يكون لديك عشرون صاروخاً دقيقاً لتغيّر وجه المعركة»، بحسب ما ورد على لسان أحد قادة العدو العسكريين، قائد المنطقة الشمالية السابق في جيش الاحتلال، اللواء يؤال سترايك.

سقوط الخيارات البديلة من المبادرة العسكرية الإسرائيلية لمواجهة تعاظم حزب الله، مع الوافد الجديد على هذا التعاظم وهو دقة الصواريخ ووسائل قتالية أخرى مكشوفة وغير مكشوفة، يستدعي من «إسرائيل» ــــ أو بتعبير أدق: استدعى منها ــــ دراسة خياراتها، ومن بينها بطبيعة الحال الخيار العسكري الموسع. فإلى أين وصلت هذه «الدراسة»؟

ثمن الحرب الإسرائيلية على لبنان لا يُقارن مطلقاً بالثمن الذي دفعته عام 2006


من الواضح أن «إسرائيل» ما كانت لتتبع أي خيار بديل من الحروب ما لم تكن تكلفتها أعظم من فائدتها، وهو في الأساس ما دفعها إلى السعي والرهان على الخيارات البديلة للحرب في مواجهة حزب الله، طالما أن الرهان معقول ومقدّر له النجاح في تحقيق نتيجة الحرب نفسها، بلا تكلفة. لكن مع كل مرة تفشل فيها البدائل، تتعاظم ــــ مع تعاظم السلاح ــــ تكلفة الحروب، فتندفع «إسرائيل» أكثر الى البدائل. فهل ينطبق ذلك على مشروع الدقة؟ السؤال كبير جداً ومتشابك في ذاته، ويمكن أن تستتبعه إجابات في أكثر من اتجاه.

المؤكد أن «إسرائيل» الآن ــــ كما منذ أشهر ــــ مدركة وفق تقديراتها أن الخيار البديل في إسقاط إيران أو إخضاعها عبر الأميركيين، وصل أيضاً إلى الفشل، وأن دراسة الخيارات ومن بينها الخيارات العسكرية وُضعت طويلاً على طاولة القرار. فهل ارتدّت هذه الخيارات إلى الخلف؟ هل البحث جارٍ عن خيارات أخرى بديلة غير عسكرية؟ أم أن المعركة مقبلة وتوقيتها مؤجل؟

المؤكد أن ثمن الحروب الإسرائيلية في مواجهة لبنان لم يعد كما كان عليه في الماضي، وهو ثمن لا يُقارن مطلقاً بالثمن الذي دفعته عام 2006. وهذا الثمن هو، حصراً، ما يدفع العدو إلى التراجع عن أي توثب للمبادرة إلى المواجهات العسكرية ضد الساحة اللبنانية تحديداً. ولا يغيّر من هذه المعادلة أنّ بإمكان «إسرائيل» أن تلحق ضرراً بلبنان أكثر بكثير مما يمكن للمقاومة إلحاقه بها.

في سياق تحذيرات سترايك أيضاً، يجب التنويه بالترسانة الصاروخية وغير الصاروخية، بمستوياتها التقليدية، الموجودة في حوزة حزب الله، التي من شأنها أن تسلّط الضوء على جزء من عوامل التأثير في وجه أي قرار إسرائيلي بالاعتداء على لبنان. كتبت صحيفة «جيروزاليم بوست» (15 كانون الأول 2020)، وقبلها وسائل إعلامية عبرية مختلفة، عن قدرة حزب الله العسكريّة في أي حرب مقبلة، لتؤكد نقلاً عن مصادر عسكرية أن بإمكانه إطلاق ما يصل إلى 4000 صاروخ وقذيفة في اليوم، مقارنة بإجمالي أقل من 4000 صاروخ أطلقت خلال حرب تموز 2006. وللحديث صلة…

مقالات متعلقة

Sayyed Nasrallah: ’Israelis’ Know They Didn’t, Couldn’t Dismantle Hezbollah’s Precision Guided Missiles P

Sayyed Nasrallah: ’Israelis’ Know They Didn’t, Couldn’t Dismantle Hezbollah’s Precision Guided Missiles P

Translated and Subtitled by Al-Ahed

Sayyed Nasrallah: Resistance Missiles Multiply in Quantities, Can Reach any Point in Occupied Palestine

Sayyed Mayadeen
Click to see the Video

Sara Taha Moughnieh

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah denied Sunday having any data around Israeli or US intention to perform any operation before the end of Trump’s presidency dubbing the latter a “crazy who is in a state of severe madness”.

“It is not something only concerning Iran, Lebanon or Palestine but even the Republican and Democratic leaderships are worried about what he could do,” he pointed out, stressing that “the resistance axis should be cautious throughout these couple of weeks so it wouldn’t be dragged into an uncalculated confrontation…”

In an interview to Al-Mayadeen TV channel, Sayyed Nasrallah revealed that he, along with other Hezbollah leaders are targets for the US, Israeli and Saudi Arabia, adding that the latter have been instigating to assassinate him since many years, even before the Yemeni war began.

“Saudi King, Mohammad bin Salman proposed this issue in his first visit to the US after the election of Trump, and the latter approved assigning this operation to “Israel”,” his eminence clarified, noting that “Saudi Arabia, specifically in the last few years, has been acting with grudge not mindfulness”.

Sayyed Nasrallah disdained Israeli threats assuring that “when you hear Israelis waging threats on media know that there will be no action… and all the action taking place on the borders with Lebanon only reveal Israel’s concern and alertness”.

As his eminence considered that the military operation that targeted Hajj Qassem Suleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis was a trilateral operation by US-Israel-Saudi Arabia, he remembered Suleimani saying “he had a strong charisma and the power to influence anyone who knows him. He was special on the humanitarian and moral levels. He was a frontline man not a man in the operation room, a man of strategy and tactics and very conscious and well-educated on political and cultural levels.”

“In the last period before his assassination, his role and movement was highlighted a lot in Western media. They usually do that before the assassination of anyone to show their people the significance of the man targeted. I was very concerned about him and I warned him about that,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, adding “I miss him so much, I used to feel that we are one person”.

“As for Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, he was a great leader and resembled Hajj Qassem so much. He had a major role in both victories against the US and ISIL,” he further stated.

In parallel, Sayyed Nasrallah spoke about the strong relation Hajj Qassem had with all the resistance factions in Palestine and his concern that these factions get all the support they need to resist the occupation, revealing that he was the one behind sending Kornet missiles to the resistance in Gaza Strip.

“President Bashar Al-Assad bought “Kornet” missiles from the Russians, and they are the missiles we used in July war. Hajj Qassem demanded that these missiles be sent to Gaza, and I proposed the issue to President Assad who instantly approved,” his eminence explained, asserting that “I am not surprised with the Arab betrayal to the Palestinians because most of the Arab regimes have only been selling words to Palestine and have only used Iran as an excuse to normalize the relations with Israel. This took place because the Palestinian cause has become a burden on them. There is no excuse for anyone to abandon Palestine.”

As he considered that these countries have long had ties with Israel but were not made public, he assured that this new peace deal is positive because it brought this hypocrisy to public and divided the lines.

“When lines are divided this means a great victory is on its way,” he said.

In this context, Hezbollah SG stated that the relation between Hezbollah and Hamas is based on the legitimacy of the resistance and the Palestinian cause despite the conflict that emerged between Damascus and Hamas due to the Syrian developments.

He further assured that the resistance axis is stronger than before and the Palestinian people have not been influenced by the normalization treaties as they still stand firm and steadfast, praising the joint maneuvers between the resistance factions in Gaza.

While his eminence expressed that the Palestinians of 1948 in the occupied territories want the liberation of Palestine more than anyone else, he stated that “as an Islamist, I find the stance of the Justice and Development Party in Morocco concerning normalization with Israelis more painful than other stances”.

On Hajj Qassem’s role in Iraq, Sayyed Nasrallah revealed that the Iraqi resistance factions who defeated ISIL were the ones who performed most of the operations that urged the US to pull out if Iraq, unlike what media portrayed about Al-Qaeda being behind them.

“I assure to you that the Iraqi resistance groups were the ones performing operations against the occupation under the support of Al-Quds force led by Hajj Qassem Suleimani, and we were in contact with them since then,” his eminence said, indicating that “4 800 suicide attacks were waged in Iraq, while the resistance operations were very accurate and merely against the occupation”.

Moreover, he added that “The US Army had threatened Hajj Qassem and Al-Quds Force to bombard locations in Iran if they continue to support the resistance in Iraq… If it weren’t for the Iraqi resistance, the US embassy would’ve been the one ruling Iraq now”.

Based on that, Hezbollah SG pointed out that “despite the significance of Hajj Qassem and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis and their great roles, what happened with them according to our culture, methodology, history and path is a natural and expected outcome because we are in a state of historical conflict… and these two martyrs fell on the path of victories and defeat of great schemes.”

“Our axis does not rely on individuals, and while the goal behind the assassination of Hajj Qassem and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis was to erase the name of the resistance, millions of people came out and shouted “we are all resistance… we are all Qassem Suleimani”.”

Hezbollah SG recalled the speech of Imam Khamenei in which he asserted that whoever ordered and implemented the assassination of these two martyrs should be personally punished wherever he is, stating that “this should be the duty of every honorable person in the world, specifically our people in Iraq as Hajj Qassem was their guest and was martyred on their territories.”

On another level, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that “one day after the toppling of former Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak, Hajj Qassem was in the Southern Suburb of Beirut and expressed discomfort telling us that the Americans will take advantage of the “Arab Spring” to change regimes in the region for their benefit and topple governments that support the resistance specifically in Syria.

“We took his words into consideration and warned the Syrian president who chose to embrace any public movement that takes place. However, funded groups refused any political solution and started using force.”

“We don’t exaggerate when we say it was a global war on Syria. They wanted to replace the regime with another one that supports US policies, submits to Turkey and Qatar, and improves relations with Israel,” his eminence added, noting that “the war on Syria was not only because of its stance from the Palestinian cause but also for its oil and gas and for occupying it and controlling it strategically “.

“President Assad chose to stand firm and never left Syria, and his decision urged us to support him”.

Furthermore, Sayyed Nasrallah revealed that Hajj Qassem went to Moscow and met with President Putin for two hours, playing a major role in convincing him to interfere militarily in Syria.

“After its role in Syria and the regional changes, Russia regained its role in the world through the Syrian gate,” Sayyed Nasrallah assured.

On the Lebanese level, Hezbollah SG stressed that the Israelis have been in a state if alertness for months now expecting a retaliatory attack for the martyrdom of one of Hezbollah members in Syria.

“All the drills and measures the Israeli is taking on the borders are because he is aware that we will respond. The Israeli is in a state of confusion and recognizes that the resistance missiles can reach accurate goals in any place inside the occupied territories, he said, assuring that “the resistance according to the people in South Lebanon is a shield not a burden”.

Answering a question about the influence of Iran-US negotiations on some files in the region, his eminence assured that “Iran, unlike other states, does not buy and sell files in the region. It does not negotiate with the Americans about countries’ affairs on behalf of these countries. It had informed the Europeans that it will not discuss the Yemeni affairs on behalf of the Yemenis and had refused to discuss Iraqi affairs with Washington without the presence of an Iraqi delegation.”

Source: Al-Manar

Related Videos

Full Video

Related Articles

Sayyed Nasrallah Vows Punishment for Every Crime: Hezbollah’s Guided Missiles More than Doubled

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image.png

By Zeinab Abdallah

Beirut – Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah appeared on al-Mayadeen TV with Ghassan Bin Jeddo in a special episode named ‘Dialogue of the Year’. The four-hour long interview touched upon almost all regional issues that happened this year, although the pivotal segment was about martyr General Qassem Soleimani and Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis less than a week ahead of their first martyrdom anniversary.

Starting with the possible options that would take place during US President Donald Trump’s few days in office, Sayyed Nasrallah indicated that there is not accurate information that Trump or the ‘Israeli’ enemy will take an action. “There are just certain analyses,” His Eminence noted, adding that everybody is anticipating and expecting what Trump might do in the coming days.

“The Axis of Resistance is dealing cautiously, accurately and attentively so that no post of this axis would be lured towards any confrontation that suits the enemies’ timing, but when the enemy creates massive media noise, this means that it won’t do anything, and that it is rather waging a psychological warfare,” Sayyed Nasrallah stressed noting that “this doesn’t mean that we mustn’t remain cautious.”

Regarding the news about a possible ‘Israeli’ landing that has taken place along Lebanon’s Jiyeh coastline, the Hezbollah leader made clear that the party’s information doesn’t provide that any ‘Israeli’ landing has taken place as it was reported in media.”

Saudi attempts to assassinate Sayyed Nasrallah

Moving to the issue of assassination, the crime by which a US drone killed the Islamic Revolution Guard’s Quds Force Commander, and Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units’ Second-in-command, Sayyed Nasrallah explained that many sides have warned him about plots to target him especially after the martyrdom of Hajj Qassem Soleimani. “This is something normal and well known,” His Eminence commented.

“I’ve been warned about assassinating me ahead of the US Presidential Elections, and that any targeting might be ‘Israeli’ or American,” the resistance leader explained, going further to uncover that targeting Hezbollah leaders is an American-‘Israeli’-Saudi goal: “I have information that Saudi Arabia has been stirring to assassinate me since the beginning of its war on Yemen, and private sources have informed me that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman requested my assassination in person during his first visit to Washington and his first meeting with Trump.”

Sayyed Nasrallah cited the same sources as saying that Saudi Arabia took it upon itself that in case a war erupts after his assassination, it was ready to pay all the financial costs for this war.

“The Americans have agreed on a Saudi request to assassinate me, and that ‘Israel’ would execute this assassination. Saudi Arabia doesn’t act rationally, it has been acting maliciously especially in the recent years,” His Eminence went on to say, then he accused the US, ‘Israel’, and Saudi Arabia of partnership in the crime of assassinating leaders Soleimani and al-Muhandis.

“The crime of assassinating Hajj Qassem was a clear one, uncovered, and similar to the assassination of Sayyed Abbas al-Moussawi.”

Soleimani, the Sayyed’s own self

When talking about martyr Soleimani, Sayyed Nasrallah couldn’t have enough listing his manners and characteristics. He described the martyr as a very special person on the level of ethics. He also referred to him as a charismatic person who had the ability to influence all those who had to know him.

“On the military level, martyr Soleimani was a strategic and tactical leader at the same time,” His Eminence noted.

Describing the time that preceded the martyrdom, Sayyed Nasrallah said that he was very worried about him and he has warned him repeatedly.

“I miss Hajj Qassem very much… We have worked together and faced challenges together. I used to feel that Hajj Qassem and I were one person.”

Hajj Abu Mahdi, the main partner in Iraq’s victories

When talking about martyr Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, Sayyed Nasrallah recommended that his identity should be more defined to the people, referring to him as a great person.

“Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis is very much like Hajj Qassem, and this is why they met in the battlefield, and Allah has concluded their lives with this martyrdom.”

His Eminence explained that Hajj Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was suggested to assume [governmental] responsibilities in Iraq, but he preferred to work in the battlefield.

“Martyr Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis was a main partner in making the two victories against Daesh [the Arabic acronym for terrorist ‘ISIS/ISIL’ group] and the US occupation of Iraq,” Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say.

“He was one of the leaders of the Axis of Resistance that surpasses Iraq and reaches all regional causes.”

Hajj Qassem, the transnational resistance commander

When tackling the issue of the US presence in Iraq, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that the Americans have left Iraq by force, humiliated and defeated thanks to the strikes of the resistance.

“The Americans fled Iraq under fire because they begged martyr Soleimani to stop the Iraqi resistance operations against them.”

As for Palestine, the Sayyed added that martyr Soleimani developed ties with all Palestinian resistance factions: “There were not any redlines for martyr Soleimani on the level of supporting Palestinian resistance factions,” uncovering that the ‘Kornet’ missiles reached the Palestinian resistance in Gaza thanks to martyr Soleimani.

“The efforts made by Hajj Qassem Soleimani and the Quds Force in supporting the Palestinian resistance factions were ongoing behind the scenes.”

Additionally, the resistance leader uncovered that the Russian-made ‘Kornet’ missiles Hezbollah used in the July 2006 war were purchased by Syria from Russia, and then Hezbollah took them.

Additionally, Sayyed Nasrallah made clear that Syrian President Bashar Assad agreed that the ‘Kornet’ missiles purchased by Damascus from Moscow reach ‘Hamas’ and the ‘Islamic Jihad’ resistance movements in Gaza.

Sayyed Nasrallah hailed martyr Soleimani and his team’s dedication to present all what could be offered to Palestine on all levels. His Eminence also praised Assad’s willingness to support the Palestinian resistance.

Normalization only took the masks off

On the level of Arab normalization with the ‘Israeli’ enemy, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that it is something that didn’t surprise him, adding that this is because most of the Arab regimes were only telling the Palestinians mere lies.

“We view the normalization deals from the perspective that masks have been taken off, and that those Arab regimes’ submissive realities appeared clearly.”

Iran is just a pretext the Arab regimes use to justify their normalization deals because they find the Palestinian cause as a burden for them, Sayyed Nasrallah added, stressing that there isn’t any reason that justifies the abandoning of Palestine.

Sayyed Nasrallah also lamented Morocco’s Justice and Development Party’s stance which he considered was more painful and more dangerous than that of the regimes’ normalization with ‘Israel’.

The ever-growing Axis of Resistance

In terms of power and numbers, the resistance leader emphasized that the might of the Axis of Resistance has multiplied many more times than its level several years ago, stressing that the most important thing is having a strong will.

“We are an axis in a state of legitimate self-defense, to defend our countries, sanctities, peoples, wealth. The Axis of Resistance has made major and great achievements,” His Eminence underscored.

“Without any exaggeration, the Axis of Resistance is stronger than any time before. The Axis was able to contain the strike of Hajj Qassem Soleimani’s martyrdom although it was very hard,” Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out.

Regarding the Ain al-Assad strike, Sayyed Nasrallah referred to it as an important response that shows how a leadership of a state in the world deals a blow to the United States: “The Ain al-Assad strike was a historical slap because the equation in confronting the Americans is not about killing, and Washington thought that by assassinating leaders it would put an end to the Axis of Resistance, while in fact this axis is not based upon a person by himself.”

His Eminence then vowed that punishing the killers of martyrs Soleimani and al-Muhandis is a goal for every honorable person, warning those who ordered and executed that they will be punished wherever they were.

“What the world should learn is that the blood of the leaders won’t be in vain, and the killers of Hajj Qassem and Abu Mahdi must be punished sooner or later,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

His Eminence praised the joint drills held between the Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza as a very important step and a development that shows their strength and frightens the enemy at the same time.

Martyr Soleimani’s role in Iraq

Sayyed Nasrallah explained that martyr Soleimani’s appearance in media started with the battles against Daesh in Iraq, adding that it was not an intended issue.

“Hajj Qassem Soleimani didn’t seek being mentioned in a news, being in the spotlight or even hailed by anybody, and his relationship with the religious leadership in Iraq was good, especially on the level of main issues.”

Explaining that the vast majority of military operations against the US occupation in Iraq was carried out by the resistance factions, Sayyed Nasrallah said that groups of young Iraqis started the armed resistance against the US troops in Iraq without a political cover.

“Arab satellite channels refused to broadcast the videos that document the Iraqi resistance operations against the American occupation. Meanwhile, resistance in Iraq received real support from al-Quds Force and Hajj Qassem Soleimani.”

Sayyed Nasrallah contrasted al-Qaeda’s 4800 suicide attacks that were carried out against civilians on Iraqi soil, showing the difference when it came to the Iraqi resistance operations that were precisely meant to pressure the occupation and were very keen and accurate to avoid harming any civilian.

That’s why, Sayyed Nasrallah explained, the US Army threatened Hajj Qassem and al-Quds Force to strike their posts in Iran if they continued to support the Iraqi resistance: “The US Army then sent a message to Hajj Qassem to help them withdraw from Iraq without being hit by fire.”

Hadn’t been to the Iraqi resistance, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the US embassy would have been in control of Iraq.

However, Donald Trump keeps his troops in Iraq and Syria to steal their resources and oil, the Hezbollah leader added.

Forecasting the scheme against Syria

Sayyed Nasrallah narrated how martyr Soleimani was concerned about the American attempts to ride the tide of the peoples’ uprisings to target some regimes after America allowed toppling its man in Egypt, President Hosni Mubarak.

“Martyr Soleimani was the first to forecast the risks heading to Syria under the pretext of the ‘Arab Spring’, because the country supports the resistance.”

And while the parties that really backed, funded, and led opposition the groups in Syria rushed for an armed confrontation, Iran contacted opposition groups in accordance with President Assad to reach a political solution, but all of them insisted that we are not in a state of political solution and there won’t be negotiations with the regime, which they predicted will collapse within days, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to say.

“There was a very big international and regional decision in the war on Syria to prevent any political solution for the Syrian crisis.”

Foreign forces supported the Syrian opposition as they believed that the regime would be toppled within two months. They wanted to weaken the regime in Syria and in need of making a settlement with ‘Israel’ and recognize it, the Hezbollah leader recalled.

“We had only two options, either to surrender and let the region collapse, or to resist; and we chose resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, hailing Syria’s independence of decision, braveness of leadership, and neither submitting to the enemies nor to the allies.

“Syria was not only targeted for supporting Palestine and the resistance, but also to be occupied and to allow stealing its oil and gas.”

President Assad’s decision to remain steadfast was the main motivator for his allies in supporting Damascus and engaging in the confrontation next to him.

“Assad didn’t leave Damascus at all over the course of the battles, and in the most difficult times of the war he was strong and solid,” Sayyed Nasrallah added.

Soleimani in Moscow

On the level of the Russian military intervention in Syria, Sayyed Nasrallah labelled it as very influential.

His Eminence recalled that Russian President Vladimir Putin was hesitant in the beginning of the war to enter Syria; then Hajj Qassem went to Moscow and explained, with maps, the field situation. At the time, Putin told Hajj Qassem that he was convinced with entering Syria.

“With his charismatic persona, strong logic, and strategic explanation, Hajj Qassem contributed to convincing Putin with entering Syria based on logic and facts.”

Soleimani in the July 2006 War

About memories from the July 2006 war, Sayyed Nasrallah recalled how martyr Soleimani didn’t leave the Southern Suburb of Beirut [Dahiyeh] but for 48 hours to submit his report on the situation and contact the brothers in Syria and Iran.

“All of the ‘Israeli’ aerial bombing during the July 2006 war couldn’t stop the logistic support from reaching the resistance in Lebanon,” His Eminence added.

After the end of the war, martyr Soleimani played a role and shouldered the responsibility of following the project of sheltering the displaced people. “The one who formed the Iranian Committee to Reconstruct Lebanon was Hajj Qassem and martyr Engineer Hossam Khoshnavis.”

Sayyed Nasrallah lamented that he could never forget that there are sides within the Lebanese political authorities who were planning to keep people homeless for the longest possible period of time after the July 2006 war to incite them against the resistance.

Commenting on martyr Soleimani’s successor, Hajj Esmail Ghaani, Sayyed Nasrallah said that he used to meet him repeatedly when he was Hajj Qassem’s deputy: “He was informed with all files. And Hajj Qassem used to say that Hajj Ghaani is to succeed him.”

The void ‘Israeli’ threats

In a strong and confident comment about the Lebanese resistance group, Sayyed Nasrallah underscored that Hezbollah is at it is: “Its strength, morale, and will are the same, or even much powerful.”

All the threats you hear from the enemy are because it knows that we will retaliate for its killing of our martyr in Syria. We are keeping our promise to respond to the ‘Israeli’ enemy’s killing of martyr Ali Mohsen, His Eminence made clear.

“The major alertness of the resistance was on all levels and in front of the ‘Israelis’’ sight. The ‘Israeli’ drones’ movement in the air is very confused as it anticipates the resistance’s response. The ‘Israeli’ knows that we have used the appropriate weapon towards its drones without making this public.”

The Hezbollah leader further announced that the precision-guided missiles owned by the resistance have doubled from the number it had a year ago.

“The resistance today is in a very good condition, and at the best of its capabilities. We believe in the future and trust that we are approaching victory.

The concerned party is the ‘Israeli’ and not the resistance especially as Trump is leaving and Washington might return to the nuclear deal with Iran.

A certain level of Hezbollah’s aerial defense has been exposed to the enemy, but whether there are higher levels or not is a matter that we don’t reveal, Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that “we are keen to keep the ‘Israeli’ unaware of a lot about what the resistance has.”

“There are many issues that the ‘Israeli’ knows nothing about.”

Our Axis is on the top and it is ‘Israel’ which is in trouble, His Eminence underscored, adding that the resistance’s decision is to carry out an appropriate response that strengthens its deterrence; this won’t be achieved without targeting the enemy’s soldiers, he said.

“We don’t need a demonstrative action along the border that targets dummies. We want an actual response.”

Lebanon’s maritime borders, Gov’t issue

In a question about Lebanon’s indirect negotiations with the ‘Israeli’ regime regarding the demarcation of the maritime borders, Sayyed Nasrallah was confident to say that the negotiations under the current US administration will reach a dead end.

“Our right to prevent any ‘Israeli’ stealing of our waters is natural, and our ability to do this is non-negotiable,” His Eminence underscored.

Elsewhere in the interview, Sayyed Nasrallah said there is a positive atmosphere and cooperation between the Prime Minister-designate Saad Hariri and Hezbollah.

However, he noted that there is a problem of trust that delays the formation of a Lebanese government, which is mainly between President Michel Aoun and the PM-designate.

The environment embracing resistance

On the level of discussing the resistance’s weapon within its own people, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the people of South Lebanon don’t see resistance as a burden, they rather view it as their shield.

“We support the threatened and targeted environment of resistance which is paying prices for this support, His Eminence said in reference to the sanctions targeting the entire country, “We try and we seek to present aid to the Lebanese people and to our environment with all possible means.”

Sayyed Nasrallah noted, however, that the problem in Lebanon is a problem of choices, and the evidence is that nobody dared to head eastward to find economic solutions.

“There is a misevaluation in linking solving some issues for some countries with the foreign factor.”

From this point, Sayyed Nasrallah went on to explain that Iran is a great regional power and a main axis in the region but it doesn’t negotiate instead of any of its allies in the region.

Iran, a non-interventionist superpower

“Iran doesn’t buy, sell, or negotiate with the Americans instead of the peoples of the region,” the resistance leader noted, adding that the Islamic Republic of Iran informed the Europeans that it is not concerned with negotiating on behalf of the Yemenis or others.

“Washington insisted to negotiate the Iraqi issue with Tehran; Iran, however, insisted that the Iraqis be present and that the negotiations be held in public.”

The Hezbollah-Hamas relations

Hezbollah leader said that he met with Palestinian resistance movement, Hamas, brother Ismail Haniyeh several times during his last visit to Lebanon and discussed with him different regional issues that included bilateral relations and the relations with Syria.

“Relations between Hamas and Syria must be rearranged; there is a positive atmosphere even if it takes time. Logically, I believe that Hamas is tending to rearrange its ties with Damascus,” Sayyed Nasrallah said, noting that he talked with Haniyeh that Hamas should help in redirecting tendencies in the region, which include the Islah [Reform] Party’s fighting in Yemen against the Ansarullah movement.

Sayyed Nasrallah also greeted the Palestinians of the 1948 lands whom he described as “our brother and our people, and they are the ones who mostly desire the liberation of Palestine from the river to the sea.”

Related Videos

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Related Articles

Hezbollah’s Surface-to-surface Firepower Capability Greater Than That Of 95% Of World’s Militaries – JP

Hezbollah’s Surface-to-surface Firepower Capability Greater Than That Of 95% Of World’s Militaries – JP

By Staff, The ‘Jerusalem’ Post

In yet another show of how the Zionist entity is focused on Hezbollah’s growing military might, the ‘Israeli’ daily, The ‘Jerusalem’ Post highlighted in one of its opinion pieces the resistance group’s updated capabilities, considering it is now greater than that of 95% of the world’s militaries.

The Post considered that Hezbollah makes no effort to hide its intention to kill and maim ‘Israeli’ settlers. “One way it plans to do this is through cross-border ground raids in the next war with ‘Israel.’ Hezbollah has repeatedly declared its intention of sending its elite Radwan Force death squads into the Galilee region, with the mission of attacking ‘civilians.’”

The article’s author, Eli Bar-On, added that Hezbollah’s intentions regarding its massive projectile arsenal are no different. He claimed that the resistance group’s arsenal has grown to 170,000 rockets and missiles since the July 2006 aggression, according to some estimates.

“It includes unguided short-range projectiles, long-range rockets, and missiles with ranges of more than 300 km., as well as hundreds of attack drones,” the former Eli Bar-On instructor at the ‘Israeli’ military college went on to say.

He then cited Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s repeated warnings to use the long-range missiles to strike the Zionist entity’s nuclear power reactor in Dimona.

The author claimed that Hezbollah is also engaged in an effort to build precision-guided munitions [PGMs], which he referred to as a top-priority conventional threat to ‘Israel.’

Meanwhile, Zionist military experts suggest that Hezbollah has succeeded in its efforts, at least to some extent, and Hezbollah is now in possession of a few dozen precision-guided missiles. Such a capability will allow Hezbollah to conduct pinpoint strikes in any future conflict with the Zionist entity and target its top strategic assets.

Hezbollah can fire up to 4,000 projectiles a day, compared to a total of fewer than 4,000 rockets fired throughout the entirety of the 34-day conflict in 2006, according to the daily. “Its surface-to-surface firepower capability is greater than that of 95% of the world’s militaries.”

According to Bar-On, Sayyed Nasrallah in 2016 “declared that he has his own version of an “atomic bomb,” in the form of a missile strike on Haifa’s ammonium storage site” – which has since been emptied – that would result in the deaths of tens of thousands of Zionist settlers.

Consequently, in any future war, the Zionist military, he said, will have no choice but to operate deep in Lebanon – both through airstrikes and a ground campaign – to neutralize Hezbollah’s capabilities.

Hezbollah Special Forces to Infiltrate, Take Control of Several ‘Israeli’ Settlements – INSS Study

Hezbollah Special Forces to Infiltrate, Take Control of Several ‘Israeli’ Settlements - INSS Study

By Staff

A 73-page study by the ‘Israeli’ entity’s Institute for National Security Studies [INSS] exposed the weakness the Zionist military would show in any future war with Hezbollah.

With the northern front being the most difficult and main challenge for the ‘Israeli’ entity, and today’s estimations hinting that neither Hezbollah nor Iran are interested in a battle with ‘Israel’, readiness for a possible escalation or war breakout is required, as a result of the transformations or the wrong estimations in this regard.

According to the study, ‘Israel’ will face in the future war new and more difficult challenges than the ones it faced before amid the new threats that will affect a war’s characteristics, if it happened.

Supposing that the war will take place on two fronts at one, the military and civilian fronts, the latter will be hit with a higher average of missiles, in comparison with the previous conflicts, especially in the first stage of war. At the same time, the number of launched missiles will cover a wider range than that in previous conflicts with Hezbollah and Hamas. Relatively, the civilian front will be endangered on different levels, which impedes the ‘security’ Zionist settlers currently feel.

Meanwhile, the head of institute declared that “the situation is alarming for the ‘Israeli’ society. He explained that the lack of the spirit of common destiny, common goal, solidarity, and readiness to bear the burdens during the Coronavirus crisis raise major concerns regarding the results of war.”

Brigadier General Udi Dekel warned of several related scenarios, including attacks targeting the internal ‘Israeli’ front using thousands of missiles, dozens of which are precision-guided ones. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles [UAVs] are also set to be deployed simultaneously from different fronts.

Additionally, several Special Units from Hezbollah forces will infiltrate to the occupied territories and take control of the border settlements, vital facilities along the Lebanese border, as well as the occupied Golan, the study noted, warning that severe damage will be caused to strategic targets within the Zionist entity.

The study came up with a conclusion that the battle will be fought on different fronts in Lebanon, Syria, west Iraq and the possible involvement of Hamas and the Islamic Jihad in Gaza.

The study’s conductors pointed that the scenario of the sudden attack, when the ‘Israeli’ ‘defense’ systems are not ready, may harm the military capability. This will reflect in a spontaneous response, readiness of the aerial forces, and mobilization of reserve forces.

In any scenario, the study added, ‘Israel’s’ enemy will focus on causing damage inside the civilian front, and breaking the Zionist entity’s economy.

مناورة الجبهة الشماليّة: قوات الرضوان في الجليل… وآلاف الصواريخ في سماء فلسطين

الأخبار

علي حيدر 

الثلاثاء 3 تشرين الثاني 2020

مناورة الجبهة الشماليّة: قوات الرضوان في الجليل... وآلاف الصواريخ في سماء فلسطين
(أ ف ب )

قد يكون إجراء المناورات الكبرى للجيوش، بما فيها جيش العدو الإسرائيلي، جزءاً من برنامج روتيني. إلا أن هناك أكثر من عامل مستجد داخلي وإقليمي يؤكد أن إجراء مناورة «السهم القاتل» الكبرى، الأسبوع الفائت، في شمال فلسطين المحتلة، وفي ضوء السيناريو الذي انطلقت منه، ينطوي على أبعاد ورسائل مُحدَّدة تتصل بأكثر من سياق داخلي وإقليمي أيضاً. فما هي السياقات التي أملت على قيادة العدو إجراء مناورة كبرى، تحاكي نشوب حرب متعددة الساحات، وترتكز على مواجهة حزب الله والجبهة الشمالية؟ وما هي الرسائل الكامنة في تبنّي الجيش سيناريو مواجهة قوات الرضوان التابعة لحزب الله، على أرض فلسطين، ومواجهة آلاف الصواريخ التي تتساقط عليها من عدة جبهات ودول في الوقت نفسه؟

المؤشر الأول إزاء خلفية إجراء المناورة يكمن في ما نقلته صحيفة «يديعوت أحرونوت» عن رئيس أركان الجيش أفيف كوخافي، الذي أعلن في مداولات داخلية أنه ينبغي إجراء المناورة، حتى لو كانت ستؤدي الى إصابة 1000 جندي بوباء الكورونا. وبرر موقفه بالقول لأنه «لا خيار بديل».

المسلّم به أن مناورة بهذا الحجم ووفق السيناريو الذي انطلقت منه، وفي ظل ما تشهده «إسرائيل» والمنطقة، من انتشار الوباء، هي بالتأكيد نتيجة تقدير وضع أجرته القيادة العسكرية. وخلصت في ضوئه الى بلورة قرار المناورة التي كان بالإمكان نظرياً تأخيرها عدة أشهر، وخاصة أن آخر مناورة مشابهة كانت قبل أكثر من سنتين. يعني ذلك، أنها نتاج مخاوف تهيمن على مؤسسة القرار السياسي في تل أبيب من سيناريوات قد تكون المنطقة مقبلة عليها، والمطلوب إزاءها رفع مستوى الاستعداد لأشدّها خطورة بالنسبة إلى «إسرائيل»، وخاصة أن من المهام التقليدية للمؤسسة العسكرية الإعداد لتوسيع نطاق الخيارات أمام القيادة السياسية.

منشأ تقدير المخاطر الكامنة في تطورات البيئة الإقليمية، على «الأمن القومي الإسرائيلي» في هذه المرحلة، يتجسد في فشل الرهان على مفاعيل العقوبات الأميركية التي كان ينبغي أن تؤدي، بحسب تقدير معهد أبحاث الأمن القومي لعام 2020، الى انتفاضة الشعب الإيراني، أو حرب أميركية تسقط نظام الجمهورية الإسلامية، أو خضوعه عبر الجلوس الى طاولة المفاوضات وفق الشروط الأميركية. إلا أن أياً من هذه السيناريوات لم يتحقق. بل ولم تؤدّ أيضاً الى تراجع الدعم العسكري الذي تقدمه لحزب الله ولبقيّة قوى المقاومة في المنطقة، وصولاً الى الامتناع عن إظهار أي مرونة تجاه القضايا الأساسية في المنطقة.
فشل الرهان على العقوبات يُعدّ استراتيجياً. وهو وضع «إسرائيل» وبقية حلفاء الولايات المتحدة أمام مسارات كانت مستبعدة جداً قبل أكثر من سنتين. وفرض عليهم البحث عن خيارات بديلة إضافية لاحتواء المسار التصاعدي لقدرات محور المقاومة، بالرغم من الهجوم الأميركي الذي لا يزال متواصلاً، بدءاً من إيران، مروراً بالعراق وسوريا، وصولاً الى لبنان.
بالموازاة، تبدّد الرهان الإسرائيلي أيضاً على المسار الذي انطلق في لبنان منذ 17 تشرين الأول من العام الماضي. إذ رأت فيه تل أبيب ــــ بصرف النظر عن المطالب المحقة التي رفعها مشاركون فيه ــــ فرصة مثالية لتحقيق مستويين من النتائج: عزل حزب الله سياسياً وحكومياً، وتجريد الحزب من جمهوره، وفرض قيود على خياراته وعلى تطور قدراته.

في المقابل، عمد حزب الله في ظل تفاقم الوضعين المالي والاقتصادي الى إظهار التصميم على تثبيت معادلة الردع التي تحمي لبنان والمقاومة من التهديد الإسرائيلي. وتجلّى ذلك، في تصميمه على الرد على استشهاد أحد مقاوميه في محيط مطار دمشق الدولي قبل أكثر من 100 يوم. وما يُضفي على هذا التصميم أهمية استثنائية في هذه المرحلة تحديداً، أن السياق الداخلي اللبناني يُمثِّل في المنظور الإسرائيلي فرصة يمكن الرهان عليها من أجل فرض قيود على حزب الله لدى دراسة خيارات الرد على اعتداءات إسرائيلية محددة، وهو ما يغري مؤسسة القرار في تل أبيب لتوسيع نطاق الاعتداءات التي تشنها في سوريا الى لبنان، والتأسيس أيضاً لتغيير المعادلة الداخلية في لبنان.

ليس أمراً عابراً أن تنطلق المناورة من سيناريو اقتحام قوات الرضوان (قوات النخبة في المقاومة) منطقة الجليل في شمال فلسطين المحتلة. وأن تكون مهمة الجيش الأولى صدّ هذا الاقتحام، ومن ثم الانتقال الى مرحلة المبادرة ــــ الرد، كما كشف الجيش عن ذلك، ونقلته التقارير الإعلامية الإسرائيلية. وكذلك التدرب على مواجهة سيناريو التعرض «لأسراب من الصواريخ الجوالة والطائرات المسيّرة الإيرانية التي هاجمتنا من سوريا ومن لبنان ومن دولتين» أخريين، يبدو أنهما العراق واليمن، بحسب ما أشارت الى ذلك تقارير أخرى. واستناداً الى سوابق يخشى العدو تكرارها بنسخ أشد خطورة، تبنى جيش الاحتلال أيضاً سيناريو تعرّض «إسرائيل» لهجوم صاروخي «مشابه للهجوم الذي تعرّضت له منشآت أرامكو في السعودية، لكن مضروباً بألف». بمعنى أن تتعرض «إسرائيل»، بحسب ما أكد المعلق العسكري في القناة «13»، ألون بن ديفيد، الى «آلاف الصواريخ الجوالة والطائرات المسيرة».

سيناريو المناورة يكشف أيضاً الدور الردعي الذي نجحت المقاومة في تحقيقه


تعني هذه السيناريوات العملانية، التي شكلت منطلق العدو في المناورة، أنها مبنية على فرضية تدحرج التطورات في المنطقة نحو السيناريو الأخطر. وهو ما يعيدنا الى إقرار قيادة العدو بفشل رهاناته، بدءاً من إيران، وصولاً الى لبنان. ويكشف سيناريو المناورة في هذه المرحلة بالذات عمق حضور خيار حزب الله باقتحام منطقة الجليل، لدى القيادتين السياسية والعسكرية. وأن حزب الله لا يزال يملك التصميم والقدرة على تنفيذ ذلك، وأن ما يشهده لبنان من تطورات داخلية لم ينجح في تبديد هذه المخاطر، إذا ما بادرت «إسرائيل» إلى ما يرى حزب الله أنه ينبغي الرد عليه بهذا المستوى.


الأهم في هذا السياق، هو أن سيناريو المناورة يكشف أيضاً الدور الردعي الذي نجحت المقاومة في تحقيقه، وأبرز تجلّياته حضوره لدى قيادة العدو التي ستضطر الى أن تأخذه بالحسبان لدى دراسة خياراتها العدوانية. وهو ما ساهم في تعزيز قوة ردع المقاومة في لبنان، في مواجهة بعض الخيارات التي يبدو أنها راودت قادة العدو في المرحلة السابقة. والقدر المتيقن أيضاً، أنه سيساهم أيضاً في كبح تدحرج أي مواجهة نحو الحرب، على فرض حصول مواجهة عسكرية ما.

على نفس الإيقاع، يحضر أيضاً سيناريو اتساع نطاق المواجهة العسكرية، الى حرب واسعة في المنطقة تتعرض بموجبها «إسرائيل» لآلاف الصواريخ الجوالة والدقيقة والطائرات المسيّرة عن بُعد. ويكشف ذلك أيضاً عن الدور الردعي الإقليمي لتحالف محور المقاومة، في مواجهة حرب أميركية ــــ إسرائيلية، في المنطقة، ابتداءً أو تدحرجاً. وبرزت تجلّيات ذلك في أكثر من محطة إقليمية. وبموجب ذلك، يتّضح ــــ وهو الأهم ــــ أن سيناريو «أسراب» الصواريخ الجوالة والدقيقة و«المسيَّرات»، يحفر عميقاً في وعي صناع القرار في تل أبيب.

تبقى مسألة ينبغي أن تبقى حاضرة لدى تقدير أي مستجدات تبدو لوهلة أنها تشكل فرصة ودافعاً للعدو، للمبادرة إلى خيارات عدوانية تهدف الى تغيير المعادلة المحلية (اللبنانية) والإقليمية بشكل جذري، وهي أن هناك مستجداً كان ولا يزال في مسار تصاعدي، وهو تغيّر معادلات القوة (بالمفهوم الواسع) بشكل جذري. وما السيناريوات التي انطلقت منها المناورة إلا أحد تجلّيات الإقرار بذلك. وشكّل هذا المتغيّر في معادلات القوة علامة لاغية إزاء بعض الخيارات، وعاملاً مُقيِّدا إزاء خيارات أخرى.

Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on September 29, 2020

Sayyed Nasrallah’s Full Speech on September 29, 2020
VIDEO HERE

Translated by Staff

Speech of Hezbollah’s Secretary General, His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, tackling the latest developments – Tuesday 9/29/2020

I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Satan. In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious the Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and prayers and peace be upon our Master and Prophet, the Seal of Prophets, Abi al-Qassem Muhammad Bin Abdullah and his good and pure household and his good and chosen companions and all the prophets and messengers.

Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you all.

I haven’t addressed you for a month, since the tenth of Muharram. Important developments and events have taken place during the past few days and weeks, putting me at your service, God willing, to tackle these developments and topics.

The first point:

Let me start with the first point and perform a moral duty towards Kuwait and the people of Kuwait. I start with the first point, which is to offer condolences over the departure of His Highness the Emir of Kuwait Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah to Kuwait, its people, the crown prince, the Emir’s family, the government, the National Assembly, and the people of Kuwait on this occasion.

Of course, we in Lebanon remember the late Emir’s personal and great role in ending the Lebanese civil war in the late 1980s. Likewise, the Lebanese people, us included, will never forget the distinguished position of the Emir, the government, the people, and the National Assembly of Kuwait during the July war and in the face of the “Israeli” aggression on Lebanon. The political position was clear and decisive. We will never forget their generous contribution to the reconstruction of what the Zionist aggression on Lebanon destroyed in 2006.

From our position as nationalists and a resistance movement in the face of the “Israeli” aggression and the Zionist project, we commend Kuwait’s coherent position, under the leadership of its late Emir, in the face of all the pressures imposed on Arab countries, especially the Gulf ones, to join the convoy of normalization.

Kuwait still maintains this honorable and coherent position that is consistent with its national, Arab, and Islamic commitments towards al-Quds and Palestine.

On this occasion, I ask Allah Almighty to grant the late Emir His mercy and forgiveness. I ask God Almighty to preserve Kuwait and its people and enable it to calmly transition to the new stage.

The second point:

We start with the local developments. This is also related to security. The second point concerns the events in the north. It begins with the security side. I call on the Lebanese to take note of what happened during the past few weeks in the town of Kaftoun where three of its youths and men were martyred. This in addition to the confrontations that took place between the Lebanese army and armed groups in the north, resulting in the martyrdom of Lebanese army officers and soldiers, as well as the great confrontation that took place in the Wadi Khaled area, fought by the Internal Security Forces, especially the Information Branch, with the support of the Lebanese army, achieving great accomplishments.

At this point, we, as Lebanese, must appreciate these efforts and these sacrifices, and we must also extend our condolences to the Lebanese Army leadership and the families of the martyrs of the Lebanese Army for the loss of their loved ones.

We must also commend these families for their patience, steadfastness, and enormous sacrifices in defending Lebanon, its safety and security. We must also praise the position of the people and their rallying around the army and security forces in the north, in the northern villages and towns where these confrontations took place.

By exposing these diverse groups, it has been revealed so far – from those killed, arrested, and identified – that there are groups made up of Lebanese, Syrians, and Palestinians who are armed with various weapons. According to the available information, quantities of explosive materials, weapons, and explosive belts were found with these groups. But the most dangerous were the mortar rounds and LAW missiles. This means that these groups were not only preparing for suicide attacks or small and limited operations here and there. But they were preparing themselves for a major military action.

In the coming days and weeks, investigations conducted by the security services might reveal to the Lebanese people the magnitude of the great achievement of the army, the internal security forces, and the Information Branch in the recent confrontations, as well as any calamity that was thwarted by the grace of God Almighty and the efforts of all these people in the north. In any case, we have to wait.

Regarding this point, if you remember correctly, I issued a warning a month ago and called on you to pay attention. I said that there was a revival of Daesh in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Unfortunately, some people responded with sometimes sharp, negative, and violent comments. In any case, hatred, blindness, and ignorance sometimes prevent some people from seeing the facts. This is primarily because they are unable to read what is happening in the region.

In our region, specifically after the “assassination of the era” by the United States of America that saw the targeting of martyr Commander Hajj Qassem Soleimani and martyr Commander Hajj Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, the Iraqi people’s demand for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq, and the decision of the Iraqi parliament in this regard, the US started reviving Daesh. If you notice since that time, Daesh has returned to Iraq, launching operations and taking control of some territories, mountains, and valleys, storming and setting up ambushes.

They are in Syria as well, in Syria’s Jazira region. Daesh was resurrected in many areas and started its operations. It is natural that it starts preparations in Lebanon to justify the continuing presence of US forces in the region under the rubric of the international coalition to confront ISIS. It is also that the battle is not between one country against another. Here lies the problem of reading the situation in Lebanon. Some people in Lebanon always view Lebanon as an island isolated from everything that is happening in the region.

Lebanon is part of the region – in terms of events and its fate, its past, present, and future as well. Therefore, when Daesh is revived, it is revived in the entire region, and this is what is happening. These large groups have been raided and arrested. They are still searching for other groups, while others have not emerged yet. All these belong to Daesh. The investigations proved that these groups pledged allegiance to Daesh and follow it. They received instructions to recruit, organize, start formations, and prepare, awaiting zero hour. We do not even know what exactly what was being prepared for our country.

In this context, I once again call for caution and to be aware of what is being prepared for the region. When the Americans reach a dead end while confronting the people of the region and when they sense failure, they resort to these methods that we are all familiar with. This matter needs attention, caution, and awareness. It also requires everyone to stand behind the military and security institutions to confront this imminent and approaching danger.

The third point:

The third point tonight concerns the southern border. Along the border with occupied Palestine, the enemy’s army is still in the highest state of alert, hiding, exercising extreme caution, and attention. This is a good thing. Perhaps this is the longest period of time that the enemy’s army experienced such suffering on our southern borders with occupied Palestine since the establishment of the “Israeli” entity that usurped Palestine in 1948. Its soldiers do not dare to move. Sometimes at night, we might notice a tank moving here or there. It is not clear whether there are soldiers in the tank because they use automatic vehicles and tanks. In any case, we are following up. Our decision is still standing. We are following up, watching, and waiting patiently because as I said on the tenth of Muharram the important thing is to achieve the goal. We will see what will come in the coming days and weeks.

The fourth point:

Another point related to the “Israeli” issue. A little while ago, the prime minister of the enemy’s government was speaking at a live broadcast before the United Nations. Before I entered this place to talk to you, the brothers told me what he said. Some of what he said was to incite the Lebanese people against Hezbollah. As usual, he took out his maps, locations, etc. He talked about a location here between Beirut and the southern suburbs of Beirut. He claimed that this place is where Hezbollah stores rockets and that it was near a gas station. He then warned the Lebanese that if an explosion happens, it will be similar to the port blast.

Because there is no time now, I will rely on the brothers to call. Hezbollah’s media relations department are supposed to start making calls. I am talking to you now, and they may have started or they will start contacting the various media outlets to meet at a close point at 10 p.m. Since I am still giving my speech and I do not want to disrupt it… In any case, anyone who would like to go to that area from now, there is no problem. We will allow the media to enter this facility and see what’s in it. Let the whole world discover Netanyahu’s lie live on air. Of course, he finished his speech a little while ago. If there are missiles there, and now I am talking to you, and its 8:43 p.m. according to my time.

I think that if Hezbollah has placed dozens of missiles or even one missile there, it will not be able to transfer it within half an hour from my announcement. Of course, this will not be a permanent policy; this does not bind us, Hezbollah and the resistance, to the principle that whenever Netanyahu talks about a place, we call the media to check it out. This means that Netanyahu will have something for you to do every day.

However, we accepted to resort to this method because we understand the sensitivities surrounding the explosion that took place at the port on August 4 and the lies, deception, and injustice that befell us after the explosion. Any local and foreign media outlet that wants to go can coordinate with the media relations department from now. And at 10 p.m., the media relations department in coordination with the brothers will determine the rendezvous point and head to the facility from there.

And whoever wants to go now to make sure that we are not removing the rockets, that is not a problem. In any case, he specified the exact location. This is only for the Lebanese to be aware in the battle of awareness and incitement – we do not produce rockets neither in the Beirut port nor near a gas station. We know exactly where to store our missiles.

I move to the political aspect. In the internal political aspect, we have the issue of the government – meaning the formation of the new government – the French initiative, and the recent conference by the French President Mr. Macron. I would like to talk about this topic.

First:

Let me explain to the Lebanese public what is happening. There are some details that I will, of course, not delve into.  There are also some facts that I will postpone talking about it to keep the doors open. But I would like to paint a clear picture – I think it will be sufficient – of what is happening. I will also talk about our remarks on the French President’s conference and where we are heading.

Regarding the government, after the port explosion, August 4, the resignation of Prime Minister Hassan Diab’s government, the visit of the French President to Lebanon, and the launch of the French initiative. Two meetings took place in the Pine Residence with the presence of the French President and eight parties, forces, bodies, or parliamentary blocs. In the second meeting, there were nine parties. An initiative was proposed. The text [of the initiative] is distributed and published in the media and on social media. People can read it, and there is nothing hidden regarding this topic. We all said we support and back the French initiative.

The first step is to form a new government. I will delve into the details shortly. The first step in the first stage is to designate a prime minister to form a government. I will say things as they are and mention names because the Lebanese people have the right to have clarity. Everything is clear because there are no secrets in Lebanon, nor am I revealing any. I am stating facts. Who are we going to designate?

We agreed. There is no problem with parliamentary blocs consulting each other. If Prime Minister Saad Hariri wants to be prime minister, it’s welcomed. We did not have a problem. If he liked to name someone, we see who he will name, and we discuss it among each other. We either accept it or not. This was the beginning of the discussions. Of course, during that period a club was formed. We call it the Prime Ministers Club.

رؤساء الحكومات السابقين يجتمعون الإثنين للبَت بموضوع تلبية دعوة لقاء بعبدا  (الجمهورية) - Lebanon News

We will talk about the club of the four former prime ministers more than once. Prime Minister [Salim] Al-Hoss (may God prolong his life) is still alive, and he is one of the former heads of government. Hence, this club is made up of the prime ministers of the previous four governments. Prime Minister Hassan Diab also became a former prime minister. So, they are two. However, this club started meeting.

They said that they met and sat with each other. We do not have a problem. On the contrary, we are calling for the broadest possible understanding between the political forces, parties, and blocs in Lebanon. They have representative blocs and they represent political forces, so they presented three names with the preference of Mr. Mustapha Adib, or that was our understanding. Of course, all indications suggested Mr. Mustapha Adib.

Of course, that night as people were all in a hurry and during the 15-day deadline, we asked about the man. The information we got was reasonable, good, and positives.

In order to facilitate matters, we did not set conditions or demanded to sit with him. We did not engage in a prior understanding. Now some people might say this was a mistake, while others might agree. This is another discussion. But we did so to make matters easy. We wanted to facilitate matters, and who is most important in the government? the prime minister. The most important thing in the government is the prime minister.

We relied on Allah Almighty and on the rule that – yes, we want a government to be formed with the widest representation and support so that it can do something at this difficult stage. We relied on God, and this step was accomplished. Excellent! Everyone was relaxed. The French President came on a second visit and met with some people after appointing Mr. Mustapha Adib. He said: “Please go ahead and begin. We want to complete this reform paper, etc.”

Lebanon faces hurdles to deliver cabinet on time | Arab News

Following the appointment of Mr. Mustapha Adib, protocol meetings with the parliamentary blocs took place, and the matter was concluded. The prime minister-designate was asked to do so. Of course, he is a respectable man with high morals, and I do not have any remarks on him.

He was told to wait for the parliamentary blocs to negotiate with since they are the one who will give their vote of confidence to the government. It is not enough just to give a name. there might be blocs that might not give a name, but they can give a vote of confidence.

However, they did not talk to anyone. According to my information, no discussions, meetings, or extrapolation of opinions took place. The President of the Republic later had to send for some heads of blocs or representatives of blocs to discuss them. It was considered that there was no reason – I will say why – to even consult with the President of the Republic, who is in fact here not a political force, but according to the constitution, a partner in forming the government.

This means that from the start the prime minister-designate should go to him and discuss with him, not bring him some files. He should discuss with him the distribution of portfolios, the names of the ministers, the nature of the government, the perception of the government. This never happened, not even once. It is as if the government should be formed and the President would be told that this is the government, these are the names, this is the distribution of the portfolios. Then, President Aoun would either sign on the government or not. There is no third option. If he signs, it means that this is a de facto government. Neither the distribution of portfolios nor the names were discussed with him. what does mean? What is the most important authority the president has following the Taif Agreement? It is taking part in the formation of the government. It means that it is over.

And here the French must pay attention to where they are making mistakes. This means that they are covering a political process that would have led to the elimination of the most important remaining powers of the President of the Republic in Lebanon.

And if President Aoun did not sign, there will be an upheaval in the country. The media and the opponents are ready, and there is French pressure. If President Aoun does not sign, he will be accused of disrupting [the formation] to support Gebran Basil. So, nothing happened. I don’t know if there were negotiations with the Progressive Socialist Party or the [Lebanese Forces]. But I know that there were negotiations with the blocs that are our friends and allies and are the parliamentary majority. There were negotiations with us – for this reason or that – because they cannot overpass this component and duo – Hezbollah and the Amal Movement.

We went to the discussions. Of course, the one who was negotiating with us was not the prime minister-designate. We had no problem negotiating with anyone that is acting on behalf of the prime minister-designate or the four former prime ministers. But former Prime Minister Saad Hariri was negotiating with us. Of course, the discussion was calm, objective, scientific, and careful. We understood several points related to the government since the beginning of the discussions. There were some differences in opinion. The first point is that the government will be composed of 14 ministers.

The second point is rotating the portfolios. So basically, it means give us the Finance Ministry. The third point is that the prime minister-designate, i.e. us, that is the club of the four former prime ministers will be the one naming the ministers of all the sects – not just Sunni or Shiite ministers. No, Sunni, Shiite, Druze, and Christian ministers. The club will name them all. The fourth point is that they will specify how the portfolios will be distributed. Brothers, how are you going to distribute the portfolios? What will the Muslims take? What will the Christians take? The Shiites, the Sunnis, the Druze, the Maronites, the Catholics, the Armenians? There is no answer. This is up to them. This means that us and the rest of the people in the country just take not that the government will be made of 14 ministers.

This was the result. The discussion unfolded in a respectful manner, but the result was that we take note that there will be 14 ministers, of the rotation, of the distribution of portfolios, and of the names of the ministers that will be representing the sects.

We engaged in the discussions, and we agreed on the number of the ministers. It was concluded that a government made up of 30 ministers is tiring, even 24 ministers is too much. But 14, this means you are handing one person two ministries, at a time when a minister is given one ministry and is barely succeeding in running it.

This is one of the problems in the country. The competent ministers who are able to run their ministries, why do you want to give a minister two ministries. Let there be 18 or 20 ministers. The discussions regarding the number remained open, but the other party insisted on 14 ministers, knowing that most of the parliamentary blocs who were later consulted by the President, were against having 14 ministers and wanted the broadest possible representation. 

We come to the second point: the rotation. We also disagreed on it. The discussion over the Finance Ministry has become known in the country. The third point, naming the ministers. Here, it is not intended only as naming the finance minister. Let us assume that certain portfolios are the responsibility of Christians, Sunnis, Shiites, or Druze ministers. They want to name those ministers, not the parliamentary blocs that represent these ministers’ sects or the parties that represent their sects. These ministers were elected by the Lebanese people and the people from their sects as well. But neither the sect nor the parties will name their ministers, they just have to take note.

Of course, we rejected this issue and was out of the question. It was not only the Shiite ministers. We consider this manner when someone wants to name all the ministers for all the sects in Lebanon a threat to the country.

Let’s go back a little bit. Let us talk about what the Taif Agreement, the constitutional powers, and customs tell you regarding the formation of the government. Talking about the formation of the government before the Taif Agreement is useless because we already have the Taif Agreement. Also talking about the formation of the government since the Taif Agreement until 2005 is useless; even though they might tell us that this is how it used to be during the Syrian tutelage or the Syrian administration.

From 2005 until today, most of the time you were a parliamentary majority and the main political forces in the country applying the Taif Agreement. The first government that was formed after the withdrawal of the Syrian forces from Lebanon was the government of Prime Minister Najib Mikati. So far, people would agree on a prime minister. The prime minister then negotiates with the people. He negotiates with them, and no one negotiates on their behalf. They agree on the number, the distribution of the portfolios. The parliamentary blocs or the parties taking part name then ministers. The prime minister never discussed the names.

There was an amendment to this behavior or this custom that took place in 2005 with the government of Prime Minister Hassan Diab. We accepted it when discussions began that Mr. Muhammad Safadi or other figures might be nominated. We accepted this. There is no problem when the blocs or parties name someone to be head a certain ministry, for example.

The prime minister-designate can say that this person is not suitable for this position and can ask for another name. We were open to this process before the government of Prime Minister Hassan Diab. We applied this with the government of Prime Minister Hassan Diab. And we are ready to apply it again.

This is a positive progress, and this strengthens the powers of the prime minister. This does not weaken the prime minister. This was the prevailing custom regarding the prime minister from 2005 until today. He would agree with the parliamentary blocs and the main political forces that want to take part in the government. they would agree on the portfolios and the distribution. They name their ministers, and he did not discuss the names.

Of course, this is good. Now, we can argue with the names and refuse some, and whoever you refuse we put aside and suggest other names. In fact, this is a strengthening of the premiership position, unlike any stage from the beginning of the Taif Agreement until today.

Whoever wants to use sectarian language and say this is weakening the premiership position, not at all. This happened for the first or the second time. We accept it and consider it logical and natural, and there is no problem.

This remained a point of contention – the issue of distributing the portfolios. It was the same thing. Even with regard to the names, a couple were proposed that we had no problem with. We also told them. We told them in the end, this is subject to discussion. We can solve it together.

For example, some wanted non-partisans. There is no problem. This can be discussed. They said we want people who have not taken part on previous governments, new people. There is no problem. By God, if the prime minister-designate does not agree with the names, we told them there is no problem. All this is to simplify and not complicate the matter.

In any case, the answer came after all the discussions and on the last day of the 15-day deadline, the government will contain 14 ministers, knowing that all this did were not discussed with His Excellency the President as far as I know. They did not agree with him on whether there would be 14 or 20 ministers or how the portfolios would be distributed. Nothing of this sort.

We were back to the beginning again – a government made up of 14 ministers, rotation, they name the ministers, and distribute portfolios.

For us, this was not acceptable at all. And this is where things got stuck. Of course, you can discuss this method with relation to the customs from 2005 until today. To those who are talking about customs, these were never the customs in forming a government. you can even discuss this in relation to the constitution which includes an article that the government should include representatives of all the sects. This method is not in the Taif Agreement. The government, thus, became the authority and the decision maker. They said all the sects are represented in the government through representatives representing these sects.

I do not wish to infer from this text contained perhaps in Article 95, but rather I would like to say that at least debate this constitutionally. In any case, I do not want to delve into a constitutional debate, but these were not the norms that prevailed from 2005 until now.

Why do you now want to establish new norms that exclude parliamentary blocs, the parliamentary majority, the Lebanese president, and the political forces and confiscate the formation of the government in the interest of one group that represents part of the current parliamentary minority, even if we respect it and respect its representation and position? These are, however, new norms that go the constitution and democracy that Mr. Macron is demanding of us.

During the last few days of the 15-day deadline, the French intervened, calling everyone and pressuring them. They spoke to leaders and heads of political parties. Of course, the channel of communication with us was different. President Macron made good effort. But in which direction is that effort heading toward?

Regardless of the discussion that took place with others, I am talking about the discussion that took place with us. ‘Why are you obstructing? We want you to help and facilitate – of course, all this in a language of diplomacy that included pressure – otherwise, the consequences will be dire.’ This sort of talk.

We asked them: Our dear ones, our friends, does the French initiative say that the government has to have 14 ministers? They said: No. Does the French initiative say that the club of the four former prime ministers should name the ministers of all the sects in the government? They said: No. Does the French initiative say anything about this club distributing the portfolios among the sects? They said: No. Does the French initiative say anything about rotating the portfolios and take the Finance Ministry from this sect and give it to that sect? They said: No.

We have wished for a narrow government. 14, 12, 10, 18. The numbers are with you and how you call this matter is up to you.

So how are we blocking the French initiative? This is the discussion that took place between us. Since they spoke about this in the media, I am speaking about this on the media. They said, it is true. This, however, was never mentioned, and the text is there to prove it.

O Lebanese people, the text is on social networking sites. The French reform paper, which is the main article of the French initiative, does not include a government of 14 ministers, does not include rotation, does not indicate who appoints ministers, and it does not include who distributes the portfolios. These do not exist.

Allow me to continue laying down the details, and then I will mention our remarks. We reached a point where the French said: ‘We understand what you are saying. It is logical that the finance minister is a Shiite. There is no problem.’

I will not delve into discussion of why Amal and Hezbollah insist on this point. This point alone needs an explanation. But it will become clearer in my future addresses.

But allow the prime minister-designate to be the one to name. This means the club of the four former prime ministers. We told them that we are looking for a Shiite minister born of Shiite parents. We are insisting on a Shiite minister because it is a matter related to the decision-making process. Who does this minister follow when it comes to making decisions?

The club of the former heads of government can bring any Shiite employee who is 100% affiliated and loyal to them. But this is not what we are looking for. We are suggesting that the sect itself will name the minister responsible for a certain portfolio. For example, if a certain portfolio belongs to the Shiites, then the duo will be the one naming their minister. The prime minister-designate can reject this minister for as much as he wants until we agree on a suitable minister for this responsibility.

Of course, the idea was totally rejected by the club of the former prime ministers.

Later, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri came out and said that he accepts for one time that the finance minister be a Shiite, but the prime minister-designate will be the one to name him. We were already over this five days ago and that he drank the poison. There is no need for you, former prime minister, to drink the poison. God bless your heart, and may He keep you healthy. We can always go back and reach an understanding. There is no problem. But this is not the solution. 

Then, the three former prime ministers say that they do not agree with what former Prime Minister Saad Hariri said. The whole matter is incomprehensible, “What do we want with it”.

We reached a point where there is a problem; we do not agree on the form of the government. We do not agree on the names of the ministers, on the rotation, or the distribution of the portfolios. The prime minister-designate, of course, apologized. I would like to point out that there was an idea of a fait accompli. I’m saying this so that I don’t accuses someone in precise. Let us form the government and ignore the rest. Let us name the ministers and then head to the President to sign. If he does not sign, he will face an upheaval. He will sign, though, because the Christians are in a difficult situation. The Free Patriotic movement is in a difficult situation, and the President wants his term to succeed. There are French pressure for the President to sign.

In any case, during the discussions between us and the side of the prime minister-designate, the man was clear. He said, ‘I came to be supported and positive and my government be supported by a large coalition so that I can help. I do not want to confront anyone, and if there is no agreement regarding the government, I will not form a confrontational government. The man was honest in his position and commitment, and he apologized.

Of course, we hoped that he would give more opportunities. Whether he could not handle it anymore or was asked to do so are details that I have no knowledge about.

I am still stating the facts and I will soon make our remarks.

Of course, the wave is already known since before the apology. The mass media machines and the writers, those groups that the American spoke about, had already begun to hold people responsible.

Whoever has a problem with the duo, Amal and Hezbollah, blamed the Shiite duo. There were those that focused on Hezbollah and those who attack President Aoun. The attack here focused on President Aoun and the duo, Amal and Hezbollah, because there were political orders issued.

The French were upset and announced that President Macron would like to hold a press conference. The Lebanese waited to see who the French would hold responsible. We all heard, we all heard President Macron’s press conference and the questions the Lebanese journalists bombarded him with.

I am done with listing the facts, and I would like to comment. In this context, the following points should be made clear to all:

First: The offer during last month, because the 15-day deadline has expired and another 15 days were added to it, so this makes a month. What was on the table? The formation of a salvation government and not to form a club of former prime ministers whereby all parliamentary blocs and parties in the country as well as the Parliament Speaker and the President hand over the country to this club unconditionally, without any discussions and questions. 

What kind of government? what kind of distribution? What is its policy? There is no discussion. Just go and accept the government that they will form; otherwise, sanctions and French pressure will follow. You will be held responsible before the Lebanese people and before the international community, and you will appear as the ones obstructing. This is what was on offer last month, and of course it was based on a wrong reading.

The most important thing about this offer was whether the Amal-Hezbollah duo would accept or not. I will talk about things frankly. Basically, they did not speak with any other party. They did not discuss or negotiate, and they considered that if the Amal-Hezbollah duo agreed, no one will be able to stand in the way of this project. In the end, if President Aoun wants to talk about constitutional powers, he will be left alone, confronted and pressured. I am stating this just for you to know what position we were in.

So, the offer on the table during the past month was not a salvation government, but rather a government named by the club of former prime ministers, with 14 ministers and a board of directors of specialists and employees whose political decision absolutely stems from one party that is part of the parliamentary minority in Lebanon and represents one political team that is considered the largest group of Lebanon’s Sunni community. However, it is not correct to say that it represents the whole Sunni sect. There are many Sunni representatives who were elected by Sunni votes and have representation in the Sunni community.

This was what was on offer, and everyone was required to accept it. Of course, there was a misreading here – the people get scared, the country was in a difficult situation, people are on the streets, and pressure and sanctions were coming. The two ministers, Ali Khalil and Youssef Fenianos, were slapped with sanctions. There were also threats to sanction 94 people, the French pressure, etc.

Thus, we are a party that they take into account. So, they are telling you that if you obstruct, there will be grave consequences regarding this matter. This is how the discussions with us went. We don’t know how it went with the rest – what they threatened or pressured them with. This is first.

A. Regarding this point, I would like to say this method will not succeed in Lebanon, whoever its supporters and sponsors are, be it America, France, Europe, the international community, the Arab League, the whole world, the universe. This method does not work in Lebanon. You are wasting time.

B. President Macron accused us of intimidating the people. Those who are accusing us of intimidation are the ones who, during the past month, have practiced a policy of intimidation against the leaders, the blocs, the political parties and forces, in order to force a government of this kind. They resorted to threats, punishments, and heading towards the worse. You saw the language they used, and this was shown in the media. This does not work.

Second: We rejected this formula not because we want to be in the government or not. The main question that was before us was, is it in the interest of Lebanon and its people and saving Lebanon? Now we have two stages. One stage moves from bad to good and one from bad to worse. Where are we heading towards? Who are we handing the rescue ship over to? Who is the captain? The four prime ministers were prime ministers since 2005 up until a few months ago. Is this wrong or right? They have been prime ministers for 15 years. They are not the only ones to bear the responsibility. We all bear the responsibility. But they bear the bulk of the responsibility because they were heads of government and had ministers to represent them in the government.

On the contrary, I hold them responsible and also ask them to take responsibility, not to run away from bearing the responsibility, to cooperate, to understand, and join hands with us. Can saving the country be achieved with you handing over the country to the party that bears the bulk of the responsibility for the reason we are here now and for the situation over the past 15 years? What logic is this? Whose logic is this?

Third: To us, here I will talk about Hezbollah specifically. Regarding our brothers in the Amal movement, they have always taken part in governments even before we participated. In 2005, you know that we were not in an atmosphere to take part in governments. After 2005, why?

During the 2018 electoral campaign, I spoke a lot about this issue, and I said that we should take part in the governments, not greed for a position, a ministry, salary, or money. Thank God, Allah has given us from his grace. We do not need salaries from the state, budgets, or this state’s money. However, I spoke the reason clearly. Now, I will add a second reason.

The reason we were talking about is to protect the resistance. We have explained this, and there is no need to repeat it. Now, some of our loving friends might say that Hezbollah does not need to take part in the government to protect the resistance. This is a respectable point of view, but we disagree with this opinion. More than one friend has said this. But we disagree with them. Why?

We have to take part in the government to protect the resistance and prevent another May 5, 2008 government from emerging. Who were in the May 5, 2008 government? The people who want to form the new government, a government similar to the May 5, 2008 government.

A dangerous decision was taken by the May 5, 2008 government that would have led to a confrontation between the Lebanese Army and the resistance. It was an American-“Israeli”-Saudi project. This matter was overcome. Frankly, we are not afraid the leadership of the army, the army establishment, its officers, or its soldiers. This is a national institution. Yes, we have the right to be cautious of the political authority and the political decision, and we decided to take part in the government to protect the resistance. This is first.

The second reason that I will add now is, during all the previous discussions, Hezbollah was admonished for choosing to resist and fight in Syria, Iraq, Palestine, etc. We were admonished for neglecting the economic situation, the financial situation, and the living situation. Accusations and equations were formulated – the arms in exchange for corruption, and the economy in exchange for the resistance. this sort of talk.

I do not want to discuss this remark, but I want to use it to say that we cannot be absent from this government today, frankly, out of fear for what is left of Lebanon, economically, financially and on every level. We fear for Lebanon and the Lebanese people. I mentioned that I do not fear for Hezbollah. We are afraid for the country, for the people, and the future of this country. How?

What if a government we are not sure whether it believes in blankly signing on the terms of the International Monetary Fund was formed? I am not accusing anyone, but this is a possibility. I know people’s convictions. Should this be allowed? Should we as a parliamentary bloc in the country give our vote of confidence to a government I already know would blankly sign with the IMF without any negotiations and the people should agree and sign? Do we not have the right to be afraid of a government that, under the pretext of the financial situation, could sell state property?

This is suggested in some plans – selling state property and privatization under the pretext that we want to bring money to pay off the debt and the deficit, etc. Don’t we have the right to be afraid of such a government? I tell you, in the previous governments where we were the half or the majority and not the third that disrupted, we used to always have disagreements. We are not alone on the issue of increasing the Value Added Tax.

If a government was formed in the way it was going to be formed a few days ago, the first decision would have been to increase VAT on everything. The tax policy would have been imposed on the people. And we promised the Lebanese people that we will not allow or accept it. Will the people be able to handle a new VAT?

A few cents were added to the WhatsApp application, and the people took to the streets on October 17th. Don’t we have the right to be afraid of a government when we do not know what will become of the depositors’ money?

No, my dears, we fear for our country, our people, state property, and the depositors’ money. We have concerns regarding the conditions of the IMF, and we are afraid of going from bad to worse. I am not claiming to have magical solutions. We have proposed alternatives related to oil derivatives from Iran, which will save the Lebanese treasury billions of dollars, and are related to going eastward without leaving the West – if possible, with Russia, china, Iraq, Iran, etc. They were concerned about these proposals, especially the Americans.  There are alternative propositions. But we are not saying that we are the alternative. We are calling on everyone to cooperate.

But, frankly, we can no longer, due to the resistance or anything else, turn our backs, close our eyes, and accept anyone to form a government and run the country and manage the financial and economic situations. This is no longer permissible at all. Therefore, to us, the issue is not a matter of power or being the authority. This is in the past, and these are also principles for what is to come, when we talk about any government that will be formed in the future.

Regarding President Macron’s conference, I will discuss the content and the form. I will quickly read them.

1- In terms of content, the French president held the Lebanese political forces responsible for disrupting the initiative. I repeat and ask him what we asked his delegates. Did the French initiative say that the four former heads of government alone should form the government and impose it on the political blocs and the Lebanese President, determine portfolios and distribute them, and name ministers from all the sects? Yes or no? The answer given to us was “no.” This was not in the French initiative. Then I look for the one responsible for causing the first stage to fail – those who benefited from the French initiative and pressure to impose such a government, to impose new customs, and to score political gains that they weren’t able to achieve in the past 15 years with your [French] cover and pressure.

If you knew and understood what was happening, then this is a catastrophe and no longer an initiative. There is a project for a group to take control of the whole country and eliminate all political forces. And if you were not aware of this, it is fine. Now you are aware, so deal with the issue in the second stage of the French initiative. Hence, there is no need to blame everyone for being responsible for the failure. You have to specify exactly who bears the responsibility!

2- When you blamed the failure on all the political forces, I do not want to defend Hezbollah, on the contrary, I wish that President Macron says that Hezbollah is the one that caused the failure and pardon the rest of the political forces. O brother, there are political forces in Lebanon that were not even consulted or negotiated with. They do not know what is happening. We, who were negotiating did not know the names and the portfolios, how will they know when they are clueless? How can they be held responsible? Later when it comes to the form, you’ll be accused. You accused all the heads of institutions. Fine, the Parliament Speaker is part of the duo. But where did the President make a mistake? Where did he fall short for them to hold him accountable? He [Macron] held everyone responsible. He said heads of institutions and political forces. This includes the Lebanese President. Where did the man go wrong? What were his shortcomings to be held responsible? He was not even informed about the government, the distribution of the portfolios, and the names of the ministers!

3- We are being held responsible and taking the country to the worse situation. No, on the contrary. What we did was prevent the country from going from bad to worse. We are still in a bad situation, and we hope that the initiative rethinks its way of thinking and the Lebanese people cooperate with each other so that we can move from bad to good.

Al-Quds News Agency – News: Hezbollah to Macron: “Hold your limits!”

4- What are the promises that we made and did not fulfill? A paper was presented on the table. Our brother, Hajj Muhammad Raad, may God protect him, the head of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, and the rightly representative of Hezbollah, of course read them. Frankly, he said: We agree with 90% of what is in the paper. Macron asked him if he was sure that we agree on 90 %. He said, yes. Of course, they did not specify the 10% that we disapproved. But let us assume that we said we agree 100%, this paper does not include this means and the formation of the government. Then, Mr. Macron, what did we promise and commit to and not keep it for us to be not respectable people who do not respect their promises? This is the harshest thing to be said. At the beginning, you said a national unity government. Then, you back tracked. We understood that. Some said it was a mistake in translation. Others said it was American and Saudi pressure. Fine. The best thing you said is that it should be a government made up of independent people with important competencies. But who will name these independent individuals? The initiative did not mention who will name them. No one has agreed with anyone on the process of naming these ministers.

You do not want the parties to name them. But former Prime Minister Saad Hariri is head of a party, former Prime Minister Najib Mikati is the leader of a party, President Fouad Siniora is a member of a party. Why is one party allowed to name ministers while the rest are not allowed?

Your Excellency the President and all the Lebanese at the table, we have not committed ourselves to pursuing a government whatever it is. We have not committed ourselves to accepting to hand over the country to some government. No one agreed with anyone how the government will be formed and who will name ministers. This was not mentioned in the plan or in the initiative. This initiative was used to impose this thought on the political blocs and the Lebanese parties.

Our friends and foes, Your Excellency, the French President, know that we fulfill our promises, our commitments, and our credibility to both the enemy and the friend. The manner in which we conduct our dealings is known. When we promise, we are known to fulfill our promises and sacrifice in order to fulfill our promises. We might upset our friends and allies to fulfill our promises. I do not want to give examples, but this is a well-known topic.

One of the points that I want to comment on is that no one should use promises of financial aid to write off the main political forces in the country and sidestep the election results. President Macron says: The Amal Movement and Hezbollah, Hezbollah and Speaker Berri, the Shiites must choose Democracy or worst [situation].

We chose democracy. What you ask of us is inconsistent with democracy. If elections are not democracy, then what is democracy? Democracy in 2018 produced a parliamentary majority. You, Mr. President, are asking the parliamentary majority to bow and hand over the country to the minority, to a part of the parliamentary minority. We chose the parliamentary and municipal elections and chose the parliament. We chose partnership. We did not choose the worst or war. We did not attack anyone. The Zionists are the ones who launched a war on our country, occupied our land, and confiscated our goods, and they are the ones who are threatening our country.

We did not go to Syria to fight civilians. We went to Syria with the approval of the Syrian government to fight the groups that you say are terrorist and takfiri, and which France is part of the international coalition that is fighting them. You are in Syria illegally and without the approval of the Syrian government. We did not go to fight civilians in Syria. We are fighting there to defend our country, to defend Lebanon, Syria, and the region against the most dangerous project in the history of the region after the Zionist project, which is the project of takfirist terrorism. We are not part of the corrupt class. We did not take money from the state’s funds. The source of our money is known. It is no secret. We do not have funds, financial revenues, or partisan projects that we want to protect. Everyone else is free to say whatever they want about themselves.

But we do not accept anyone to speak with us in this language or thinking of us in this way. When we talk about obstruction and facilitation, we accepted the appointment of Mr. Mustapha Adib without prior understandings and conditions. We only built on goodwill. But this means that we are heading towards compromise and facilitations. As for surrender, it is a different story. Blindly handing over the country is another matter.

We are not terrorizing or intimidating anyone in Lebanon. Unfortunately, President Macron stated this, even if it came in the context of being skeptical about the election results. You can ask your embassy and your intelligence services in Lebanon. They will tell you how small Lebanon is and how many politicians, media outlets, social networking sites, and newspapers insult us and falsely accuse us day and night. They are living and are not afraid of anyone. If they were afraid, they would not dare open their mouths against Arab countries under your protection and are your friends and allies. No one dares write a tweet to express an opposing stance against normalization, or support, or criticize a government, king, or prince. No, we are not intimidating anyone. If anyone is afraid, it is their business. But we are not intimidating anyone. You can come see for yourself and ask the people in the country.

5- The last point in the matter. I hope that the French administration will not listen to some of the Lebanese, and if it has this point of view to deal with it. Not everything is – Iran asked to block the French initiative, Iran requested strictness in naming ministers, Iran asked the duo to insist on the Ministry of Finance. This is nonsense and baseless. Iran is not like this. Iran is not like you. Iran does not interfere in the Lebanese affairs. We are the decision-makers when it comes to Lebanese affairs. We decide what we want to do in regarding matters in Lebanon. We, in Hezbollah, and the duo, Hezbollah and Amal, and we with our allies decide.

Iran does not interfere or dictate. At the very least, in the past 20 years and more than 20 years. I am talking about a long time ago, ever since I took the post of secretary general because the direct contact is with me. From 1992, anyone who spoke to Iran, Iran told them to speak with the brothers in Lebanon – talk to them, discuss with them, the decision is theirs. Every once in a while, they point to an Iranian-American agreement. Hezbollah is disrupting and waiting [an Iranian-American agreement]. There is neither an American-Iranian agreement nor American-Iranian negotiations. At the very least, in the elections, this is settled. The Iranians announced this. Iran does not want to pressure France for a certain interest in the Security Council. What is this nonsense! If this ignorance will continue and this wrong way of thinking remains, this means we will never reach any results in Lebanon because wrong introductions will always lead to wrong results.

Mr. Macron, if you want to search outside Lebanon for the one who caused the failure of your initiative, then look for the Americans who imposed sanctions and are threatening to impose sanctions. Look for King Salman and his speech at the United Nations.

Regarding the form, on what basis did you say that all political forces, the heads of constitutional institutions committed treason and betrayal – regardless of the translation? How? Who said they committed treason?

1- First, we don’t allow anyone to accuse us and say that we committed treason. We categorically reject and condemn this condescending behavior against us and all the political forces in Lebanon. We do not accept neither this language nor this approach. We do not accept anyone doubting whether we are respectable people and a respectable party or whether we respect our promises and respect others. We do not accept anyone to accuse us of corruption. If the French friends have files on ministers from Hezbollah, deputies from Hezbollah, and officials from Hezbollah that we took money from the state, I accept, go ahead, and present them to the Lebanese judiciary. We will hand over anyone who has a corruption file of this sort. And this is a real challenge, and I have spoken about this a hundred times, and I will repeat and say it again.

But the rhetoric of the corrupt class, the corrupt political class, and the corrupt political forces is not acceptable. We welcomed President Macron when he visited Lebanon and welcomed the French initiative, but not for him to be a public prosecutor, an investigator, a judge, and a ruler of Lebanon. No, we welcomed President Macron and the French initiative as friends who love Lebanon, want to help it emerge from its crises, and want to bring different points of view closer. This means friendship, care, mediation, brotherhood, and love. But there is never a mandate for anyone, not for the French President or for anyone to be a guardian, a ruler, or a judge of Lebanon. It is not to my knowledge that the Lebanese have taken a decision of this kind. That is why we hope that this method, form, and content be reviewed.

In this part, I conclude and say that we welcomed the French initiative. And today, His Excellency the President extended. It is also welcomed. We still welcome the French initiative, and we are ready for dialogue, cooperation, openness, and to hold discussions with the French, with all the friends of Lebanon, and with all the political forces in Lebanon. But the bullying that was practiced during the past month, surpassed the facts that took place during the past month. This cannot continue; otherwise, we will not reach a conclusion. We are ready, and we hope for this initiative to be successful, and we support its continuation. We are betting on it as everyone else. But I call for the reconsideration of the method, the way of action, the understanding, the analysis, the conclusion, and even the management and the language of communication. The most important thing is respect and people’s dignities.

In the past two days, the national dignity was violated. There are people who are angry at parties and at a political class. They have the right to be angry, but there was something else. When anyone generalizes an idea to include everyone, institutions, parties and political forces, this in fact violates national dignity. This is unacceptable. We know that the French are moralists and diplomatic and speak in a beautiful language. Even if the content is a little harsh, yet they try to beautify it. I do not know what happened on Sunday night.

In any case, we are open to anything that benefits our country. Now in the new phase, it is natural after what happened that the parliamentary blocs will return and talk to each other, consult and communicate. The French say that they will continue with the initiative. That’s good. But what are the ideas? What are the new foundations? I will not present neither ideas nor solutions, nor will I set limits for us as Hezbollah because this issue needs to be discussed with our allies and our friends. But we must all not despair. We must work together and understand one another. We still insist on everyone’s cooperation and everyone’s understanding, as well as positivity among everyone so that we can cross over from a bad stage to a good one and not from bad to worse.

The fifth point:

I will say a few words in this last section. We must say something about this. In the past weeks, a new development took place in the region – the Kingdom of Bahrain, the State of Bahrain joined the caravan of normalization with the United Arab Emirates. We must praise the position of the people of Bahrain. The youth took to the streets despite the repression and dangers. The religious scholars in Bahrain openly published a list of their names and clearly and strongly condemned this normalization. We must speak highly of Bahraini religious scholars and leaders inside of Bahrain and abroad, headed by His Eminence Ayatollah Sheikh Isa Qassim (may God protect him), the parties and forces, the political associations, various figures, and some representatives in the House of Representatives.

Of course, this is an honorable position. This is Bahrain, and these are the people of Bahrain. The government, the king, the administration, or the authority that took this decision, we all know that this authority does make its own decision in the first place. It is dealt with as one of the Saudi provinces. Our bet is on the Bahraini people and pave the way for our bet on others. Of course, salutations to the patient, courageous, dear, and loyal people of Bahrain.

Despite their wounds and the presence of large numbers of their youth, religious scholars, leaders, and symbols being in prisons, they did not remain silent. They were not afraid. They expressed their position courageously, braved the bullets, and were prepared to be arrested. They said the word of truth that resonated in a time of silence, betrayal, and submission. We repeat and say that our bet is on the people.

There are honorable positions being expressed in the Arab world: the official and popular Tunisian position, the official and popular Algerian position, and other positions in more than one country and place.

Of course, today we want to appeal to the Sudanese people, whose history we know, the history of their sacrifices, their jihad, their struggle against the colonialists, and their tragedies. Do not allow them to subjugate you in the name of the terror list or the economic situation. The people of Sudan, its parties, and the elites must issue a statement because it seems that the country most eligible now to be on the line [of normalization] is Sudan.

In any case, even if governments normalized, they see it as a great achievement. There is no doubt that this is a bad thing. But this is not the basis of the equation. Our bet lies on the people. This is the basis. Camp David is more than forty years old. But are the Egyptian people normalizing? What about the Jordanian people and normalization? There is no normalization. Neither the Egyptians nor the Jordanians normalized.

The ruler of the Emirates says, “We are tired of wars and sacrifices.”

O my dear, you neither fought nor made sacrifices. The Palestinians, the Egyptians, the Lebanese, and the Jordanians are the ones who made sacrifices. These are the people that made sacrifices and did not normalize.

And as long as this is the people’s choice and as long as the Palestinian people hold on to their rights, we are not concerned about everything that is happening in the region. Those who normalized and those who are now standing in line have decidedly lost their Akhira [afterlife]. Their worldly calculations will fail, and they will discover that even their worldly accounts are wrong. These accounts will not last.

There is no time left to explain this point. Until here is enough. However, this meaning will be confirmed in the near future.

May Allah grant you wellness. Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you.

لماذا استعجلت أميركا و«إسرائيل» ترسيم الحدود مع لبنان؟

 د. عصام نعمان

أعلن رئيس مجلس النواب نبيه بري منتصفَ الأسبوع الماضي عن إتفاق إطار لبدء مفاوضات بين لبنان و«إسرائيل» بشأن ترسيم الحدود البرية والبحرية بينهما تحت رعاية الأمم المتحدة وبوساطة الولايات المتحدة، مؤكداً انه ليس اتفاقاً نهائياً، وانّ الجيش اللبناني سيتولى المفاوضات برعاية رئيس الجمهورية العماد ميشال عون وأي حكومة عتيدة.

ملف المفاوضات بين لبنان ودولة العدو فُتح سنة 2010، وتواصلت بشأنه اتصالات متقطعة نحو عشر سنوات الى أن وافق الطرفان، بفعل وساطة أميركية، على اتفاق إطار في 9/7/2020 يُحدّد الأسس التي تبدأ بموجبها المفاوضات في 14 الشهر الحالي تحت علم الأمم المتحدة في مقرّ قوات الطوارئ الدولية «يونيفيل» في بلدة الناقورة الحدودية اللبنانية.

أسئلة كثيرة طُرحت حول الدوافع والمرامي التي حملت أميركا، ومن ورائها «إسرائيل»، على تعجيل البدء بالمفاوضات قبل نحو شهر من موعد الانتخابات الرئاسية الأميركية، وفي غمرة جائحةٍ كورونية عاتية ضربت كِلا الدولتين وتسبّبت باضطرابات سياسية وأمنية وبخسائر اقتصادية.

لعلّ أبرز الدوافع والمرامي ثمانية:

أولاً، فشلُ الضغوط التي مارستها أميركا لحمل لبنان على اعتماد خطةٍ طرحها مبعوثها فريدريك هوف سنة 2012 لقسمة المنطقة البحرية المتنازع عليها ومساحتها 860 كيلومتراً مربعاً على أساس أن تكون حصة لبنان منها 500 كيلومتر و«إسرائيل» 360 كيلومتر، لكن لبنان رفض الخطة لكون كامل المساحة المذكورة واقعة برمّتها ضمن مياهه الإقليمية.

ثانياً، فشلُ الاعتداءات العسكرية الإسرائيلية طوال السنوات العشر الماضية، لا سيما حرب 2006، في حمل لبنان على تغيير موقفه الرافض لمطامع «إسرائيل» وضغوطها.

ثالثاً، مباشرةُ «إسرائيل» في التنقيب عن النفط والغاز في المياه الإقليمية الفلسطينية المحاذية لحدود لبنان الجنوبية، وإقامة منشآت لاستثمار الإنتاج، والتلويح بتمديد عمليات التنقيب الى المنطقة الاقتصادية الخالصة اللبنانية ما أدّى إلى إعلان السيد حسن نصرالله موقفاً صارماً بعزم المقاومة على الردّ بقوة ساحقة على العدوان الإسرائيلي ما يعني تدمير المنشآت البحرية التي أقامها العدو.

رابعاً، إقدامُ العدو، بعد إنجازه إقامة منشآته النفطية البحرية، على عقد اتفاق مع قبرص واليونان ومصر لإنشاء أنبوب بحري لنقل الغاز الى اليونان ومن ثم الى إيطاليا لتموين دول أوروبا بهذه المادة الاستراتيجية الأمر الذي يستدعي توفير حماية كاملة لمنشآنه البحرية وذلك بحلّ الخلاف على ترسيم الحدود مع لبنان تفادياً لتدمير منشآته من قِبل حزب الله.

خامساً، تأكّد العدو الصهيوني من تعاظم قدرات حزب الله إذ أصبح في مقدور صواريخه الدقيقة ضرب العمق الإسرائيلي بما يحتويه من مرافق حيوية كالموانئ والمطارات والمصانع والقواعد العسكرية. وكان لافتاً في هذا السياق تصريح لوزير الأمن بني غانتس محذراً من فعالية قدرات حزب الله العسكرية وضرورة عدم الاستخفاف بها.

سادساً، لاحظ العدو أنّ لبنان يعاني منذ مطالع العام الحالي انهياراً اقتصادياً واضطرابات سياسية ما ينعكس سلباً على مركزه التفاوضي ويتيح لـِ «إسرائيل» فرصة نادرة لاستغلالها في سياق محاولاتها المتواصلة للاستيلاء على مساحة واسعة من المياه الإقليمية اللبنانية حيث كميات هائلة من الغاز والنفط.

سابعاً، تُدرك «إسرائيل» أنّ دونالد ترامب هو أقوى وأفضل رئيس أميركي ساندها وموّلها وسلّحها بسخاء منقطع النظير، لكن بقاءه في البيت الأبيض غير مضمون إذ قد يخسر أمام منافسه الديمقراطي جو بايدن. لذا فالأفضل لها انتهاز وجوده في البيت الأبيض واستغلال شبقه للبقاء فيه بإغرائه بتحقيق «انتصارات» خارجية لتوظيفها في الانتخابات الرئاسية، وبأنّ لبنان هو أحد المواقع المتاحة – في ظنّهاــ لتحقيق «انتصار مضمون». من هنا يمكن تفسير تدخل إدارة ترامب مع المسؤولين اللبنانيين لإقناعهم بالقبول بإطارٍ للمفاوضات يبدو مراعياً مصالح بلادهم.

ثامناً، يصعب على المنظومة الحاكمة في لبنان، وسط الانهيار الاقتصادي والمالي الذي تعانيه البلاد، ان ترفض عرضاً للبدء بمفاوضات أولية مع «إسرائيل» وفق إطار يراعي شروط لبنان وقد يؤدّي إلى تمكينه من مباشرة التنقيب عن الغاز والنفط في منطقة غنية بهما، مع العلم أنّ المفاوضات قد تطول وميزان القوى المائل حالياً لمصلحة خصوم أميركا في المنطقة قد يميل أكثر لمصلحة أطراف محور المقاومة ما يؤدّي إلى تعزيز مركز لبنان التفاوضي حيال «إسرائيل».

غير أنّ إعلان الرئيس بري، حليف حزب الله، للاتفاق –الإطار حمل خصوم الحزب على انتقاد بري من جهة والتحذير من تداعيات الاتفاق على حقوق لبنان في أرضه المحتلة من جهة أخرى وذلك على النحو الآتي:

ــ جرى انتقاد بري لاستعماله مصطلح «إسرائيل» بدلاً من العدو او الكيان الصهيوني ما يوحي – في ظنّ الناقدين – أنّ رئيس مجلس النواب بات متهاوناً حيال عدوانيتها. والحال أنّ بري كشف أسس الاتفاق – الإطار الذي يضمّ أطرافاً عدةً، بينها «إسرائيل»، فلا يُعقل تضمينه مصطلحات عدائية ضدّ أحدها.

ــ أشار منتقدون إلى تصريحٍ لوزير الطاقة الإسرائيلي يوفال شتاينتش حول التوصل الى إجراء «مفاوضات مباشرة» مع لبنان الأمر الذي يتعارض مع واقع أنّ لبنان ما زال في حال حرب مع «إسرائيل» وانه يعتبرها عدواً مغتصباً لفلسطين. والحال انّ الاتفاق – الإطار الذي أعلنه بري يشير الى مفاوضات غير مباشرة وليس إلى مفاوضات مباشرة.

ــ أشار منتقدون آخرون الى انّ الاتفاق – الإطار يشير الى التفاوض حول خلافات على حدود بحرية في حين انّ الخلافات تتعلق بالحدود البرية أيضاً. والحال انّ بري شدّد على التلازم في المفاوضات بين الحدود البرية والبحرية. هذا مع العلم انّ الاتفاق المعلن تضمّن إشارة إلى تفاهم نيسان/ ابريل وإلى قرار مجلس الامن 1701 سنة 2006 اللذين يتعلّقان اصلاً وفصلاً بالحدود البرية وبالنقاط التي تحفّظ بشأنها لبنان كونها أراض لبنانية ما زالت «إسرائيل» تحتلها وما زال لبنان يصرّ على إنهاء احتلالها.

ــ غير أنّ أبرز الملاحظات والتساؤلات انصبّت على مسألة تعهّد حزب الله بالردّ على الاعتداءين الإسرائيليين الأخيرين اللذين أدّيا إلى ارتقاء شهداء من المقاومة. فهل سينفذ حزب الله وعده ووعيده بعد بدء المفاوضات غير المباشرة ما يؤدي الى تعطيلها؟ أم أنه سيستنكف عن ذلك ما يشي بوجود «صفقة» مع أميركا لإنجاح المفاوضات؟

قياديون في حزب الله أكدوا أنه ليس طرفاً في المفاوضات وانّ المقاومة ما زالت في حال حرب مع العدو، وانّ تعهّد السيد نصرالله بالردّ على الاعتداءات الإسرائيلية ما زال قائماً ومُلزماً وسينفذ في الوقت الذي تراه القيادة مناسباً.

باختصار، الاتفاق – الإطار هو مجرد تحديد للأسس التي ستجري المفاوضات بموجبها. فلا شيء تحقق حتى الآن على صعيد المضمون، ولا حدود جرى التفاهم على ترسيمها في البرّ أو البحر. الإعداد للمفاوضات استغرق أكثر من عشر سنوات، ولا ينتظر المتابعون والمراقبون ان تنتهي الى نتائج إيجابية في المستقبل المنظور، ولا بالتأكيد قبل مغادرة ترامب البيت الأبيض.

وزير ونائب سابق

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

ISRAEL RELEASED DETAILS ON ALLEGED HEZBOLLAH MISSILE FACTORY IN BEIRUT (VIDEOS)

South Front

On October 2, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) released details on two alleged precision-guided missile factories of Hezbollah located in the Lebanese capital, Lebanon.

The location of the alleged factories was originally revealed by Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a speech before the UN General Assembly on September 29. Back then, Hezbollah responded to the accusations by allowing journalists into one of the sites, that turned out to be a metal workshop.

In its new statement, the IDF repeated Netanyahu accusations, claiming that the workshop, that is located in the Jnah neighborhood, was used to produce missile parts.

The IDF said the bending machines, rolling machines and cutting machines, which were spotted in the workshop, were being used to manufacture missile engine casings, warheads, navigation component housings and missile stabilization fins.

According to the IDF’s claims, the Jnah workshop’s owner, Muhammad Knurl Fouad Rimal, is a member of Hezbollah’s missile production unit, who has flown to Iran several times.

The IDF also claimed that it had detected “suspicious traffic” at the other precision-guided missile factory, which is located in the Chouaifet neighborhood, after it was revealed by Netanyahu. The suspicious traffic was just a truck leaving the site to a civilian building in the Bat El Brajneh neighborhood. The IDF claims that the building is a Hezbollah headquarters.

Israel has been working for the last two years to promote the narrative that Hezbollah is storing weapons and making missiles in the heart of Beirut. No credible evidence has been presented by Tel Aviv, yet.

During the 2006 war, Israel used similar allegation to justify a bombing camping that wiped out a large part of the Lebanese capital. Dozens of civilians were killed while thousands others were displaced.

MORE ON THIS TOPIC:

Hezbollah vs Israel 2006: Who has upper hand 14 years on?

Hezbollah vs Israel 2006: Who has upper hand 14 years on?

Original links:
Part 1: http://middleeastobserver.net/hezbollah-vs-israel-2006-who-has-upper-hand-14-years-on-pt-1/
Part 2: http://middleeastobserver.net/hezbollah-vs-israel-2006-who-has-upper-hand-14-years-on-pt-2/

Description:

Senior Lebanese political analyst Nasser Qandil explores what has changed between Hezbollah and Israel over the last 14 years since the ‘July War’ or ‘The Second Lebanon War’ in 2006.

After tracing the major changes and transformations in the military balance of power between the two sides over the last 14 years, Qandil then explores the current challenges facing Hezbollah inside Lebanon, particularly regarding the deepening economic and political crises in the country.

Note: we have added our own sub-headings in the below transcript to make for easier reading

Source: Al Mayadeen News

Date:  July 12, 2020

(Important Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations for you by contributing as little as $1/month here: https://www.patreon.com/MiddleEastObserver?fan_landing=true)

Transcript:

Hezbollah 14 years on from the July War

Nasser Qandil:

Actually, regarding (Hezbollah’s) achievement of liberation (in the year 2000) free from any conditions or negotiations, any analyst can figure out that after the year 2000, the region was involved in a race between the Resistance and (Israeli) Army of occupation in which both (sides) tried to reinforce the reality that they wanted to reflect on May 24, 2000 (i.e. just before the liberation).

Israel wanted to say that it has positioned itself on the borders with the purpose of protecting the interior (of Israel); that the era of (the war of) attrition has ended; and that it is moving into a stage where it is able to direct (its) deterrent capacity at will. In contrast, the Resistance wanted to say that Israel has humiliatingly and forcefully withdrawn (from Lebanon); and that this withdrawal is not only the beginning of a countdown of the (Israeli) entity’s capacity to hold onto (occupied) land, but also (its capacity) to go to any (new) war again as well.

Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 and the Al Aqsa Uprising (“Al Aqsa Intifada”) certified what the Resistance was saying. (Israel’s) 2006 war on Lebanon was the contest that had to settle the previous contests and the (side) who wins this round, cements what it has said. Israel has worked on a plan, theory, mechanisms and appraisals, that is, it didn’t go haphazardly to war (in 2006). In short, Israel counted on “air warfare” theory and put it into practice the (2006) war. However, the Resistance was aware of that, so it opted to strengthen its power on land, in order to cancel out the theory of air warfare, and to bring the enemy to the land to fight, engage in (battles) of attrition, and (ultimately) defeat it.

The Resistance was the victor. This was the outcome (of the war), because when we talk about ‘victory’ we are not referring to the historic and final defeat. Rather, we are just discussing this war (in 2006) in which the Resistance achieved victory and Israel was defeated again. As in the Lebanon war of the year 2000, or (more accurately) as reflected by the liberation in the (year) 2000, Israel lost its first pillar, that is, its ability to occupy (Lebanon) and remain in it. It also lost its second pillar in the 2006 war, which is its ability to wage war and achieve the goals (that it sets) as it wills.

After the 2006 war, the issue (between both sides) persisted. They entered a totally new and different race. The entity of the (Israeli) occupation is fighting to restore its honor and rehabilitate its image, whereas the Resistance is fighting the battle of becoming a regional power able to make the deterrence weapon (itself as) the policymaker. Since the year 2006, America put its weight behind (Israel’s goals) since Israel is not able to survive any longer without American protection and support. America went to Iraq after realizing that Israel superiority is (gradually) being eroded, and that it is important to rehabilitate its power and control through the American military presence to compensate for the deficiency in Israel’s ability that came about after Lebanon’s liberation in the year 2000 and the Al Aqsa intifada.

Host:

We all remember Condoleezza Rice and the ‘New Middle East Project’.

Nasser Qandil:

Exactly, and this was at the heart of the 2006 war. However, before this (war), America went to Iraq in order to redress the imbalance occurred after Lebanon’s liberation in 2000 and the Al Aqsa intifada, but they failed. The “July War” (2006) came as a second rehabilitation supported by American pressure, calculations and backing. It was a new failure that was added to the accumulated record of failures.

The only available alternative (choice) then was going to a great war, i.e. to topple Syria. This was like Armageddon. Nevertheless, other different battles, the Yemen war and the battle over the future of Iraq, occurred alongside the war (in Syria). They were no less important than the (war in Syria). Today, 14 years after the July War (in 2006), we can talk about facts and not about general trends only. The resistance (movements) transformed from being a resistance force into an Axis of Resistance. This becomes a fact; it is not just words. Today, when his eminence Sayyed (Hassan Nasrallah) speaks and says “I will kill you” – we’ll discuss this later – this (statement) reflects the (powerful reality) of the Axis of Resistance, from Beirut, to Palestine, to Iraq, to Yemen, to Iran and to Syria. This is the first major transformation that occurred between the years 2006 to 2020 during the heat of the several wars that raged over the map of the region.

The second (major transformation during these years): the ‘missile belt’ is now able to strike – from any point (within the Axis of Resistance) – any target in occupied Palestine (i.e. Israel). This means that as the resistance in Palestine is able to target all (areas of Israel) north of Gaza, the resistance in south Lebanon can target the entire (area of Israel) south (of Lebanon); the resistance from Iraq is even able to reach the (Mediterranean) sea; the resistance in Yemen can cover the whole territory of Palestine; and that’s besides (the missiles capabilities of) Syria and Iran.

The Host:

The entire Israeli intelligence efforts have lately been centered on the missile capabilities of the resistance.

Nasser Qandil:

This ‘(missile) belt’ has been completed; it is not a subject of discussion anymore.

The third (major) development is the entrance of the drones (UAVs).  The use of this weapon is not restricted to the Lebanese front line. Israel has evidence that confirms that. How many times were drones sent by the resistance from Lebanon? How many times were the Israelis lost because they failed to track the drones sent from Gaza? (Further evidence lies in) the drones in Yemen, and the achievement of the Aramco attack (in Saudi Arabia) that the godfather of the Dimona (Israeli nuclear program) and Thomas Friedman wrote about it an important article in the New York Times. The article states that what happened in Aramco (can be) repeated on all American military bases in the Middle East, and can be repeated (in a strike) on Dimona. Moreover, one of the Israeli generals quoted by Thomas Friedman during a telephone conversation says that it seems that we must now relinquish the status of being the number one technicians in the Middle East, (and cede that status) to Hezbollah and its allies, and (we ought to) call upon our people to carry hand rifles  in any coming wars in which drones are used.  Henceforth, the third factor is the drones.

The fourth (major) new factor is the precision-guided missiles which formed the center of the struggle during the last two or three years of the Syrian war. The Israeli (air) raids which initially aimed at stopping the supply of weapons to the resistance (from Syria to Lebanon) turned into a specific goal (during these years) which became ‘preventing the resistance from the possibility of transforming their missiles into precision-guided ones’. Today, the Israelis speak about precision-guided missile factories and this signifies that they have surrendered to this fact.

The last issue we are ignorant of was revealed by the video published (recently) by (Hezbollah’s) military media which says “Mission accomplished”. Certainly, it is not referring to the precision-guided missiles because his eminence Sayyed (Hassan Nasrallah) has already announced clearly and publicly that ‘yes, we have enough precision-guided missiles to hit any vital Israeli military installation in occupied Palestine’.  But we still don’t know what is meant by “Mission accomplished”. This will stay one of the resistance’s surprises in the coming wars.

Israel 14 years on from the July War

Nasser Qandil:

What have Israel and America achieved in return? Their situation now is similar to that in the July War (2006); they go to war today on one foot only. It was the air force in (the) July (War) that they relied upon, and it is the financial sanctions (that they rely upon) today. Did the Resistance succeed in breaking this foot?  I say “Yes, and we will expand on this discussion later.

Host:

We will continue discussing why the resistance succeeded…

Nasser Qandil:

In the first section we talked about the progress achieved by the resistance (Hezbollah) from 2006 to 2020. Israel also worked (on building its power) during these 14 years. Let u see what it did.

Host: …and of course (Israel) was given a green light by the US.

Nasser Qandil:

First of all, Israel focused on the home front. Its main aim was not to draw up a plan to seize the initiative, but to face the fallout of the July War. The resistance (Hezbollah) has risen higher and higher in its level of readiness, its networking capabilities (i.e. greater integration of the Resistance Axis across the region), and its ability to wage war. Meanwhile, what did the (Israeli) entity do?

(First), the Iron Dome that (Israel) was preparing (in order to intercept) Katyusha missiles is now threatened by precision-guided missiles and drones. (The Israelis) went back to saying that they will shoot down missiles with hunting rifles!

(Second), the (Israeli) home front has further collapsed, and now in the time of Corona, it is even worse.

Third, political fragmentation, which is one of the repercussions of the July War. Since the July War, the (Israeli) entity has been mired in its inability to reestablish a historical (political) bloc capable of leading the entity politically. This fragmentation reached its peak with three (consecutive) repeats of the election.

The last point that (Israel) has discovered (over the last 14 years) is that there is no solution to is broken spirit, because we are not only talking about equipment, armies, weapons and logistical plans, we are talking about human beings, about their mental condition. The resistance (Hezbollah) is now becoming more and more confident that it can bring down the (Israeli) entity. When his eminence Sayyed (Nasrallah) comes out and says in one of his recent appearances that there is a real possibility that the (Israeli) entity will collapse without war, and that this generation is going to witness the liberation of Jerusalem…On the other hand, we find the (Israeli) entity in a state of frustration. No matter how many (Israeli) generals say “We will win. Victory is ours in the coming war. We are waiting for the right opportunity to wage war”…what are you (Israelis) waiting for? You and the Americans said: “Time is not in our favor. Yesterday’s war is better than a war today, and a war today is better than a war tomorrow.”

Host:

Who is going to achieve Israel’s goals today? Who is the principal agent? The US? Because, as you said in one of your articles, Sayyed Nasrallah’s recent speech on 7/7/2020, presents the most vivid example of the (resistance’s) ability to defeat the Israeli occupation and American hegemony. But how is he (Nasrallah) able today to combine this (military) resistance with economic resistance?

The third pillar of the Resistance: economic reconstruction

Nasser Qandil:

What I want to get to is that in one of his appearances, his eminence Sayyed Nasrallah cut to the chase and said: “The resistance (Hezbollah) has already overtaken Israel. Israel is still standing thanks to US protection.” In 1996, the Resistance discovered – and this was the secret behind the liberation in the year 2000 – that the Israelis remained (in Lebanon) because they were under the illusion that the border buffer zone (that Israel established within Lebanese territory) protects the (Israeli) entity from the missiles of the resistance. So if (Israel) realizes that the border (buffer zone) is pointless and that the entity will be targeted no matter what, it will withdraw. And this is what happened (in the year 2000).

Today, his eminence Sayyed (Nasrallah) tells us that the resistance is certain that the (Israeli) entity continues to survive only because of the American presence (in the region), and that the decisive battle with the entity is a battle to expel the Americans from the region.

Whoever analyses the (American) sanctions and the logic behind them will discover that they are not aimed at escalating the situation such that it provokes a full-scale confrontation. This is nothing but propaganda. In fact, these sanctions have direct political goals. I mean, (Lebanese) parties affiliated to the US (in Lebanon) are proposing (very high demands such as) the disarmament (of Hezbollah) and the implementation of Resolution 1559 because this is the American approach. Just as they (Americans) did in 1983 with (Lebanese) President Amine Gemayel when they told him that they were (about to attack) Syria at the same time in which they were engaged in negotiations with (Syria). Two months later, McFarlane) the special US envoy to the Middle East) was asked: “why did you back out (of the attack)? You would have put (Gemayel) in big trouble.” McFarlane answered: “if we told (Gemayel) that we were (negotiating) with Damascus, he would have beat us to it. We trick our allies to make them think that we are escalating for the sake of imposing stronger terms in the negotiations.”

What do Americans want from the Caesar Act? Why are the Americans putting pressure on Lebanon, blocking access to US dollars in the (Lebanese) market, preventing the transfer of dollars to the country, and closing lines of credit – via the Central Bank of Lebanon’s accounts -for the purchase of fuel? What do they want? The Americans are not hiding (their intentions). They told us what they want. James Jeffrey (US Special Representative for Syria Engagement) told us. Why the Caesar Act? He said in the live appearance he made in which he spoke about the Act. He said ‘we wish to go back to (the balance of power) that existed before 2011. What does he mean by “before 2011”? He means the time when “we (Americans) will acknowledge the victory of President Assad. We were not present (in Syria before 2011), but Hezbollah and Iran were not there either. We leave (Syria), but (Hezbollah and Iran must) leave too.”

So he (Jeffrey) wants to ensure the security of the (Israeli) occupying entity in southern Syria by hinting at sanctions against Russia as the main target of the Caesar Act. Syria will be hit by sanctions anyway and Iran is drowning in a sea of sanctions. Therefore, these sanctions are actually against Russia. The Caesar Act was introduced originally at the beginning of 2016 in order to reach a compromise with Russia in relation to the battle in Aleppo. However, (the Caesar Act) now aims at reaching an agreement with Russia over the terms of the withdrawal of US forces from Syria and is not aimed at (prolonging) their stay.

Second, regarding Lebanon, David Schenker (US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs) publicly appeared on TV and said that Hezbollah is involved in ‘corruption, smuggling, money laundering, causing devastation, and that it is the cause of the crisis (in Lebanon)’ etc. Give it to me directly (Schenker), what do you want? He (Schenker) told us directly that “you are suffering greatly (due to the economic crisis). You have promising gas reserves in the (Mediterranean) sea, but they are in a region that is the subject of a dispute with Israel. We (the US) presented you with a plan, so accept it! So the US wants an exit strategy that provides the (Israeli) occupying entity with a security belt on the Syrian and the Lebanese fronts, and (the US seeks to achieve this) by exerting “maximum pressure on the resistance”.

———

Nasser Qandil:

This is the third pillar of the power of the Resistance. The first pillar is military capability. The second pillar is the political front, meaning the Axis of Resistance. The third pillar is economic reconstruction. Without a resistance economy, the resistance cannot speak of an ability to maintain a level of cohesion within its support base and environment. What I want to say here is that the measures and steps taken by the resistance are not new. It is not true that the resistance, being under pressure at the moment, is now discovering or searching (for solutions). This was in fact its original program. Its original program was and is ‘Openness to the East’, that (Lebanon) have multiple sources (for economic, financial, and political relations). Its original program is aimed at breaking the borders (created by) Sykes-Picot between the countries of the region to form a single (economic) market. Its original program is aimed at relying on industry, agriculture and the national currency for exchange with neighboring countries and where possible. This is the original plan of the resistance. But this plan is now being put into action. It is not a negotiating weapon to lure Americans into easing conditions. If the Americans want to cooperate they are welcome, but if they don’t we will proceed (with this plan). Either way, this plan is not subject to review. Industry and agriculture are objective needs (of Lebanon).

In terms of industry and agriculture, Lebanon … Lebanon, by the way – in the year 1960, the Iraqi market was running 60% of the Port of Beirut and 30% of Lebanese industrial production. Today, Lebanon, which used to export milk, cheese, juice, clothing and shoes to the Gulf, imports 200 million dollars worth of milk and cheese only! Thus, the revival of the agricultural and manufacturing sectors, which were destroyed by the rentier economy, was and is the original plan. We are not talking about a knee-jerk reaction.

Host:

Has the goal (behind the sanctions) become counter-productive? Because the Lebanese internal consensus over the economic resistance that Sayyed Nasrallah called for was remarkable. I want you to comment briefly because we exceeded the time allocated for this file. The Patriarch (Bechara Boutros) al-Rahi said today: “The Lebanese people today do not want any majority (group in Lebanon) to tamper with the constitution and to keep them away from (Lebanon’s) brothers and friends.” This is noteworthy as well Mr. Nasser, is it not?

Nasser Qandil:

The truth is, the speech of his Beatitude (al- Rahi), at certain points, was vague and unclear. It seemed like he was targeting the resistance by talking about neutrality and keeping Lebanon out of conflicts. However, today there may be another direction. I think the Lebanese people know that when we talk about buying oil products in Lebanese pounds… if you don’t want to buy them from Iran, then buy them from Saudi Arabia. Aren’t you friends with Saudi Arabia and the UAE? Let these countries sell us oil products in Lebanese pounds. Half of the demand for dollars in the Lebanese market is because of oil imports. We are depleting the reserves of the Central Bank of Lebanon. They will last us for five years instead of ten if we keep using them for oil imports.

His eminence Sayyed Nasrallah announced that Iran is ready to help, and since oil imports are consuming half of the budget, the resistance is proposing to remove half of the pressure on the US dollar, meaning (that the exchange rate) would return to 3000 or 4000 (Lebanese pounds per dollar) if we buy these oil products in Lebanese pounds. We are not bound to (importing) from Iran exclusively. Bring any offer from any other country.

Host:

True…for the Americans, the (economic) war was aimed at Hezbollah. However, the entirety of Lebanon is suffering the consequences of this war.

Nasser Qandil:

Here, I want to say something so we can put things in the right perspective. When the uprising began in October (2019), Pompeo and his team went beyond warnings. (Jeffery) Feltman (Former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs) said before the American Congress: “Do not overestimate the influence of this uprising. Let’s not allow Lebanon to become prey for China and Russia.” He said frankly that China wants Lebanon to be a base for its 5G (technology) in the Middle East.

The Americans are backtracking from this (maximum economic pressure) approach not only because of economic (considerations). Do not be mistaken. This is because a highly powerful security message was delivered to the Americans about what the resistance might do if the situation (in Lebanon) deteriorated further.

—————-

Nasser Qandil:

When someone with the great prominence, status, and figure of Sayyed Nasrallah comes out and says: “I will kill you, I will kill you, I will kill you” … These words were written down (on paper). He did not say them out of anger during his speech. He was establishing a (new) equation. He said: “You are making me choose me between hunger or death. My answer is: I will kill you, I will kill you, I will kill you.” Mediators received questions asking them “what is going on? (what does Nasrallah mean here by ‘I will kill you’)” Then they got the answer. The answer might be – I do not know the answer, only the resistance knows it – but it might be in the form of strong military strike that the US and Israel would never expect. Is it the announcement of the zero hour for the expulsion of US forces from Iraq and Syria? Maybe. Is it a precision guided missile attack on the Dimona (nuclear reactor in Israel), for example? Maybe. Is it a (codeword) for opening up the (military) front in the south of Lebanon, and the Golan Heights front (from Syria) under the title of liberating the Shebaa Farms and the Golan Heights in one go? Maybe. This is the level and size (of the warning that Nasrallah directed).

The resistance will not stand idly by while its people suffer (from the deteriorating economic crisis). It will fight hunger by establishing the foundations of economic reconstruction because this is its project. This (economic reconstruction) has nothing to do with merely fighting (US) sanctions. (The resistance) found an opportunity to launch this project. Other (Lebanese parties) did not accept these proposals (before). Now it is the chance (to put them forward).

Do we want to change Lebanon’s identity by (economically) cooperating with China and giving rise eastern totalitarianism and who knows what, as some (in Lebanon) claimed? No. But does it make sense that the NATO (member) Turkey dares to go to Russia and buy S400 (missile systems), while we (Lebanese) don’t dare to buy Kalashnikov bullets that former Prime Minister Saad Hariri pledged to buy but did not dare to allocate funds for? We have 10 billion dollars’ worth of offers from China to build power plants, factories and tunnels under BOT (Build–operate–transfer) contracts, but we don’t have the courage to accept these offers because we are afraid that the US might be upset with us!

Host: Saudi Arabia itself is now negotiating with China over avenues of cooperation…

Nasser Qandil:

Everyone is turning to China. (Check) the Boston Harbor now, all the equipment for loading, operating, and unloading are Chinese!

Host: This all goes back to the American-Israeli concerns, Mr. Nasser.

Nasser Qandil:

This is the economic vision of the resistance. The (military) dimension (of this whole picture) is something else. The (military) dimension is the following: when they raise the bar of the financial threat, we raise the bar of the military-security threat.

%d bloggers like this: