A propagandist-in-chief's war on intellectual imperialism and pursuit of a resistance episteme

Posts Tagged: resistance


The insistence on denying victory to the heroic Palestinian resistance and people is reminiscient of Arab state media and western mainstream media coverage of the 2006 July War. In both wars, the casualty toll and mass destruction supposedly denied victory to resistance forces. But this is a very flawed and superficial understanding of what constitutes military victory, particularly in asymmetric warfare. It does not matter if israel made “no significant concessions” beyond a pledge to ease the blockade (i.e. no talk of releasing Palestinian prisoners) or that Hamas was unable to ensure all of its conditions were met. All of this is moot when we recall that this war was not launched by Hamas but was waged by Israel with the declared aim of halting the resistance’s rockets and demilitarizing Gaza. The fact that the Palestinians were able to deny Israel the ability to secure either of these military goals means that the resistance won and Israel lost. Over and above this, the resistance scored moral victories that were less pronounced in 2012, namely exposing Israeli barbarity to the western world, and the overwhelming popular support Hamas and other resistance groups rallied behind them. The biggest victor in all this is the logic of resistance— the strategic rationality of armed struggle has triumphed over the [il]logic of “peace” and submission.


Some preliminary observations—similarities and contrasts between Israel and the Resistance :

(1) Israel shares some important similarities with the Resistance movement in Lebanon and Palestine in that (a) the Zionist political-military apparatus enjoys organic popular support, between 86-91% to be exact (identical figures to Shia support for Hizbullah and, given numerous reports, I would assume similiarly high figures in Palestine for Hamas). Just as a culture of resistance characterizes Lebanese and Palestinians, a culture of aggression and occupation typifies the overwhelming majority of Israelis whose views both reflect and reinforce the actions of their military and political leaders. This is not a cultural over-generalization but an observation based on the shocking moral depravity Israeli teenagers, youths and other social media users are displaying on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram vis-a-vis Palestinian civilians. The examples are too numerous to list here but are now well documented in alternative media.

(b) Just as it’s a misnomer to call Hizbullah or Hamas/IJ etc. political movements with military wings, when in fact they are military/ resistance movements with political wings, it’s erroneous to call Israel a state with an army, when it is more akin to a military base with political and civilian wings, as Nasrallah has described it on numerous occasions. The sole purpose of the Israeli state is to serve Israel’s expansionist aims; similarly, the political parties formed by Hizbullah and Hamas are in the service of the resistance priority, as exemplified by the alliances and unity governments they are often compelled to make.

(2) In contrast to the policy of Israel’s genocidal war machine which is used as a means to pressure Hamas into submission and to undermine popular support for the resistance, the military strategy of the Izzedin al -Qassam Brigades is to pressure Israel by exclusively targeting IDF forces and neutralizing civilians, as asserted by its commander, Mohammad Deif  who is quoted as saying that the movement chooses “to confront and kill Israel’s military and elite soldiers rather than attack civilians in neighboring villages.” This is evidenced by the casualty toll (2 civilians killed vs. between 60 and 80 Israeli soldiers) and is further corroborated by several reports on Iron Dome’s failure to intercept weapons. As reported by Reuters, “only about 5 percent of Iron Dome engagements result in the targeted rocket being destroyed or even sufficiently damaged to disable its explosive warhead. In the other 95 percent of cases, the interceptor either misses entirely or just lightly damages the enemy munition, allowing the rocket’s intact warhead to continue arcing toward the ground.” This means that large numbers of Israeli civilians are escaping death not because of the much vaunted defense shield, but because Hamas’ rockets are not intended to inflict mass civilian casualties, but merely function as a form of psychological warfare by forcing civilians into shelters, paralyzing the economy, laying siege to the airport etc. In a similar vein, and as acknowledged by an Israeli intelligence source to the Times of Israel, the attack tunnels target soldiers and not civilian communities: of the nine cross-border tunnels detected, none actually stretches into the grounds of a civilian community: “They could have gone 500 meters more, into the kibbutz,” he said. “Why didn’t they do that?” asks the source.



Israeli media quotes Moussa Abou Marzouk, Meshaal’s deputy, as telling Ria Novosti “We hope the Lebanese front will open and together we will fight against this formation [Israel]…There’s no arguing that Lebanese resistance could mean a lot”.

Given the warming of relations between Hamas and Hizbullah, and the latter’s ongoing military assistance and coordination with Hamas (recently acknowledged by Osama Hamdan) and other Palestinian factions, it is unlikely that Moussa Abou Marzouk’s comment was meant to be divisive or intended to shame Hizbullah which has never actually intervened militarily in Palestine. A more likely explanation for his quote is that it is psychological warfare against Israel whch would surely be threatened by the prospect of its northern front, and possibly Golan front, being activated. This seems all the more likely when one closely reads Nasrallah’s declaration on on Quds Day: “We tell our brothers in Gaza we are with you and beside you and WE WILL DO ANYTHING THAT WE PERCEIVE IS A DUTY on all fronts. We tell the Zionists, you are in the circle of the frail spider web, do not move further to approach the circle of suicide.” Nasrallah’s words were clearly a pledge to the Palestinians to militarily intervene if and when the need arose, and a threat to Israel, that if they “moved further”, i.e. escalated beyond a predetermined threshold, then this would draw Hizbullah into the battle, hence Israel’s imminent “suicide”. Back in 2009 I wrote that Hizbullah would militarily intervene if Hamas’ military capacity were considerably weakened, the resistance emasculated and the Palestinian people left without protection. It doesn’t seem as though we are anywhere near that stage yet, but, if Hamas fails to secure a lifting of the siege and the Sisi regime and its Saudi backers make it impossible for the resistance to replenish its rocket supply, then I think Hizbullah would be forced to step in. Hamas cannot be left without an ongoing flow of weapons; if they dry up then we are faced with the specter of a wider regional war, where Hizbullah will have to fight on 3 fronts simultaneously, especially considering ISIS and Jabhit al Nusra will indirectly collaborate with the Zionists by striking the Resistance and its supporters. But liberating Palestine, rather than Lebanon, is not just Hizbullah’s priority, it is its raison d’etre….

Full story here


If the 2006 July War shattered the myth of Israel’s invincibility, this latest war on Gaza has shattered the myth of Israel’s sustainability. I am not just referring here to the military performance of Hamas, IJ and other groups, or to the demonstrable failure of Iron Dome, but to the ultimately self-destructive nature of Israel’s military strategy of genocide. When a people have been subjected to such relentless barbarity, there is no worst case scenario that the oppressor can threaten them with. They have everything to gain and nothing left to lose from resisting to the end. The more ground troops Israel sends into Gaza, the more opportunities it presents the Resistance with to abduct and kill them. The only thing that is now preventing a cease-fire is Israel’s inability to find a face-saving exit strategy. Israel’s identity as an invicible power and its physical security are entirely dependent on its ability to commit genocide at minimum human and economic cost, and that is no longer possible. Israel is on its death-bed, regardless of what a long miserable death it will be.


The deputy-speaker of the Israeli Knesset calls for the occupation of Gaza and the expulsion of all its inhabitants, using the following measures:
1) Don’t spare any civilian lives: “Attack the entire ‘target bank’ throughout Gaza with the IDF’s maximum force (and not a tiny fraction of it) with all the conventional means at its disposal. All the military and infrastructural targets will be attacked with no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’. It is enough that we are hitting exact targets and that we gave them advance warning.”
2) Starve and strangulate the Palestinian population: “a total siege on Gaza. Nothing will enter the area. Israel, however, will allow exit from Gaza.”
3) Repeat, don’t spare any civilian lives: “attack with full force and no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’.”
4) Conquer Gaza with no mercy for civilian lives :”the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations”
5) All supporters of the Resistance should be killed, including children related to Resistance fighters and kids who throw stones: ” ..eliminate all armed enemies from Gaza. The enemy population that is innocent of wrong-doing and separated itself from the armed terrorists will be treated in accordance with international law and will be allowed to leave.” 
6) Palestinians will be denied even this open-air prison because every inch of historic Palestine must be usurped: “Liberation of parts of our land forever is the only thing that justifies endangering our soldiers in battle to capture land. Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews.” 
It’s important to bear in mind that this is not a minority view but represents the aspirations of the political mainstream and the majority of Zionist “civilians”, all of whom would be actively pursuing this were it not for the heroic Resistance and the resilient Palestinian people.

Full op-ed here


 Nothing irks me more than when naive Arab [pseudo] leftists voice their disillusionment with Hizbullah for “abandoning the resistance to Israel” by fighting with “fellow Muslims”; for its allegedly “sectarian” turn because of its military role in Syria and given its protection of the Sayyida Zeinab shrine in Damascus and its intent to protect holy shrines in Iraq; and for its appropriation of Bush’s “war on terror” discourse.

First of all, there is zero indication that Hizbullah has indeed abandoned its struggle with Israel. I would like to ask them if Israel committed any act of aggression against Lebanon which the Resistance didn’t respond to since the war in Syria began. Or if they read IDF General Amos Gilad’s admission that Israel has “not been successful in preventing a buildup (of rockets) in Lebanon,” which now threatens all of Israeli territory. But on a much more fundamentally basic level I want to ask what is inherently ignoble or unprincipled about fighting for one’s existence. Does this Intifada-chic crowd believe that a real resistance movement should turn the other cheek when any group or entity besides Israel attacks it and threatens its people and territory? Or more rudimentary still, do they believe there would even be a Resistance to fight Israel if it allowed petro-dollar funded Takfiris to have their way with it?

Second, despite the infantile Marxist fantasies of these Muqawama Hipsters, Hizbullah is not, nor has ever, proclaimed to be a secular or Socialist movement. It is an Islamic Shia movement which owes its roots both to the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the Shia Islamic concept of the Wilayat el-Faqih. As such, for Hizbullah, the desecration of Shia shrines is a huge deal, just as the desecration of Islamic symbols is for hundreds of millions of Muslims. This doesn’t make Hizbullah a sectarian organization because religiosity and sectarianism are mutually exclusive concepts, even if they can and often do overlap as in the case of the Takfiris.

And finally, Hizbullah refers to Israel as terrorist, not just the Takfiris, so it can hardly be likened to a neo-con US president . Moreover, when Hizbullah uses the term terrorism it isn’t consciously or unconsciously adopting US discourse because a discourse is an entire, ideologically delimited, system of thought and language, not a word which has different uses for different actors. When Hizbullah refers to Takfiris as terrorists, it is using the term within the framework of a Resistance Axis discourse, not quoting from an American imperialist script.”

And that’s how those “Hizbullah stronghold” folks do Valentine’ s <3

And that’s how those “Hizbullah stronghold” folks do Valentine’ s <3


Here is my response to Ibrahim Al-Amin’s piece on Yarmouk in which he argues that all Palestinians, refugees in particular, are “100 percent” responsible for their own starvation and deaths. I know many supporters of the Resistance Axis will be disappointed in my position on this issue, especially since I have seen quite a few praise his commentary on social media, but I urge you to read my piece carefully before rushing to judgement, and hopefully reassess your position. Excerpts:
" While Amin is correct in calling on Palestinians to “conduct an overall review," we, too, in the Resistance camp must also engage in a similar process of self-reflection, especially now that we are in a militarily and diplomatically stronger position than we have been in the past. While it remains even truer today that the real litmus test of our commitment to the Palestinian cause is supporting the Syrian Arab Republic in its struggle against the imperialist-Zionist-takfiri onslaught against the Resistance project, this does not absolve our Resistance camp from its responsibility toward the Palestinian people and their fundamental rights.
What Amin and others who identify with the Resistance Axis should be doing today, is to call on the Syrian authorities, who are much more likely to listen to us than our enemy is, to designate the Yarmouk camp and its inhabitants as a “red line,” just as the al-Qaeda-infested Nahr al-Bared camp was for Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah when he declared it as such in 2007.”

Full piece here


Hizbullah announces the assassination of a Resistance commander last night, in front of his home in the St.Therese area in Haddad, Beirut. Hajj Hassan Hulu al-Lakkis was a fighter in the Resistance since its early days, and was father to of one of the Resistance martyrs in the July War. Hizbullah lays full responsibility for this crime and its implications on the Zionist enemy, who had made several attempts on his life in the past.
May he rest in power.

Full statement here in Arabic.


Many are concerned that Iran’s nuclear deal in Geneva will lead to a wider regional agreement whereby Iran will be forced to relinquish the Palestinian cause and support for Hizbullah’s resistance. There is no room here for a response that refers to political identity, ideology and historical precedents, nor to the implications of the deal on Iran’s foes and allies, which I will leave for another time. For now I just want to highlight one fact: had it not been for Iran’s resistance-driven foreign policy and its regional alliances—in short, Iran’s supposed liabilities—the US would not have been compelled to recognize Iran as a nuclear power, and more importantly, as THE leading  regional power. Only an irrational and suicidal state would relinquish the very forces and alignments which were responsible for its ascendance on the world stage. If anything, the Geneva agreement has proven that the path of dependency and Arab “moderation” will earn its members little more than a regional spoiler role. This deal only confirms the logic of  independence and resistance as the soundest path to national security and power.  


It is no coincidence that the Bir al Abed bombing occurred on the anniversary of the July War, while today’s massacre of Dahyeh’s residents occurred on the anniversary of Nasrallah’s annual victory speech (to be held tomorrow), and just days after the Zionists’ botched raid in South Lebanon earlier this month. It is no coincidence that these bombings began right after Hizbullah’s role in liberating al-Qusayr , for which it was punished by the EU [and the treasonous GCC regimes] with a terrorist labeling, ironically. This is not an attack on Lebanon’s Shia, even if its aim is to provoke sectarian strife; it is an attack on the resistance for confronting the US-Israeli scheme in our region, whether in Lebanon or Syria or Palestine. It is an act of terrorism which aims at demoralizing the resistance’s supporters who have historically refused to be cowed by Zionist terrorism. Whether this act was executed by takfiris, who have claimed responsibility for these attacks and threatened more, or by Israel’s local agents, the enemy of the resistance remains one, and it is one which shares the same strategic aim of destroying Syria , Hizbullah and the resistance axis as a whole.
The fact that fingers can be pointed just as easily at Israel as to takfiri jihadis only underlines the multifarious nature of Hizbullah’s enemy, which has required it to expand its concept of resistance by fighting the Empire and its local minions [Arab regimes] and unwitting tools [takfiris] on multiple fronts.


My translation of Seyyid Hassan Nasrallah’s live speech yesterday:

"First of all, we must emphasize that when we talk about Palestine, we mean all of Palestine, which extends from the sea to the river, and which must be retrieved in its entirety by its rightful owners. And nobody in this world, no king, or prince, or president, or leader, or sheikh, or Seyyid, or state or government, or organization can relinquish or give up one grain of Palestinian land, or one drop of its water or oil.  

Second, Imam Khomeini described Israel in very accurate and realistic terms when he called it a cancerous growth. This is a cancerous existence, and we all know that it is the nature of cancer to spread in the body and to disintegrate it, and that the only cure for cancer is to eradicate it and refuse to surrender to it…Israel poses a grave and permanent danger to the region. And we must be careful to note here that it isn’t merely a threat to Palestine and its people,  [ or to maintain that]  we have nothing to do with it, and that Lebanon is secure, as are Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, the Gulf states and North Africa, and other Arab states…. This is an illusion; it is a misleading and ignorant notion. Israel poses a grave and permanent threat to all the states and peoples of this region….Therefore, it isn’t merely an existential threat to Palestine and the Palestinian people, but an existential threat to all states, governments, peoples and civilizations in the region.

Third, some believe that the removal of this cancerous growth and this usurper entity is a Palestinian interest. But it isn’t only Palestinian, it is in the interest of the entire Islamic world, and in the interest of the entire Arab world when we say it is an Arab nationalist interest, and it is also a national interest for every country in the region. In this sense, we cannot extricate the Arab nationalist [qawmi] from the national [watani] interest. Israel is a danger to Jordan, and its eradication is a Jordanian national interest; Israel is a danger to Egypt and its eradication is an Egyptian national interest; Israel is a danger to Syria and its eradication is a Syrian national interest; Israel is a danger to Lebanon and its eradication is a Lebanese national interest.

Fifth, Palestine and al-Quds are the responsibility of every Palestinian and also, of every Arab, whether Muslim or Christian, and of every Muslim in the world and every human in this world because it is a righteous cause. It is above all else the responsibility of the Palestinian people…But there is a minimum responsibility that falls on everyone and nobody can shirk this minimum responsibility. Political position is a minimum responsibility, as is the media’s position, popular solidarity and financial aid to the Palestinians. And the minimum [responsibility] which we will be held to account for on Judgment Day is the non- recognition of Israel….

Sixth, confirming the priority of this struggle and confrontation against the Zionist scheme occupying Palestine….From the start, even as the Zionist scheme was occupying Palestine, states, governments and calls in the Arab world were saying: “the priority is confronting the Communist expansion; the danger to Islam lies in the Communist expansion,” and as such, Palestine was forgotten. And for the purpose of confronting the Communist expansion, billions of dollars were spent, television and media were established, books and conferences were held, and wars were waged, over the past decades. Fighters from all over the world even joined the war in Afghanistan; fighters from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon and even Palestine, which was an occupied land itself. Why did you leave Palestine for decades and go to fight in Afghanistan? I am not debating here the shari’iya [religious legal] aspects of fighting in Afghanistan, but I am talking about the logic of priorities.

Well, the Soviet Union fell and was defeated in Afghanistan, and the Islamic Revolution in Iran triumphed which constituted an additional strategic element in the struggle with the Israeli enemy.  They immediately manufactured a new priority for us—they manufactured a war and invented a new enemy called the Iranian expansion and the Majoosi [Magi/Zoroastrian] danger. At first, they didn’t refer to it as “Shia” [threat]. Today I want to call things by their name; they didn’t say Shia, they used to say the Iranians or the Majoos or the Persians, were attacking the eastern gate of the Arab umma. They waged an 8 year long war against Iran, and Arab states spent hundreds of billions of dollars on this war. If just one quarter or one fifth or one tenth of this was spent to liberate Palestine, the Palestinian people wouldn’t be enduring all these hardships today.

….For every single tank, warplane, rocket and warship some Arab armies receive, there are guarantees extended to America that this won’t be used against Israel. They made a new enemy and then realized that their language which used the words Persian and Majoos etc. didn’t serve their project. So they gave their invented enemy another name:  the Shia expansion. For God’s sake, where is this Shia expansion?…They invented an enemy and now they have implanted the notion that Iran is the enemy in the minds of many Islamic groups, that the priority is confronting the Shia danger, Shia thought and Shia expansion, and that this Shia danger is a bigger threat to the umma than Israel and the Zionist scheme.

…And the worst part is that they cloaked some of the local political conflicts in sectarian garb.  In Egypt today there is a political conflict, a deep polarization, is this conflict sectarian? It isn’t sectarian but political. In Libya there is a major political conflict and deep polarization. Is it sectarian? In Tunisia there is a major political conflict and in Yemen too. Yes, when we come to countries which are marked by [religious] pluralism and diversity, like Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Bahrain, the issue becomes a sectarian one when it is, in fact, a political conflict. The discourse becomes sectarian and historical files are opened. This conflict is political, why are you turning it into a sectarian one? They do this intentionally, not out of ignorance. Today, this [sectarianism] is one the most destructive weapons in the region.  

There are those who seek the destruction of this region, the destruction of its states, armies and people, not merely to dismantle states and armies but also, to fragment people, Christians, Muslims, Sunnis. Shia, Druze, Zaidis and Ismailis, Arabs, Persians, Kurds and Turks.   

Whoever sponsors the Takfiri currents and groups across the Islamic world, ideologically, financially, with media and weapons, and encourages them to fight in various arenas in more than one country, is ultimately responsible for all the problems and destruction and has offered the greatest service to Israel and America.  

We in Hizbullah will remain on the side of Palestine and the Palestinian people, and we are committed to the solid and good relationship that we have with all the Palestinian factions and forces. Even though we disagree with them sometimes on issues related to Palestine itself, and to Syria and the region, we continue to meet on common denominators, [so imagine how solid these ties are] when the common denominator is Palestine, when our slogan is “al-Quds unites us”. Al-Quds must unite us regardless of any other disagreement we have, be it ideological or doctrinal or religious or jurisprudential or political—   the commitment to Palestine, the Palestinian cause and the Palestinian people must remain.

On al-Quds Day we must extend our deepest gratitude to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and to the Syrian Arab Republic for all it has done for Palestine and al-Quds and for what it offered resistance movements in Lebanon and Palestine which resulted in more than one Israeli defeat.

…Permit  me now,  I always speak as a Muslim and a nationalist and an Arab nationalist, and whatever else, but permit me now to speak as a Shia.

This language increased with events in Syria. One feels that whoever is behind all this [sectarian agitation] activity aims at making us Shia forget Palestine, and forget al-Quds and forget the Palestinian people, and worse, to hate everything called Palestine and Palestinian.  What is being worked on today is this, for the day to come when these Shia who demonstrate every single al-Quds Day in every place they are present…to be removed from the equation of the Arab-Israeli struggle. And when the Shia leave [the equation] Iran is then required to leave the equation.

Today we tell America, Israel and the English— who excel in these types of games—and states who are their tools in the region, we want to tell every enemy and friend, on al-Quds Day, the last Friday of the month of Ramadan, that we the Shia of Ali bin Abi Taleb will not abandon Palestine or the Palestinian people or the umma’s sanctities in Palestine. Call us rafida [infidels/deserters], call us terrorists, call us criminals, call us whatever you want, and kill us everywhere, we Shia of Ali bin Abi Taleb will not abandon Palestine.

And we Hizbullah amongst these Shia, we who were raised in the spirit of resistance, for us, confronting the Zionist project, defending the umma, defending Palestine and al-Quds and the sanctities, and Lebanon…is something that has become ingrained in our flesh and blood and veins… and we offered thousands of martyrs in this path, from Seyyid Abbas [al-Mousawi] to Sheikh Raghib [Harb] to Hajj Imad [Mughnieh]…We in Hizbullah will bear our responsibilities. And we Hizbullah, the Islamic, Imami, Twelver Shia,  will not abandon Palestine, and will not abandon al-Quds, and will not abandon the Palestinian people.”




"We have entered a completely new phase. What is happening in Syria is very important and fateful, for Lebanon’s present and future. Let us not bury our heads in the sand and act like we live in Djibouti, we are here on the border [with Syria]. We have the courage to talk and the courage to act and we will therefore speak honestly as such a historic and sensitive moment requires us to.

Our political position was clear from the very outset: we said popular demands for reform were legitimate. And we said that this [Assad] government had its positive points, particularly regarding resistance and mumana’a (political resistance), and that it also had negative points and flaws, and that what was needed were reforms which could be fulfilled by way of a political dialogue, [whereby] neither side fires a shot at the other. And this is because we know what Syria means to Lebanon and the region and the Arab-Israeli struggle, and to resistance movements and to the Palestinian cause.

Despite our modest capabilities as a party, we have strong and good ties with regional players. I was personally involved, along with my brothers [in Hizbullah], in brokering a political dialogue and a political resolution between President Bashar al-Assad and the opposition. And I witnessed how President Assad accepted while the opposition refused. All along, the Syrian leadership was willing to sit at the negotiating table and pursue a dialogue, and it accepted substantive political reforms. But to this day, the opposition continues to reject dialogue as it did from the outset, in the [vain] hope that the regime would collapse within a few months. This was based on the assumption that whoever is backed by the US, the UK, France, Italy, Germany, Europe and Arab oil states and Turkey etc. will necessarily triumph within a few weeks or months. They miscalculated.

An alliance of all these states I just mentioned soon emerged, led by the US which has the first and final say [in everything] . The British, French, Italians, Germans, Arabs, Turks, all work for the Americans. And we all know that Israel also supports this axis because the American project in the region is first and foremost an Israeli project. Al-Qaeda and takfiri groups joined this axis, and they were offered money and all kinds of facilities from all corners of the globe.  Doors were opened for them and they entered Syria. Nobody can convince us that the tens of thousands of takfiris and extremists who reject everyone that doesn’t subscribe to their thought, stealthily entered Syria…And an international war against Syria was waged, a media, political, diplomatic, economic and financial war, and the arming and funding and deployment of tens of thousands of fighters from all over the world. Tens of thousands of fighters from all over the world don’t seem to bother the so-called “Friends of Syria”, who met in Amman a couple of days ago, but they considered the intervention of a small group of Hizbullah [fighters] as foreign intervention.

To be honest, we didn’t intervene until a month ago….We used all our contacts with Islamic and national forces, as well as with states, to no avail; nothing but the downfall of the regime, whatever the cost. I know that there were reasonable proposals for a solution which were accepted by the Syrian leadership. These proposals were rejected by regional states because they cannot bear the idea of this regime remaining in power, even if Syria is going to be destroyed in the process.

We don’t accuse everyone [in the opposition], there are people who don’t have [American/Zionist/Arab oil] connections, and they are logical and have a vision, their demands are just, they are willing to engage in dialogue for their natural rights, and we respect these rights. This is part of the Syrian opposition. And there is another segment of the opposition which is employed by the CIA and the Pentagon and this or that intelligence service, and they don’t have any say in decision making. This is the external opposition. On the ground, [there are] the armed groups, [in] the areas from which the state withdrew, or was made to withdraw, and which is now under the control of armed groups. Does the external opposition have any control over these groups? They want to go and debate in Geneva; will they able to hold any sway over these armed groups? The West, the Arabs, the intelligence agencies and the media, and you and I know this truth: the largest force and dominant trend within the ranks of the armed forces is the takfiri trend. Those abroad have no influence over any of them.

And this trend started to dominate the Syrian opposition and it was funded and armed by several Arab states and regional countries and these states not only want to get rid of the Syrian regime, but of these   [takfiri] groups as well, so they facilitated their departure. But what they didn’t realize was that there would come a day when they will return home after earning this combat experience and experience in slaughter and killing….The case is no longer a popular revolution against a regime, it is no longer an issue of reform [because] the man [Assad] was ready to reform.

We regard the control these groups have over Syria, and specifically over parts of Syria bordering Lebanon, as a grave danger to Lebanon and a grave danger to all Lebanese. It is not only a danger to Hizbullah, or to the Shia of Lebanon, it is a danger to Lebanon and the Lebanese and the Resistance and communal coexistence in Lebanon. If these groups control areas bordering Lebanon they pose a threat to Lebanese Christians and Muslims, and when I say “Muslims” I means Sunnis, Druze, Shia and Alawites. I don’t just mean Shia, it is the Sunnis who are first and foremost in danger. The proof of this is Iraq. The same groups fighting in Syria today are an extension of a group there called “the Islamic state of Iraq”. Just ask Iraqi Sunnis how many of their Sunni clerics and Islamic party leaders this group killed; leaders who didn’t follow it. How many mosques in Anbar, Fallujah and Mosul, not merely Shia mosques and Christian churches? This organization boasts of carrying out 4 000 or 5 000 suicide attacks in Iraq. Most of these operations have targeted Iraqis of all sects, religions and ethnicities.

A week ago there was an election in Pakistan. You know what is problem with takfiri thought? They accuse others of apostasy over the most trivial matters, not merely for ideological or sectarian reasons, but for political reasons too. Whoever participates in the parliamentary elections is also an apostate; [shedding] his blood becomes permissible….This is the takfiri mind. He doesn’t differentiate between Sunni, Shia, Muslim, Christian, it makes no difference…They killed people at polling booths in all Iraqi provinces. How many people were killed in Pakistan a week ago? And most of those killed in Pakistan, in electoral campaigns and polling booths, were Sunni Muslims and Sunni clerics. The Pakistani Taliban killed them because they consider participation in the parliamentary elections as apostasy.  In just 4 countries—Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Somalia—there were many more Sunnis killed than other Muslims or Christians.

Tunisia and Libya are suffering from this [takfiri] scourge today; those states which created and exported this scourge suffered from it. And we have been promised here in Lebanon that this scourge is coming our way. This is the danger. This mind does not accept dialogue…it has no priorities or common denominators. All it does is declare others apostates for the most trivial reasons, and it sanctions their killing. What future can there be for Syria amidst these groups and this mind? What future for Lebanon? What future for Palestine? What future for the people of this region?

We do not approach the problem from the perspective of Sunnis versus Shia as some have accused of us doing. Our approach is that all Muslims and Christians are threatened by this mind and trend and thought, which is creeping its way into our region. It is financed by America and supported by America, because that is the only means America has left at its disposal with which to destroy the region and restore its hegemony over us.

From the very start, people in the Syrian opposition declared that once the regime would collapse within 2 or 3 months, they were coming after us in Lebanon, before we had even articulated our political position. They burnished their credentials with the Americans and Israelis, [assuring them that] “we are ready to take revenge from the resistance which was victorious in 2000 and which thwarted the New Middle East project in 2006. We are ready, just support us.” And from the start, they kidnapped Lebanese pilgrims in Azaz and they began attacking Lebanese in the Qusayr countryside in order to displace them.

I have three points I want to make. This is the first development, and that is the domination and control by the takfiri trend. If it does take control, then the future of Syria and Lebanon and the region will be a very difficult and dark one.

Second, Syria is no longer an arena for popular revolution against a political system, but an arena for the imposition of a political project led by America and the West and its regional tools. And we all know that the American project in the region is an Israeli project through and through.

Third, Syria is the backbone of the resistance and a support for the resistance and the resistance cannot sit idly by while its back is being broken. We are not stupid. Only someone stupid would watch the death, siege, and conspiracy closing in on him without lifting a finger. Only a stupid person would do this. A reasonable, responsible person lives up to his obligations in full. If Syria falls into the hands of America, Israel, the takfiris, and all of America’s tools in the region, the resistance will find itself under siege, and Israel will invade Lebanon, in order to impose its terms on the Lebanese people, and in order to revive its aspirations and schemes. Then, Lebanon would return to yet another Israeli era. If Syria falls then Palestine is lost and the resistance in Palestine is lost, Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem will be lost.

There are two sides in this conflict: the first is the American/western/Arab axis which links the takfiri currents with one another on the battle field. [Takfiris] who rip chests open, behead people, dig up graves and destroy the past, a past which is 1400 years old. For the entire duration of this past, the followers of different faiths coexisted, and mosques, churches, shrines and mausoleums remained, and this diversity remained under the rule of various governments, most of which were Sunni governments….

And on the other side is a state or government which has a clear position on the Palestinian cause , on resistance movements and on the Israeli scheme, and which has always made clear its intent to engage in dialogue and a political solution and enact reforms.

Hizbullah can never belong to the same front which includes America, Israel and those who rip chests open, behead people and dig up graves. You can take any side you want, but Hizbullah can never belong to a front which wants to destroy all our achievements and squander all the sacrifices and make us slaves of America and Israel once again in a renewed Middle East project which we had previously defeated with the blood of thousands of martyrs…. By means of our position, we are defending Lebanon, Palestine and Syria.

In any case, we have been subjected to a formidable media and political campaign on account of our position, even when we were still silent, even when we had not yet intervened. The intent behind this media barrage, this media and psychological hegemony, for the past two years, was to prevent us from uttering a word of truth, and to make us subservient to this scheme. Whether we intervene in Syria or not, the media campaign against us is unrelenting. Millions of dollars have been poured into this campaign.

Our classification as a terrorist group is not new. There are people inside and outside Lebanon who aspire to have just one regional leader mention them by name. In our case, the leader of the greatest world power went to Israel and from day one repeated “Hizbullah, Hizbullah, Hizbullah”. We are happy [about this], not sad, that Europe sees that we are capable of changing the equation. This is something we take pride in. Go soak your terrorism list and drink its water.

They accused us of sectarianism. This is nonsense.  In Lebanon, Palestine and Bosnia Herzegovina. Maybe this is the first time we talk about this issue. We fought in Bosnia and lost martyrs, in defense of whom? In defense of Muslim Sunnis in Bosnia. There are no Shia in Bosnia. All the hardships that we endured and will continue to endure for the sake of Palestine. Nobody can accuse us of sectarianism. Our position on Iraq was clear. Our position on all events is clear.  Attempts to undermine our will and morale and [that of] our martyrs’ families, have failed.

I want to tell you something, [in response to] the completely unfounded words which were written these past two days. Go and meet the martyrs’ families and listen to what these honorable people have to say. None of what I am about to say has been reported in the media before or even in internal meetings….I am one and a half years late in saying this. The martyrs’ families are saying the same grand words they said during our previous confrontation [with Israel]….We don’t have to force our youths to go to battle. Not once in these past 30 years have we forced anyone to do so. There has been such a huge surge in the number of mujahideen and cadres [who want to fight in Syria]… we have banned many from fighting….We are not merely ready to declare jihad, all it takes is a couple of words and you will find tens of thousands of mujahdieen heading for those battle fronts. We do not allow an only son to go to battle unless we have permission from his parents. Now, there are only sons whose parents send me signed documents [granting permission]. Their sons come and tell us my parents have allowed me to go, and when our brothers ask these youths if they forged the signatures, their parents come and ask us to send their only sons to battle. I have now instructed our brothers not to allow them to do so even upon their parents’ request.

You do not understand this resistance or its support base, or its environment, or its culture. You haven’t understood it for the past 30 years nor will you understand it, because you always misunderstand it.

We have entered a completely new phase now, which began these last few weeks.  This new phase is called immunizing the resistance and protecting its backbone, and immunizing Lebanon. I am not asking anyone to share this responsibility with us. As with all previous battles, this battle is ours, we are its men, we are the ones who will turn it into a victory…

As I told you at the beginning of the July War in 2006: oh honorable people, oh mujahideen, oh heroes, as I promised you victory in the past, I promise you victory once again.”   



To all those pseudo-Palestine solidarity activists and erstwhile supporters of the resistance who now equate the Syrian takfiri counter-revolution with the struggle against Zionism: If it were not for the Assad “regime’s” military and political support for the resistance there would be no Resistance and Liberation Day to celebrate in Lebanon on May 25. And had it not been for this support, there would no war on Syria now, nor would Hizbullah have been compelled to militarily intervene there to help Syria liberate its territory from the enemies of our resistance cause. The war on Syria has never merely targeted Syria, but the resistance axis as a whole and the resistance project in the region.
Hizbullah’s role in Syria today is not merely an “alliance of minorities” fighting for their survival as one journalist suggested to me today [as if to suggest that Hizbullah and the Syrian army is fighting Sunnis rather than takfiris specifically] , it is a strategic alliance of those who refuse to allow this nefarious sectarian scourge to drag us into endless bloodletting and distract us from confronting our Zionist and imperialist enemies, in accordance with the latter’s long-time strategy of divide-and-rule . By confronting the counter-revolutionary, or rather, counter-resistance, forces, Hizbullah and Syria are defending our resistance cause and the unity of our people. 
They used to say disparagingly that “Syria is still in Lebanon”; well now we see that Lebanon is also in Syria. And that is because we always were one people who shared one land and one language and one political identity which no amount of colonial redrawing of our borders, imperialist interventions or takfiri violence can ever undo.


Yes the Qusayr battle is strategic because it links Damascus to the Mediterranean coast, lies adjacent to Hizbullah strongholds in Lebanon and serves as a crucial supply route, but it is also important because once fully overtaken (which should be a matter of hours from now) it will lead to the fall of Homs and hopefully, other areas soon where we will witness this:
"When we reached the town’s main square, we removed the [French] mandate flag and planted the Syrian flag," a Syrian Army general speaking to al-Mayadeen in the strategic town of Qusayr.