Sheikh Qassem Recalls the Days of The April 1996 Aggression: Details of The Resistance & Negotiations
By Al-Ahed News
A total of 27 years has passed since “Israel’s” Grapes of Wrath Operation in 1996. The enemy sought to break the resistance and violate Lebanon’s sovereignty and that of its people. But the grapes turned sour and “Israel” was soon getting a bitter taste of regret and defeat.
This is the anniversary of the wounds inflicted on the shield that protected civilians in Lebanon and secured recognition for the right of the Lebanese to resist. On this occasion Al-Ahed News sat down with the Deputy Secretary General of Hezbollah His Eminence Sheikh Naim Qassem.
He took us back to the days of the difficult negotiations in Damascus that paved the way for what became known as the Israeli–Lebanese Ceasefire Understanding. He also shed light on the role of late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in its success and his cooperation with Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who was in Damascus at the time.
Furthermore, Sheikh Qassem told Al-Ahed about the role of a "central military official" at the time – the martyred commander Sayyed Mustafa Badr al-Din.
“He prepared the fighters in an organized way; he had a strategic mind; he loved precision in his work and planned everything; and he was known to be a disciplined person in the sense that he desired a high degree of discipline and equipped the fighters with the best types of equipment, weapons, and capabilities. He provided supplies, means of transportation, hiding places and hiding in a distinctive way. He was the military commander in this battle and was keen to ensure that the number of missiles being fired never decreased.”
Sheikh Qassem was referring to Sayyed Badr al-Din’s role in maintaining the rate of rocket fire throughout the war and the divine guidance that accompanied the process.
He also touched on the Secretary General's statement during the aggression, which came to serve as a principle for Hezbollah – "Hezbollah will not sign the same document as the ‘Israelis’”. Sheikh Qassem explained how the party applied it in all subsequent events.
The Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General also used the interview to send a message to Palestine, its people, and its resistance in the climate of the approaching International Quds Day:
You have proven your true worth through sacrifices, martyrs, and the wounded and through the participation of men, women, children, and everyone in resisting the occupier. It turns out that when some capabilities are available to you, you at the forefront, you give your souls and your money and you sacrifice your homes.
This people are great people, and I am confident that they will be victorious and will liberate Palestine and Al-Quds, God willing, and it is only a matter of time. A country with such a people can only triumph.
On another note, Sheikh Qassem pointed out the positive effects of the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement on the region.
Below is the full transcript of the interview:
Q – On the anniversary of the April 1996 aggression, during which the resistance established the first equation for the protection of civilians, how did this equation develop as “Israel” is known to study its options well before initiating any aggression on Lebanese territory?
A – The April aggression is the second juncture in the post-1993 broad “Israeli” attacks. The aim of the aggression was to stop the resistance, incite the Lebanese public against it, and obtain an international resolution, one way or another, that would restrict the resistance.
But the steadfastness of the resistance, the continuous bombing of the settlements, the pace of the barrage and the number of missiles launched daily, which showed the “Israelis” that the resistance was not diminishing and that its capabilities were not weakened, are all important factors.
We succeeded in letting the enemy understand that the battle is long and that it cannot defeat Hezbollah and that if it continues, it will pay a heavy price which entails the continuous bombing of the settlements in northern Palestine.
We see the April Understanding as “Israeli” and international recognition of that fact that resisting is a legitimate act and that the mutual bombing and reaction by the resistance is an acceptable response because it is self-defense and the defense of the Lebanese citizens, and this is an important equation.
In fact, we were bombing because they were bombing civilians in general. Otherwise, we consider the “Israeli” soldiers and not the settlements as our main target.
Hence, in the face of the aggression in April 1996, we established an understanding that is meant to protect civilians by threatening to bomb "civilians" in the “Israeli” entity. I can say that this is the first equation that strikes a balance between civilians and "civilians".
However, this equation laid the foundation for another equation that took place after 2006, when the balance of deterrence became much more comprehensive without a written understanding.
In other words, today if "Israel" attacks anyone in Lebanon and if carries out military attacks on any region or citizen, there will be a response against the “Israeli” entity.
This new equation is the fruit of the April Understanding. There is a balance between civilians and "civilians", but in a developed way. It has now become an equation of a balanced deterrence that includes all of Lebanon, not just civilians in Lebanon. This is a great achievement.
The Syrian role during April 1996
Q – What did Syria represent to the resistance at that time, especially during the negotiations? Did this role change or develop during the July 2006 war? What about this relationship today?
A – Syria’s role, especially that of President Hafez al-Assad, during the April 1996 aggression was central and essential.
“Israel” was in Sharm el-Sheikh, and all the talk at the conference was about not disturbing “Israel”, preventing the resistance from working, and protecting “Israel”. All of this was sponsored by America.
So, nothing has changed for us between the past and present. The Americans directly attack us. The latest of which, as we know in Lebanon, are the sanctions against the Lebanese, offering complete cover for the July 2006 aggression, trying to cause chaos in Lebanon, controlling and trying to prevent institutions from functioning normally, and the people backed by the embassies adopting the popular movement in 2019 in an attempt to direct hostility towards the resistance and Lebanon. American behavior has always been on the side of "Israel".
Q – Sayyed Zulfiqar was the cornerstone of confrontation in that aggression. What do you remember of his strength during those days? What was his presence like?
A – Sayyed Mustafa Badr al-Din "Zulfiqar" was the central military official. He prepared the fighters in an organized way; he had a strategic mind; he loved precision in his work and planned everything; and he was known to be a disciplined person in the sense that he desired a high degree of discipline and equipped the fighters with the best types of equipment, weapons, and capabilities. He provided supplies, means of transportation, hiding places and hiding in a distinctive way.
He was the military commander in this battle and was keen to ensure that the number of missiles being fired never decreased.
I remember back then, the plan was to make sure there were enough missiles along the posts on the frontlines to last for several days, and if they needed additional projectiles, some would be transferred from the villages north of the river or sometimes from the Bekaa or Beirut.
Due to the ferocity of the battle, ammunition and rockets were consumed quickly, causing a shortage. Had this same pace continued, the “Israelis” would have felt, after a few days, that we have reduced the number of missiles that we will be launching.
Sayyed Zulfiqar believed that we should continue and look for any way to move the missiles to the frontline posts.
Thanks to God Almighty's support, clouds appeared in the skies of April, blocking the “Israelis’” view. So, the brothers moved large quantities of missiles to the frontline positions.
Because of Sayyed Zulfiqar’s boldness, he agreed that the pace continue despite the danger of it stopping after a few days. This is one form of divine guidance.
Q – During the negotiations, the Secretary General of Hezbollah said that Hezbollah will not sign the same document as the “Israelis”. How did this principle remain constant in the events that followed, up to the agreement to stop military operations in July 2006, and all prisoner exchanges, as well as others that led to the protection of Lebanon and its wealth?
A – We had a discussion in the Shura Council led by His Eminence the Secretary General on how a group of countries could sponsor this understanding without having Hezbollah’s signature, and we are the main stakeholders.
Since we cannot sign on a document that has "Israel’s" signature, the solution was naming Lebanon as the representative of the resistance. Therefore, it was possible for Lebanon to sign the understanding document that had the signatures of major countries, including America and France. Syria’s signature was there too.
Lebanon acted as the official signatory because it was trying to deal with major countries and trying to bind the “Israeli” entity, which has no respect for any covenant or pact. Meanwhile, Hezbollah did not sign the understanding.
Technically, the April Understanding does not have Hezbollah’s signature, even though it was a written understanding. But it does have the signature of the Lebanese state.
Later, the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 was passed in 2006. This international resolution did not need to be signed because it was issued by the Security Council.
Then, during the demarcation of the maritime borders, an agreement was reached with the Lebanese state that there would be two separate copies. The “Israelis” would sign one, and the Lebanese would sign the other. The two copies would go to the United Nations. This means that the signatures were not on the same paper.
We maintained this practice at all stages, and Hezbollah did not sign on the same document as the “Israelis”. Even during prisoner swaps, the exchange took place through a mediator. We never engaged in direct discussions or signed the same documents as part of keeping our distance and not recognizing the “Israeli” entity. As a resistance, we had to establish the project of fully rejecting this entity and refusing to legitimize it, even partially.
Q – What are the implications of what we have witnessed during the past few days, when the “Israeli” entity came under missile attacks from several fronts in response to the violations against Al-Aqsa Mosque? Has the Zionist entity become more vulnerable to shakes as a result of the unity of the resistance axis?
A – Before we discuss the source of the missiles that were launched from Lebanon, the Golan Heights, Gaza, or any other place, we must talk about the “Israeli” aggression against Al-Quds and the Palestinians, whether in the West Bank, Al-Quds and its surroundings, or Gaza. This is where the primary responsibility lies.
So, when the world talks about missiles launched from here or there, I consider this the wrong discussion. The discussion should be, "Why is “Israel” attacking?" The Palestinians have the right to defend themselves in the ways they see fit, and we are not here to justify any action.
But we are talking about principles and rules. The question must be: Why does the world not stop the Zionist attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque and put an end to the “Israeli” crimes against the Palestinians? This is the question and not where the missiles were launched from.
Q – There has been a lot of talk in the “Israeli” media in recent weeks about the role of Hezbollah, not only on the southern borders with occupied Palestine, but also along the borders all the way to the occupied Golan. What is the truth about this role with this expansion?
A – Hezbollah is present in Lebanon, and its resistance emanates from Lebanon. Those who are resisting the temporary “Israeli” entity in the region are the Palestinian people and the other forces in and surrounding Palestine. Hezbollah does not hide that it supports anyone who resists "Israel" anywhere, and we consider that the Palestinians have every right to fight "Israel" inside Palestine and to liberate Palestine and Al-Quds. We are by their side and support them. They are the compass, and we support and fight to liberate the land in the way we see fit.
Q – In the Quds Day climate and with the escalating situation in Al-Aqsa, what is your message to the Palestinian people?
A – A great salute must be given to the founder, Imam Khomeini, who founded the International Quds Day. This heralded a new phase in which people, resistance groups, and countries stand alongside the Palestinian people to fight the “Israeli” enemy, in addition to the open support for the Palestinian people and resistance to expel the occupier.
Here, we tell the Palestinian people: You have proven your true worth through sacrifices, martyrs, and the wounded and through the participation of men, women, children, and everyone in resisting the occupier.
It turns out that when some capabilities are available to you, you, who are at the forefront, give your souls and your money and you sacrifice your homes.
This people are great people, and I am confident that they will be victorious and will liberate Palestine and Al-Quds, God willing, and it is only a matter of time. A country with such a people can only triumph.
Q – What is your interpretation of the resumption of Saudi-Iranian relations?
A – The resumption of Saudi-Iranian relations carries two main subjects. The first is the change in direction in the region by focusing on the central enemy – the “Israeli” entity – instead of tirelessly working on making Iran the central enemy, and we clearly see the repercussions of this issue.
As for the second, the Saudi-Iranian agreement will open a new page and phase in which there will be strength and dignity for the peoples and countries of the region through stability, solidarity, cooperation and help in changing the pattern that the Americans wanted in our region, and this is a great achievement for future generations.
For us, the Saudi-Iranian agreement is a new phase in every sense of the word in our region towards more cooperation and stability, isolating "Israel" and confronting it, and restraining America's hand from many issues of concern to our region.
We hope that the outcomes of this agreement will be influential on the entire region. According to what we have learned, the resumption of bilateral relations is proceeding very quickly, and a resolution to the problem between Yemen and Saudi Arabia is also proceeding at a rapid pace. The resumption of Saudi relations with Syria is moving ahead, and all of this is an indication that the agreement is progressing quickly. Certainly, it has positive effects on Lebanon, but the exact impact and its timing remain unknown. We do know that this agreement is a good thing.
Q – Is there anything new concerning the Lebanese presidential file?
A – The Lebanese presidential file is still pending due to the insistence of a number of parliamentary blocs not to engage in dialogue and not to be rational in their choices.
Today, the only person who has a large number of votes, according to all the statistics and evidence, is Minister Suleiman Frangieh. All the other names presented in the media cannot catch up with him.
Therefore, these blocs that were not able to unanimously agree on a candidate that has the ability to pass the quorum in parliament should engage in dialogue to see if it is possible to bridge points of view in favor of this option – Minister Suleiman Franjieh to be president.
The alternative is to waste time and prolong the vacuum, and we want to elect a president as soon as possible because it is a constitutional challenge that all solutions in Lebanon depend on.
The time has come for the various parliamentary blocs to be realistic and head towards finding common denominators for a president who has the ability to be open to everyone and is able to save Lebanon, God willing.
