Nasrallah boasted a commanding presence and great influence due to his wisdom, management of affairs, and credibility, which was recognized even by many Israelis. The victories he achieved by expelling the Israeli forces from Lebanon in 2000 and standing up to the Zionist invasion in 2006, preventing it from achieving its objectives, contributed to his legendary status. Therefore, his death in this manner, alongside the assassination of most of Hezbollah's leadership and the injury of thousands in the pager and walkie-talkie blasts, is not just a major event but a cataclysmic one with far-reaching consequences for the entire region. We are not exaggerating when we say that his assassination and the current developments will mark a pivotal turning point that will either pave the way for the completion of the new Middle East project or spell the start of its defeat and the restructuring of the region according to the interests, goals, and aspirations of its countries and peoples.
His loss is devastating, and there is no replacing him or finding anyone his equal. Indeed, Hezbollah will require the collective efforts of its leaders and institutional teamwork to fill the void left by his absence.
Does this mean that Hezbollah has been removed from the equation and suffered a defeat it cannot overcome? Or will the blow that did not kill it only make it stronger? Or does it depend on the party's ability to restore cohesion, retake the initiative, regain control, rise from the ashes, and press onward?
Answering these questions and rising from the ashes requires conducting a deep, comprehensive, and bold review of past experiences, particularly in terms of security, and drawing the necessary lessons and insights. This review should explain what happened and identify the appropriate remedies, especially since what happened is indicative of either a major breach, overwhelming technological superiority, or both. This is especially important since Operation Northern Arrows is ongoing and is likely to persist, and has been renamed Operation New Order to reflect the true goals that extend beyond returning the displaced settlers to the North to altering the balance of power and reshaping the entire Middle East, as Binyamin Netanyahu has repeatedly stated.
Achieving this Israeli objective hinges on the demise of the Palestinian cause, and on sidelining, bypassing, and liquidating it in all its aspects. It requires more Arab and Muslim countries to normalize relations with the occupation state and integrate it into the region, destroying or weakening various resistance movements, and installing Israel as the dominant power in the region. This is a grand ambition, but it can be thwarted if the resistance forces and the affected countries in the region possess the necessary awareness and develop the appropriate plans and policies to counter it.
It is not crucial for Hezbollah to manage a proportional response right now. It may respond if able, or wait to retaliate later. What it really needs is to take time to catch its breath and regroup. Nor is what is crucial whether Iran will retaliate now, but recognizing that avoiding war due to a lack of readiness is impossible if your enemy has chosen to engage and is already in the throes of battle. This does not mean rushing into uncalculated revenge but rather exacting a price that forces the enemy to reconsider its decision to go to war, rather than allowing red line after red line to be crossed.
True, the current priority is to absorb the blows, regain the initiative, maintain the unity of fronts and the resistance forces, keep Hezbollah cohesive and uphold its priorities, and sidestep the trap of internal strife being laid by sowing distrust and a sense of defeat among the party's ranks or fomenting division within the Shiite community or between it and other religious communities in response to incitement. What has happened, and fears of what may happen in terms of Lebanon facing the same destruction as Gaza, are being used as an excuse to push Hezbollah to abandon the unity of fronts and withdraw from the border area to create a safe zone at least, or to agree to disarm entirely and distance itself entirely from the Palestinian cause at most.
Obstacles to internal strife include:
First: The goals of the Israeli war extend far beyond returning the displaced Northern settlers or establishing a buffer zone on the border, to changing the face of the Middle East. This cannot be achieved without creating a buffer zone in South Lebanon and delivering a lethal blow to Iran and its nuclear program. Netanyahu's depiction of the 'axis of evil' on the map and his remarks during his UN speech lead one to expect that the war is still in its early stages, and Israel's ambitions far exceed what is being discussed. The Israeli consensus on launching a ground war is strong evidence of this.
Second: Hezbollah is a strong, institutional, and ideological party, and it is difficult if not impossible for it to surrender. It may retreat a little or a lot, and it may be weakened, but it will never perish or abandon its goals or program, no matter the cost. It will rise from the ashes sooner or later.
Defeatists must stop serving their enemies by constantly repeating that resistance is futile and that Israel is an invincible power that cannot be fought because resistance incurs far too heavy costs. They ignore the fact that throughout history, colonized peoples and liberation movements have faced flagrant imbalances of power, and had they used that as an excuse not to resist, colonization would have persisted forever.
However, liberation movements and their peoples chose appropriate methods of resistance, relying on long-term popular liberation wars and guerrilla warfare. They treated resistance as a means to achieve their goals, not as an end in itself, to defeat the colonial state not militarily – since that was not possible – but by bringing it to a point where it realized that its colonialism and occupation were costing more than they were worth. Therefore, they adopted various forms of resistance, both peaceful and violent (hard and soft), betting on tensions within the enemy's ranks as well as on liberation and solidarity movements and the forces of progress, justice, and freedom around the world.
On the other hand, some champions of Hezbollah and the resistance must check themselves and stop misleading themselves, the public, and the leadership by promoting the victories in Gaza without acknowledging the heavy costs. Yes, Gaza is witnessing great steadfastness, but it is accompanied by unprecedented disaster.
Likewise, they should stop promoting victories that are supposedly on the way without recognizing the risks and the imbalance of power. Some even go so far as to claim that Israel's demise is not only possible but has already begun, arguing that it cannot afford the losses or to enter a ground campaign, and does not really want war but seeks only to improve its negotiating position. This notion is detached from reality, and entails a stubborn defense of assessments that have proven to be wrong. It portrays the occupation state is incapable of enduring if the war reaches its internal front, and that its internal conflicts will accelerate its total and resounding defeat.
Yes, Israel can be defeated, as demonstrated by Operation al-Aqsa Flood, which shattered its deterrent power and revealed that it was in need of protection. However, it has now regained its deterrent power until it suffers another defeat or defeats. Israel may eventually disappear, but only when the conditions for its downfall are met. However, achieving this requires revolutionary realism that sees things as they are and strives to change them without succumbing to reckless adventurism, debilitation, or surrender.
Victory takes time, altering the balance of power, and creating favorable local, regional, and international conditions. Israel is a powerful country and a nuclear state. More importantly, it is part of a colonial bloc that, while in decline, remains the strongest. It has deep ties to the U.S., the world's most powerful nation. The U.S. will not easily and readily allow Israel's defeat, as it would only benefit Washington's adversaries, particularly China, which seeks to lead the world by 2049.
This is why the Biden administration has provided all manner of support and partnered fully with Israel in this war. It has been in agreement with the occupation state on the objectives, differing only on a few policies and tactics, while pledging to protect Israel's security and prevent its defeat.
"To be continued...," concludes Masri.