No Script

Please Wait...

Al-Ahed Telegram

Sayyed Nasrallah Is the First Arab Leader Whose Credibility Has an Influence on «Israel»

Sayyed Nasrallah Is the First Arab Leader Whose Credibility Has an Influence on «Israel»
folder_openAl-Ahed Translations access_time5 years ago
starAdd to favorites

René Naba

On July 12, 2010 and on the occasion of the fourth anniversary of the destructive war against Lebanon, the “Israeli” newspaper Haaretz published a detailed university study on the topic, drafted by the “Israeli” military establishment. It was an academic study by a senior “Israeli” intelligence officer. It backed the assertion that Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's Secretary-General, is the first Arab leader since the late Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser who has the ability to influence “Israeli” public opinion with his speeches.

Hezbollah achieved two military victories against “Israel”. It is one of the world’s chief liberation movements, eclipsing the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam, the National Liberation Front (Algerian) and the Cuban Revolution. It is striking that the criminalization of Hezbollah by the Persian Gulf and the Arab League came in the name of Arabism, a slogan that the Wahhabi dynasty wanted to destroy.

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah ponders his words that are equal in weight to gold. They are immediately analyzed by interpreters, philologists and linguists – whether they be academics, diplomats, strategists, experts in psychological warfare, native Arabic speakers or pseudo Orientalists. The Western political media bubble is about to suffocate from its pent-up anger, as is the case with the Arabs applauding them. They both face the same reality: Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah – a Lebanese Shiite paramilitary group, is a man who does not only talk. His actions correspond to his words and his words with his actions.

What he says in his speeches is not for the sake of boasting or bragging. His credibility does not have the same effects of a propaganda campaign. The facts are documented by senior “Israeli” Arab journalists whose acknowledgments are in this article.

On July 12, 2010 and on the occasion of the fourth anniversary of the destructive war against Lebanon, the “Israeli” newspaper Haaretz published a detailed university study on the topic, drafted by the “Israeli” military establishment. It was an academic study by a senior “Israeli” intelligence officer. It backed the assertion that Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's Secretary-General, is the first Arab leader since the late Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser who has the ability to influence “Israeli” public opinion with his speeches.

The article reads "Colonel Ronen discussed this thesis at Haifa University based on an analysis of the contents of Hassan Nasrallah's speech during the second Lebanon war in 2006." The “Israeli” officer describes Nasrallah as "the first Arab leader who was able to develop the ability to influence “Israeli” public opinion since Abdel Nasser" in the 1960s. Ronen, who was then an intelligence officer in the “Israeli” army, wrote the following: "Nasrallah used two weapons to confront “Israeli” threats: his speech addressing his audience and using it for defensive battles on the Lebanese front and missiles directed against “Israel”."

Nasrallah's speeches were the subject of most “Israeli” newspapers. It aroused strong reactions from “Israeli” political and military leaders. Ronen pointed out that "if “Israel” deciphered Nasrallah's speeches during the war, it would have had an impact on its decisions." He stated that during the war Nasrallah used to bolster the claim that "we will win the war if we succeed in the defense." For him, victory meant "to continue resisting and keep Lebanon united without accepting humiliating conditions."

The “Israeli” officer pointed out that "the resistance of Hezbollah carried on until the last day and the unity of Lebanon was not undermined."

“With regard to the humiliating conditions, the answer is not conclusive on whether Nasrallah was forced to accept the deployment of the Lebanese army and elements of the United Nations in southern Lebanon, which he rejected at the beginning of the war," the author notes.

When the government's approach was demagoguery, the man appeared to be reasonable and did not brag even in the smallest of the theatrical details. He put on a stunning show on a Sunday afternoon in July 2006, giving a televised political speech to hundreds of thousands of viewers astonished by the destruction of an “Israeli” battleship near the Lebanese coast.

In an area that is eroded by sectarianism, the cleric posed as a lawyer with his eloquent language and rich vocabulary in which religious expressions blend with the worldly as well as the standard (Arabic) with the dialectic. His speech is inspired by the more rigid Arabism. And thus he transformed his country into the regional diplomatic indicator and the role model in the history of the Arab-“Israeli” conflict, especially as he relies to the collective Arab memory that had an important psychological impact equivalent to the impact of Operation Badr (the seizure of the Bar-lev line) and the crossing of the Suez Canal during the October 1973 war.

After eight years, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah did it again, not caring about the rejection of all Arab monarchies. He laid the groundwork for a new way of confronting his fiery enemy, which was the mobile conflict in a closed battlefield. It was a new approach to modern military warfare, supported by a strong missile deterrent force feared by the West and its Arab allies.

Hezbollah fought with its light armament and full control over its weapons, especially the anti-tank ones. The group fought in a decentralized manner similar to that of the Finns in their war against the Soviets in 1940.

But in view of this unique achievement in the history of the contemporary Arab world, the protests of a degenerate political class created by modern feudalism and developed from the stream of opportunism would stir sectarianism in a region considered to be a prey of intolerance and in a country that has suffered so much in the past. It is a country whose people are in despair due to the growing impoverishment. They are the forgotten victims of the old, heinous actions, the prey of intellectual and moral impoverishment of a class of elites, and finally the prey of the Nazism of senior Lebanese politicians unnaturally allied with the old warlords and their financiers.

Hezbollah has become a Lebanese political-military movement, which is marked for elimination by the Americans. It enjoys unprecedented parliamentary representation thanks to the digital majority of the Shiite community, thanks to its contribution to the liberation of its land, thanks to its prestige at the regional level and finally thanks to the people’s support who are not looking to benefit from it.

Former French Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin paid a high price for calling Hezbollah a terrorist. He was the victim of the most recent stone-throwing incident in contemporary history, ending his political life in a pathetic way and politically burning him forever.

Source: Al-Mayadeen, Translated and Edited by website team

Comments