December 19, 2024
Nasser Kandil
• Israeli provocations continue to escalate in both scale and intensity, flagrantly violating all notions of sovereignty and national dignity. These violations, now numbering in the hundreds, range from cold-blooded drone assassinations to the destruction of homes and mosques, and incursions into areas the occupation forces had not ventured into even during the war. Most recently, settlers were seen pitching tents and chanting Talmudic hymns on Lebanese soil, a blatant affront that has stirred widespread outrage. In light of this aggression, some question what the resistance is waiting for to respond, insinuating that it may now fear confrontation, acting as if it has been deterred or defeated following the war.
• Amid these provocative demands, often crossing into outright extortion, it is imperative to think carefully before calling on the resistance to retaliate. Many of these calls emanate from quarters more interested in scoring political points against the resistance than in defending its cause. If the resistance were to respond and trigger another round of fighting, these same voices would accuse it of dragging Lebanon into war, claiming that international interventions and diplomatic pressure might otherwise have succeeded in curbing Israeli violations.
• At this juncture, the resistance is tasked with confronting those who argue that the French-American oversight of the ceasefire agreement guarantees protection from Israeli aggression. These individuals must be held publicly accountable, both within and outside the government. Popular demonstrations from villages under attack should be organised to amplify these demands, targeting government offices and every meeting of the oversight committee supervising the ceasefire. The Lebanese government must be pressed to explain why it has not yet directed the Lebanese Army to confront these violations. Many of those advocating against the resistance claim that the dual framework of the Army and UNIFIL, under American auspices, is sufficient to deter Israeli aggression.
• The resistance must exercise patience and restraint, preparing its responses while refraining from haste. If the violations cease, the objective will have been achieved. If not, and public sentiment along with political momentum coalesce to provide the necessary mandate and cover, the resistance will be poised to seize the initiative with a decisive and painful response – not merely a warning shot. When the time comes, the response must target the forces intruding into Lebanese territory across multiple fronts simultaneously. Before acting, the resistance should issue clear warnings that any response will inflict significant damage and will not stop at mere cautionary measures. At that point, the occupation must choose: adhere to the agreement or abandon it altogether.
• Those who have relentlessly advocated for defensive strategies that exclude the resistance must now present their solutions. This is the real test of a defensive strategy, playing out on the ground. Thus far, the results speak for themselves: without the resistance, the occupation acts with impunity, unchallenged. The Lebanese Army lacks the capacity to confront these aggressions, and the so-called international guarantors neither possess the will nor the means to restrain the occupation. These facts underscore that Lebanon’s only viable means of defense is through the resistance. If anyone has an alternative, let them demonstrate it in practice – now, not later – or remain silent forever. This is the equation that must be articulated loudly and clearly until it reverberates in every ear.
• The debate over Lebanon’s defensive strategy is ongoing, unfolding daily across the southern borders and villages under persistent aggression. Occupation drones roam freely in Lebanese skies, disregarding international law and any notion of Lebanese sovereignty. If diplomacy, international relations, legal frameworks, and an under-equipped army are the proposed strategy, let their proponents demonstrate their efficacy now – not tomorrow.
