Bassil Embodies the Meaning of Brotherhood in the Homeland… and Afeef Stands Against Deceit

November 13, 2024

Nasser Kandil

• I felt the spirit of national brotherhood and responsibility flow through the words as I read the detailed press conference by the head of the Free Patriotic Movement, Gebran Bassil. His meticulous analysis of UN Resolution 1701, a perspective unmatched by others, concluded that the resolution has no gaps needing amendment, addition, or clarification.

Lebanon and Hezbollah fulfilled their commitments in its first phase, while Israel’s failure to meet its obligations for a permanent ceasefire has prevented the implementation of the second phase, which entails ending armed presence south of the Litani River and addressing the fate of the resistance’s arms. Since Israel continues to occupy land and violate Lebanese airspace and waters, Bassil argues that confronting the resistance’s arms with empty rhetoric only weakens Lebanon, disregarding the duty to build a capable army and leverage every element of national strength. This strength is crucial against a brutal aggression, a guardianship project, and an existential threat that only force can deter.

In his heartfelt tribute to Sayyed Nasrallah, Bassil diverged from many others by openly noting his differences with Hezbollah on the concept of support fronts and unity of battlefronts. This stance reflects true national responsibility, merging the right to disagree with a sense of shared responsibility in the face of danger, underscoring the warmth of national brotherhood in these critical times.

• Yet, as I read a Lebanese newspaper’s lead article mocking Hezbollah’s media official, Hajj Muhammad Al-Afeef, I felt an opposite emotion. This derisive tone, unbecoming of a national publication, ignores the decorum owed to a representative of a political party with the highest Lebanese electoral support and a wide following, as noted even by French President Emmanuel Macron. Disagreement is legitimate, but the manner of communication – half the battle in political discourse – matters. The nauseating feeling increased as the article went on to exude hatred, rife with hostility, missing the opportunity for the – much needed- reasoned dialogue. Ironically, the same newspaper that now derides the virtuous Afeef and Hezbollah for being “mired in denial” had in 2020 staunchly defended Riad Salameh, refraining from similar language and instead branding the economic plan of PM Hassan Diab’s government a “plan of total collapse” merely because Salameh opposed it.

• The article draws a comparison between Iraqi Minister of Information Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf. Here we should remind readers that Al-Sahhaf relayed false reports from the enemy’s command centre of fake victories to evade admission of their collapse before the invasion. Whereas al-Afeef relays credible updates from a steadfast resistance that has managed to defeat invasion forces. By drawing the comparison, the article claims that al-Afeef, like al-Sahhaf, is “selling people a fantasy of triumph”. Yet, al-Afeef’s words are grounded in real outcomes on the battlefield.

• The article argues, “The videos show Israeli forces advancing to a depth of 4 kilometres into multiple border towns, demolishing them entirely to create a buffer zone that would allow the return of northern settlers”. My response to the writer: Did you see the footage aired by Israel’s Channel 12 and covered by Yedioth Ahronoth? The report showed that Hezbollah rockets were launched precisely from these so-called buffer zones that you mention. What did the paper say? We shall repeat it here for you only to annoy, not persuade. Yedioth Ahronoth – the Hebrew newspaper said that “Rockets were fired towards Evin Manachem in the western Galilee from the borderline – that is from places where the Israeli army was supposed to have completed their task”. This comes after 40 days of ground confrontation, the paper further states that “northern settlers are not relying on military or political statements about security – instead they are only reassured by what they witness firsthand”. As for Israel’s Channel 12, it reported “widespread anger among settlers regarding Hezbollah’s continued missile launches and reports by their army’s leaders, about the ability of settlers to return. Channel 12 also said that “Hezbollah is maintaining its missile capabilities, even after this battle concludes and northern residents return, the security and military establishment cannot guarantee that missiles will not be launched from Lebanon” adding that “We are witnessing unceasing fire from Lebanon, which is increasing in both quantity and range”.

• After this adrenaline-pumping dose that stimulates mental laziness, we ask: Where did the article’s supposed contradiction between Al-Afeef and Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Qassem, come from? They are not contradicting but complementing each other, with a shared understanding that true friendship is built on honesty. The Batroun incident underscores this, arising perhaps from the army’s frustration over Germany’s refusal to share radar data crucial for monitoring Lebanese coastal security. Al-Afeef’s remarks on the strong bond between the army and Hezbollah seem to have unnerved some, especially when he stated, “No one will succeed in driving a wedge between the army and the resistance.”

• The Qur’an says, “Or do those in whose hearts is a disease think that God will not bring forth their malice?”, and Prophet Muhammad said, “Three traits: if a person is free of, God may forgive them for anything else, according to His will: one who dies without associating anything with God, one who has not practised sorcery or followed sorcerers, and one who holds no resentment against their brother”.

• But as Bismarck said, resentment is a poor guide in politics. So why harbour resentment toward your brother? Can’t you oppose him with goodwill? And if that feels impossible, then oppose him with respect. Especially when the homeland is at risk and unity is our strongest defence, while discord serves only the occupier’s aims.

• It does not diminish Afeef to confront such indecency … but resentment only diminishes its bearer, exposing their pettiness.