In Defense of the Resistance
By Ibrahim Al-Amin | Al-Akhbar Newspaper - Translated by Al-Ahed News
Within every component related to the conflict with the “Israeli” enemy, all eyes are on the resistance and what it intends to do in the face of imminent challenges.
There are many differences among the Lebanese when it comes to the resistance. Some reject it entirely as a concept. But everyone, including “Israel”, behaves very realistically, given the strength the resistance possesses which can facilitate or disrupt any project related to dealing with the occupation forces.
Over the 12 years of indirect negotiations as well as US and international mediations between Lebanon and “Israel” over maritime borders and oil and gas reserves, all parties were careful not to interfere in the affairs of the resistance.
For its part, the resistance was fully aware of what people in power were doing and what they could obtain because of the method they adopted to conduct negotiations. But it would not have intervened directly in the file if these natural resources weren’t a major asset for supporting the livelihoods of all the Lebanese, shielding them from hunger and destitution.
It is true that the resistance did not condemn the pillars of the state who negotiated and approved projects for maritime lines that do not meet Lebanon's needs. But everyone knows that it rejects, in principle, any negotiations with the enemy. It does not even recognize the borders with “Israel”.
The recent developments came amid the intensifying American and Western blockade on Lebanon, which was initiated with President Michel Aoun's accession to the presidency, and reinforced by pressures that prevent Lebanon from securing its rights at sea.
This took place in the form of maneuvers carried out by global exploration companies, talking about unclear borders, and preventing the recruitment of any company not approved by the United States. Meanwhile, “Israel” worked round-the-clock on exploration and excavation, all the way to drilling and preparing for extraction.
At the height of the siege, it was not possible for Lebanon to obtain any resources without submitting to American and Western demands and conditions. Other conditions were added from Saudi Arabia and its team in the region that matched “Israel’s” demands.
At this point, the resistance could no longer remain on the sidelines. Observing from inside closed rooms became useless, and so did pushing for settlements with officials who fear the Americans and the Westerners all the time.
Therefore, the initiative came by throwing the stone into the stagnant pond and raising the voice to obtain Lebanon’s rights ans prevent the enemy from achieving its objectives in the sea of Palestine.
But the resistance's management of this battle was not emotional or random. And everyone should know that when the resistance decided to intervene, it was certain of its readiness to face the worst.
Therefore, with its warning to the enemy, the resistance had taken the most important decision in its history and in the history of the conflict with “Israel”. The decision centers on the fact that the resistance is ready to initiate military operations even if it leads to a full-scale confrontation that goes beyond the disputed maritime zone.
Hezbollah knows that Tel Aviv was the first to understand its position and would act on it, which will make the Western mediators modify the way they dealt with the file, just as the resistance – albeit unintentionally – sought to tell the Lebanese officials that they could not just agree to the results of ill-considered negotiations on maritime rights.
Fortunately for us, what actually happened and what the next few days will show is that Hezbollah’s intervention and the level within which it intervened, secured for Lebanon what could not be secured by all kinds of negotiations and groveling for the Americans, Westerners, and “Israel”. The “Israeli” side is likely to showcase this aspect more so than anyone else.
However, what happened and what is happening should not be used to falsely exaggerate Hezbollah’s role, especially by those who want to claim the resistance chose the mechanisms of action or was able to disrupt everything and deprive Lebanon of the opportunity to break the Western siege.
And if in Lebanon, there are those who do not desire manna and quails, it is surprising that those voices are trying to suggest the resistance is providing cover for the recognition of the rights of the enemy.
It is true that no one will hear the following frank words from the leaders of the resistance, but it is useful to point them out:
- The resistance is not disturbed by the lack of a final and decisive delimitation of the maritime borders with the enemy because it considers that it cannot and does not have the right to negotiate on land belonging to the Palestinian people who are absent from these negotiations.
- The resistance is not waiting for guarantees from the United Nations or the American mediator to obtain rights and implement understandings. Rather, it relies on the elements of strength and its ability to intervene, whether others like it or not, to guarantee Lebanon's rights.
- The resistance does not want folkloric confrontations to be employed in internal politics or marketing operations linked to the presidential elections in Lebanon or any other aspects of political life. Rather, it wants a base to launch the journey to end the siege on Lebanon, something that will surely happen, even if the Americans and Europe try to circumvent it.
- The resistance does not conceal any mistake committed by any party in Lebanon or outside it with regard to Lebanon’s rights, and it does not commit itself beyond the general framework that preserves rights. Whoever says that there is no guarantee that any new “Israeli” government will abide by the agreement or believes that changes taking place in the world or in America would threaten the agreement must know that the resistance possesses magic and power, which make others abide obediently.
This is why we trust the resistance!
