Hezbollah's Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem issued the following statement:
It is no longer a matter of debate that a dangerous American-Israeli project is unfolding in the region under the banner of “Greater Israel,” a vision rooted in occupation and territorial expansion stretching from the Euphrates to the Nile, with Lebanon included within its scope. The aggression against Lebanon did not end on November 27, 2024. Israel has failed to honor any agreement and has instead continued its attacks relentlessly for over fifteen months.
Lebanon now faces a defining moment between two stark choices. The first is surrender, which would mean relinquishing land, dignity, sovereignty, and the future of coming generations. The second is confrontation through resistance, a path deemed inevitable to prevent the occupation from achieving its objectives. The resistance, according to Qassem, has carefully determined the timing of its response, denying Israel the element of surprise, preventing Lebanon’s isolation, and stripping away any justification for escalation. A barrage of rockets, he argues, cannot serve as a pretext for war, particularly after prolonged and continuous aggression.
Qassem asserts that the resistance is fully prepared and has demonstrated both effectiveness and capability. He describes its fighters as selfless and determined, presenting what he calls examples of courage, honor, and patriotism. He emphasizes their readiness to continue the fight without limits, portraying them as symbols of national pride and as the force behind what he describes as a coming liberation.
He also highlights the role of the civilian population aligned with the resistance, describing them as resilient and steadfast despite displacement, loss, and hardship. Their sacrifices, he says, are made in pursuit of a dignified and independent future for Lebanon and its people.
In his framing, the core issue remains the ongoing aggression, which he identifies as the primary threat, while positioning the resistance as both a response and a source of hope. He stresses that confronting this aggression is not the responsibility of one group alone but a collective national duty shared by the government, the army, political factions, and citizens.
Qassem accuses the United States and Israel of seeking to weaken Lebanon, control its political direction, and undermine its sovereignty. He warns that these efforts include fostering internal divisions, legitimizing Israeli presence on Lebanese territory, and limiting the Lebanese army’s ability to defend the country.
He strongly criticizes calls to restrict weapons exclusively to the state under current conditions, arguing that such proposals, when made in line with Israeli demands while occupation persists, risk paving the way for Lebanon’s decline. He further rejects the idea of negotiations under fire, describing it as a form of imposed surrender that would strip Lebanon of its remaining leverage. In his view, negotiations are fundamentally unacceptable while occupation and daily attacks continue.
Qassem dismisses claims that Lebanon is a battleground for external conflicts, insisting instead that the country is facing a direct war waged by Israel and supported by the United States. He contrasts this with what he describes as a legitimate defense carried out by the resistance, the army, and citizens committed to Lebanon’s independence.
He frames the current situation as a defensive battle, emphasizing that those killed are civilians and fighters alike, and that any gains made are tied to reclaiming Lebanese land. He calls for national unity as a priority, urging all sides to focus on halting the aggression and liberating both land and people before addressing internal political differences.
According to Qassem, unity is essential to preventing further occupation, overcoming the current crisis, and rebuilding the country. He argues that national cohesion requires the government to avoid decisions that could benefit Israel, even indirectly, and calls for a reversal of policies that criminalize resistance activities.
He concludes by pointing to the human cost of the conflict, accusing Israel of targeting civilians, destroying infrastructure, and displacing communities while avoiding direct confrontation with fighters. Despite this, he expresses confidence that the resistance and its supporters will not be defeated, regardless of the sacrifices required, reaffirming a belief in eventual victory and justice.
It is no longer a matter of debate that a dangerous American-Israeli project is unfolding in the region under the banner of “Greater Israel,” a vision rooted in occupation and territorial expansion stretching from the Euphrates to the Nile, with Lebanon included within its scope. The aggression against Lebanon did not end on November 27, 2024. Israel has failed to honor any agreement and has instead continued its attacks relentlessly for over fifteen months.
Lebanon now faces a defining moment between two stark choices. The first is surrender, which would mean relinquishing land, dignity, sovereignty, and the future of coming generations. The second is confrontation through resistance, a path deemed inevitable to prevent the occupation from achieving its objectives. The resistance, according to Qassem, has carefully determined the timing of its response, denying Israel the element of surprise, preventing Lebanon’s isolation, and stripping away any justification for escalation. A barrage of rockets, he argues, cannot serve as a pretext for war, particularly after prolonged and continuous aggression.
Qassem asserts that the resistance is fully prepared and has demonstrated both effectiveness and capability. He describes its fighters as selfless and determined, presenting what he calls examples of courage, honor, and patriotism. He emphasizes their readiness to continue the fight without limits, portraying them as symbols of national pride and as the force behind what he describes as a coming liberation.
He also highlights the role of the civilian population aligned with the resistance, describing them as resilient and steadfast despite displacement, loss, and hardship. Their sacrifices, he says, are made in pursuit of a dignified and independent future for Lebanon and its people.
In his framing, the core issue remains the ongoing aggression, which he identifies as the primary threat, while positioning the resistance as both a response and a source of hope. He stresses that confronting this aggression is not the responsibility of one group alone but a collective national duty shared by the government, the army, political factions, and citizens.
Qassem accuses the United States and Israel of seeking to weaken Lebanon, control its political direction, and undermine its sovereignty. He warns that these efforts include fostering internal divisions, legitimizing Israeli presence on Lebanese territory, and limiting the Lebanese army’s ability to defend the country.
He strongly criticizes calls to restrict weapons exclusively to the state under current conditions, arguing that such proposals, when made in line with Israeli demands while occupation persists, risk paving the way for Lebanon’s decline. He further rejects the idea of negotiations under fire, describing it as a form of imposed surrender that would strip Lebanon of its remaining leverage. In his view, negotiations are fundamentally unacceptable while occupation and daily attacks continue.
Qassem dismisses claims that Lebanon is a battleground for external conflicts, insisting instead that the country is facing a direct war waged by Israel and supported by the United States. He contrasts this with what he describes as a legitimate defense carried out by the resistance, the army, and citizens committed to Lebanon’s independence.
He frames the current situation as a defensive battle, emphasizing that those killed are civilians and fighters alike, and that any gains made are tied to reclaiming Lebanese land. He calls for national unity as a priority, urging all sides to focus on halting the aggression and liberating both land and people before addressing internal political differences.
According to Qassem, unity is essential to preventing further occupation, overcoming the current crisis, and rebuilding the country. He argues that national cohesion requires the government to avoid decisions that could benefit Israel, even indirectly, and calls for a reversal of policies that criminalize resistance activities.
He concludes by pointing to the human cost of the conflict, accusing Israel of targeting civilians, destroying infrastructure, and displacing communities while avoiding direct confrontation with fighters. Despite this, he expresses confidence that the resistance and its supporters will not be defeated, regardless of the sacrifices required, reaffirming a belief in eventual victory and justice.
