[News] Hezbollah SG reveals war details on Al Mayadeen for the first time

[Anti-Imperialist News]

english.almayadeen.net
<https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/hezbollah-sg-reveals-war-details-on-al-mayadeen-for-the-firs>
Hezbollah SG reveals war details on Al Mayadeen for the first time
Al Mayadeen English
July 8, 2025
------------------------------

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem details post-war readiness,
stance on Syria, and reasons for accepting the ceasefire after Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah's assassination.

   - [image: Hezbollah SG reveals war details on Al Mayadeen for the first
   time]
   <https://alpha-en-media.almayadeen.net/media/image/2025/7/8/ef035aef-32d3-4acb-90ca-69dabfc97a17.jpg?v=4&width=1000>
   Screen Grab from Al Mayadeen interview with Hezbollah's secretary general,
   Sheikh Naim Qassem, aired on July 8, 2025 (Al Mayadeen)

In his first interview with *Al Mayadeen *since assuming the leadership of
Hezbollah, Sheikh Naim Qassem spoke to *Al Mayadeen*'s chairman of the
board of directors, Mr. Ghassan Ben Jeddou, offering a detailed account of
the Resistance's strategic decision to enter the ongoing war on Gaza
through a "support battle" rather than a full-scale war.

Sheikh Qassem described the move as the product of collective deliberation
within Hezbollah’s Shura Council, marking a pivotal moment in the group's
evolving response to the Israeli occupation's war on Gaza. Sheikh Qassem
revealed that Hezbollah’s Shura Council convened and unanimously decided to
enter the support battle for Gaza. He emphasized that this decision was not
taken lightly nor through phone calls. “This kind of decision cannot be
made via phone calls or casual communications. It required an urgent
in-person meeting,” he said, adding that the decision came two days after
the start of the war, while Hezbollah had already begun launching attacks
from Shebaa Farms on October 8.

Responding to the question of why Hezbollah chose a limited support
operation rather than an all-out war, Sheikh Qassem stated that a
full-scale war demands significant prior preparations. “The outcome of a
full war is predictable. It requires preparedness that simply wasn’t
available,” he said. Instead, Hezbollah opted for a measured approach. “We
had to enter the battle with limited support and observe developments
closely. Based on how things evolved, we could make a clearer choice,”
Sheikh Qassem explained.
Goals of engagement in support operation

Weeks into the operation, the Shura Council solidified its decision to
pursue a support war rather than a comprehensive one. According to Sheikh
Qassem, this approach successfully achieved Hezbollah’s strategic
objectives without escalating into full-scale conflict.

Sheikh Qassem outlined three primary goals behind Hezbollah’s engagement:
Diverting the Israeli occupation forces: “We aimed to draw a significant
number of Israeli forces to northern occupied Palestine,” he said; creating
social pressure: Hezbollah sought to force the evacuation of Israeli
settlers from the north, thereby triggering a social, economic, and
security crisis; inflicting casualties: “The more soldiers we kill, the
more we push Israel closer to defeat,” Sheikh Qassem asserted.

These tactics, he said, helped deplete Israeli military capabilities near
Gaza and the surrounding areas, easing pressure on the besieged population
in the Strip. “It also sends a clear message to the Israelis that they are
facing a two-front war, and that it is in their interest to find a solution
and bring this to an end,” he added.
No prior coordination

Sheikh Qassem denied that Hezbollah had any prior coordination with Hamas
before the October 7 operation. “We simply didn’t know. If we weren’t
aware, how could we join a comprehensive war from the start?” he said.

He disclosed that Hezbollah later received a message from the commander of
Hamas’ military wing, martyr Mohammed Deif, via a Lebanese intermediary.
Sheikh Qassem added that discussions were held in Beirut with senior Hamas
official Khalil al-Hayya and his delegation during their visit. According
to Sheikh Qassem, both Hezbollah and Palestinian factions, including in a
meeting with the late Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, reached a shared conclusion:
the support operation was sufficient to serve the resistance's broader aims.

“For two months, we assessed whether this level of support was enough. But
we came to see that the Israeli aggression was extreme, supported by new
rules of engagement and US backing,” he said. “Doing more than support
would not have changed the outcome.”

Sheikh Qassem clarified that, based on his information, Iran was not
informed in advance of Hamas’ plans. “In fact, even parts of Hamas’
leadership abroad weren’t aware,” he noted. Still, he stressed that Iran’s
unwavering support for the Palestinian cause, militarily, financially,
politically, and even through intelligence and media, has continued
uninterrupted. “Whether they told us or not, our stance remains firm in
supporting Palestine, especially during this strategic phase of the al-Aqsa
Flood,” he said.
Breaches that affected Hezbollah being investigated

In the second installment of his exclusive interview with *Al Mayadeen*,
Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem addressed the recent
security breaches that shook the organization, revealing ongoing internal
investigations and new details about the scope and nature of the
infiltration.

Sheikh Qassem confirmed that a central investigative committee had been
formed and was still working, alongside several subcommittees examining
specific aspects of the breach, including the booby-trapped pagers, the
location of Sayyed Nasrallah’s assassination, and the assassination of
Sayyed Hashem Safieddine. He said various monitoring and investigation
points had also been established.
Rigged pagers, untraceable explosives

On the issue of the rigged pagers, Sheikh Qassem revealed that
investigations uncovered a serious vulnerability in the procurement process
over the year to year and a half leading up to the purchase. “We did not
know the supply chain had been exposed. With the means available to us, we
could not detect the presence of explosives,” he admitted. He explained
that the type of explosive device used inside the pager was highly advanced
and undetectable by standard methods. “This could be seen as a failure, or
as a limitation of our capabilities,” he said.

In the days just before the pager explosion, Hezbollah’s team had already
begun to suspect a malfunction. “There were efforts to examine the pager
differently, including attempts to break it open, which were prompted by
some anomalies that raised questions,” Sheikh Qassem noted.

As to whether the Israeli regime detonated the device out of fear it might
be discovered, he said, “That’s an Israeli assessment. Perhaps they feared
we were close to exposing it.”
Massive surveillance, not human espionage

Sheikh Qassem also acknowledged a serious gap in Hezbollah’s awareness of
the scale of Israeli surveillance, particularly through electronic and
aerial means. He said Hezbollah had received reports indicating possible
wiretapping, but “we did not realize the extent, that it was near-total and
very extensive.”

He said "Israel" has been collecting data through aerial surveillance over
a 17-year period, documenting geographical and infrastructural changes. “We
didn’t have the capacity to grasp how deep Israel’s information gathering
had gone,” Sheikh Qassem admitted.

In light of this, Sheikh Qassem argued that human espionage now plays a
secondary role compared to the technological intelligence capabilities
deployed by Israel. “Frankly speaking, the human breach appears very
limited compared to the immense volume of data collected through
surveillance and drones,” he said.

He firmly denied any evidence of a widespread human infiltration within
Hezbollah’s ranks. “There is no indication of any significant breach
involving core figures or senior commanders,” he stressed, pledging
transparency. “If we find there has been human penetration, I will speak
publicly and disclose the level of that breach.”
1,500 bugged devices intercepted

Sheikh Qassem also disclosed that Hezbollah intercepted a shipment of
roughly 1,500 bugged pager devices in Turkiye. The discovery was made after
the initial pager explosion. Hezbollah immediately contacted Lebanon’s
caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who in turn reached out to Turkish
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, requesting the devices be destroyed. “This
issue was addressed swiftly after the explosion,” Sheikh Qassem said.

As for speculation that similarly rigged military armor or protective gear
may have been intended for Hezbollah fighters, Sheikh Qassem stated: “I
have no information to confirm that.”

Sheikh Qassem addressed the future of the party following months of war and
the loss of top leaders, including the late Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. He
emphasized resilience, determination, and the readiness to confront any
future Israeli aggression.
'A people that cannot be defeated'

Sheikh Qassem reassured supporters that Hezbollah, despite the severe blows
it had endured, is not a defeated force. “A people like this, an Ummah like
this, a party and resistance like this, cannot be defeated,” he declared.
“Do you expect anything less than for us to remain present, strong, and
capable of shaping the future we choose?”

Referring to the attacks that targeted Hezbollah’s advanced capabilities,
including the bugged pagers and communications systems, as well as the
assassination of Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Sayyed Hashem
Safieddine, and a group of top commanders and lower-ranking officers,
Sheikh Qassem said the Israeli occupation had assumed Hezbollah would
collapse. “And yet, here we are, back on our feet, engaged in fierce
battle, and forcing Israel to agree to a ceasefire. What does that say?” he
asked.

He listed what he called the elements of victory: Hezbollah’s continued
operations, the Israeli failure to penetrate deeper into Lebanese territory
or reach Beirut or Sidon, and the preservation of Lebanese unity. “They
failed to spark internal strife. They failed to destroy the party. They
failed to achieve their objectives,” he affirmed.
'Our patience has limits'

Commenting on the Israeli occupation's expanding aggression, including
recent attacks on Beirut’s southern suburb, Sheikh Qassem warned that
Hezbollah’s patience was not unlimited. “Resistance will not wait forever.
There are limits,” he stated. While he did not disclose timing or methods,
he underscored that when the decision is made, “there is no third option
between victory and martyrdom. We do not have surrender as an option.”

He attributed the Israeli occupation's escalated operations to US policy,
saying Washington hopes to gain through diplomacy what it failed to achieve
militarily. “Their strategy is: ‘Let’s use diplomacy to get what we
couldn’t in war.’ So the Americans apply pressure through Israel,” he said.

Sheikh Qassem praised Lebanese state leaders for their unified position. “I
salute President Joseph Aoun, Speaker Nabih Berri, and all officials
involved in what has become a remarkable display of national unity.”
Martyrdom of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah

In deeply personal remarks, Sheikh Qassem reflected on the loss of Sayyed
Hassan Nasrallah, calling it a devastating shock not only to the public but
also to Hezbollah’s leadership. “His martyrdom was not only unexpected to
the world, it was unexpected for us,” he said. “If you had asked me before,
I would have said all of us might fall before Sayyed [Nasrallah] does.
That’s how strong, courageous, and divinely guided he was.”

“It was not easy to imagine his departure,” he added. “Perhaps this was
part of a divine secret. We do not know when our time comes. But he earned
his rest, and he rose to the highest rank. We consider martyrdom the
greatest honor, and he received the highest honor.”

Sheikh Qassem described the moment he learned of the assassination. “At
first, I was in denial. I thought maybe the news wasn’t true, maybe he
wasn’t hit, maybe he was still alive somewhere. But the next day, the
brothers confirmed the body had been recovered. That’s when the truth
settled in.”

The greatest challenge now, he said, is carrying on in the absence of a
leader whose strength, tone, energy, and stance were irreplaceable. “We
don’t cry because he’s gone, we cry because we don’t know how to compensate
for what we’ve lost,” Sheikh Qassem said. “But martyrdom doesn’t stop the
path; it nourishes it.”

“We are now charged with continuing this mission at the level of his
sacrifice. With sincerity and resolve, we ask God to help us carry this
responsibility.”
Assuming the leadership of Hezbollah

Sheikh Qassem opened up about the tense days following the assassination of
Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, recounting his first public appearance, the
burdens of leadership, and how Hezbollah transitioned into a new command
structure while under fire.

After the assassination of Sayyed Hashem Safieddine, Sheikh Qassem formally
assumed the role of Secretary General, with direct responsibility for
overseeing Hezbollah’s military operations. He said that shortly after
taking the helm, he was asked by an Iranian military leader and a Lebanese
commander outside Hezbollah how he would manage a military campaign.

Sheikh Qassem explained that the Secretary-General is, by party structure,
also the head of the Jihadi Council, responsible for directing military
affairs. “Now that I was in this position, I had to intensify communication
with relevant commanders and better understand operational details,” he
said.

He laid out three key qualifications for leading Hezbollah and its
resistance project: The ability to organize and lead effectively, a deep
understanding of Hezbollah’s mission and strategic vision, and familiarity
with the party’s structure, resources, and internal workings. “All of these
were present,” he affirmed, noting that he had served as deputy for 32
years and was an active member of the Shura Council throughout.
Process of making military decisions

Sheikh Qassem offered a rare insight into Hezbollah’s military
decision-making process, emphasizing that all major decisions, from naming
unit leaders to launching operations, are made collectively within the
Shura Council. “There is no appointment without deep discussion.”

He added that proposed battle scenarios, such as the Qalamoun campaign,
Hezbollah’s entry into Syria, or decisions to retaliate against Israeli
actions, are always brought before the council. “We might say: this is our
proposal, the Jihadi Council recommends this course. Should we strike this
way? Launch a drone? Fire a rocket? All of this goes through internal
deliberation,” he said.

Sheikh Qassem stressed that Hezbollah continued to function in an organized
fashion even amid heavy attacks. “Hezbollah was run as if it still had a
secretary general. No one outside the leadership was making the decisions.”

He detailed how operational decisions were made for each escalation. “When
Tel Aviv was struck, that had its own directive. When the strike hit
Netanyahu’s residence, that required a specific order. Even what the enemy
calls ‘Black Sunday’ on November 24, 370 rockets and drones in one day,
that too was based on a formal decision.”
The Tel Aviv strike: Meticulously coordinated

Sheikh Qassem emphasized that the strike on Tel Aviv was not spontaneous
but the result of deliberate planning and leadership oversight. “The
Secretary-General was following developments closely through the military
command,” he said, referring to martyr Sayyed Nasrallah, who remained
engaged in strategic oversight until the last moment.

He described the military command structure at the time of the strike as
fully intact. “Every position in the military command was occupied. No seat
was left vacant,” he stated, adding that contingency plans were implemented
quickly after leadership losses.

Sheikh Qassem acknowledged that Iran had provided consultations, for which
he expressed gratitude, but stressed that the decisions came from
Hezbollah’s own organizational framework. “While we appreciate the Iranian
advice, the decisions related to our military structure were made
internally,” he noted.

He cited a specific instance to illustrate the level of coordination: the
timing of his third public speech, which was immediately followed by the
Tel Aviv strike. “How could the two occur back-to-back unless there was a
detailed, prearranged plan?” he asked rhetorically.
'Legendary resilience' on the support front

Reflecting on the battlefield performance, Sheikh Qassem described the
front as having exhibited “legendary resilience,” which he attributed to
two main components. “First, the young fighters who were stationed there:
they knew what they were doing and held their ground even if they were cut
off from communication. They achieved something heroic,” he said.

“The second component was the external support, what we call the
bombardment,” he added, referring to the salvoes of missiles and drones
launched by Hezbollah in support of frontline units. He assured the public
that even in the most difficult moments, Hezbollah maintained an active and
coordinated presence. “Until the very last moment, fighters were reaching
positions like the southern town of Khiam,” he revealed. “There were places
we couldn’t reach, yes, but not everything was severed.”

Asked whether Hezbollah still possessed the human and non-human
capabilities needed to continue fighting, Sheikh Qassem declined to
disclose numbers or percentages related to losses or remaining strength.
Instead, he offered a concise yet firm assurance: “Hezbollah is rebuilding,
recovering, and ready now.”

He added, “If Israel were to attack, we would not stand by and watch; we
would fight.”

Regarding claims that 500 of Hezbollah’s weapons storage sites south of the
Litani River had been destroyed, Sheikh Qassem replied: “They’re referring
to what they saw south of the Litani. But the country is vast,” declining
to elaborate further.
Why Hezbollah accepted a ceasefire

Sheikh Qassem revisited discussions that took place even before the war
began, noting that martyr Sayyed Nasrallah had publicly stated Hezbollah
was not seeking war. A French-American proposal for a 21-day ceasefire in
Lebanon, separate from Gaza, was already circulating well before the
broader conflict erupted.

According to Qassem, on September 25, a joint French-American statement
outlined the proposal. “As media coverage and diplomatic discussions
unfolded, Sayyed Nasrallah informed Speaker Nabih Berri through (Hezbollah
MP) Hussein Khalil that Hezbollah was open to the idea of a ceasefire,
depending on how the proposal could be improved through negotiations,” he
explained.

But just two days later, Sayyed Nasrallah was assassinated, and the
situation changed dramatically. Hezbollah launched what it later named
Operation *People of Might* in response to the Israeli escalation. Sheikh
Qassem disclosed that the name was suggested in part by martyr Mohammad
Afif, who had texted Sheikh Qassem with a list of proposed titles.

He stressed that Hezbollah had never made a decision to enter a full-scale
war, only to retaliate for Israeli aggression. “If the enemy stops, we are
ready to stop. We didn’t start the war; they did,” he said.
Avoiding a war of attrition

Sheikh Qassem explained that the military campaign had succeeded in halting
the Israeli occupation's advance and preventing it from achieving its
objectives. Prolonging the conflict further, he argued, would have led to a
war of attrition with no strategic gain. “At that point, the battle risked
becoming aimless, and we would have ended up at the negotiating table
anyway,” he said. “So, on November 24, we agreed to a ceasefire because the
enemy had also accepted it.”

The agreement was facilitated by US envoy Amos Hochstein, who presented a
draft to Speaker Nabih Berri. Hezbollah reviewed the proposal, submitted
amendments through Berri, and the final agreement was reached with
unanimous approval from Hezbollah’s Shura Council.

Qassem noted that Hezbollah’s front-line commanders also supported the
deal. “They said this was the right proposal at the right time, after we
had reached the point of attrition.”

Sheikh Naim Qassem firmly rejected two prevailing narratives surrounding
the movement’s decision to accept a ceasefire with the Israeli regime: that
Iran pressured Hezbollah into the agreement, and that the central
leadership was unaware of the heroic endurance being demonstrated by
fighters on the southern front.

Sheikh Qassem stressed: “How could a ceasefire go into effect at 4 o’clock,
and everyone from the frontlines to the rear immediately comply, unless
there’s a connected command chain and a decision being executed?” He
emphasized that Hezbollah’s military discipline disproved the claim of
disconnection with field units.

On the role of Iran, Qassem was equally clear: “Iran never asked us to
agree to a ceasefire. We informed them of our decision, but it was entirely
ours. It was a Lebanese decision, taken by Hezbollah and Amal. Even the
Lebanese state accepted the agreement through indirect negotiations.”
Iran’s calculated non-intervention

Sheikh Qassem acknowledged that at the outset of the Gaza war, Hezbollah
had moved independently to begin its support operations based on its own
assessment of capabilities and strategic timing. Although some within the
Palestinian factions initially felt the support was insufficient, they
later accepted its value.

As for Iran’s role in the broader regional war, Sheikh Qassem pointed to
Tehran’s calculated restraint: “Iran understood that direct entry into the
war would pull the United States into a confrontation with Tehran, giving
Israel exactly what it wanted, a larger war with US backing.”

Instead, Iran chose to provide critical financial, military, political, and
media support across the Axis of Resistance. “Iran did everything it could
and more,” said Qassem. “We never asked Iran to participate in the war, and
it did not need to be asked. Its support is the foundation of our
resilience, and that of the entire resistance.”

He stressed that direct military engagement is not the only form of
meaningful support: “Participation comes in many forms. Iran did what
mattered most, and it was deeply effective.”
The Leader of the Revolution's personal involvement

Sheikh Qassem also revealed the degree of attention Iranian Leader
Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei devoted to the situation in Gaza and Lebanon.
“The Leader was receiving daily reports from the IRGC, Iranian
intelligence, and media, and was actively following developments. He urged
his officials to give support, stay engaged, and stand by us,” Qassem said.

“What more could we ask for?” he added. “The stream kept on flowing even if
some of the canals got damaged. But if the source dries up, we have a real
problem. And the source, Imam Khamenei’s commitment, remains steadfast.”

In a candid assessment of the regional landscape, Hezbollah Secretary
General Sheikh Naim Qassem described the collapse of the Syrian government
as a “definite loss” for the Axis of Resistance, noting that Syria once
served as a vital logistical and political artery for armed Palestinian
groups and resistance movements.
Syria’s Strategic Role Before the Collapse

Sheikh Qassem stated, “What happened in Syria was certainly a loss for the
Axis of Resistance because Syria was a route for military support,”
recalling the era when Damascus offered concrete assistance to Palestinian
factions and facilitated the transfer of weapons and supplies.

He added that the Syrian government, prior to its downfall, had a clear
political stance aligned against the Israeli occupation, which amplified
its value to the Axis of Resistance. The collapse of that role, he said,
had ripple effects not only in Lebanon but also in Gaza, where resistance
forces had relied on Syrian backing in various forms.

The Hezbollah leader expressed uncertainty regarding Syria’s political
future:
"We still cannot clearly read what the shape of the future Syrian system
will be," he said, raising critical questions about whether the country
will emerge as an inclusive political order or fall under the control of a
single faction that sidelines other communities and movements. Sheikh
Qassem also warned of lingering instability: “Thousands of Alawites and
others were killed by groups connected to the regime. This poses a serious
threat to any efforts at rebuilding a stable national framework.”

Despite Hezbollah’s historic alliance with Syria, Sheikh Qassem clarified
that the organization has “no connection to the internal situation in
Syria” following the regime’s collapse, but he hoped Syrians would
ultimately form a unified and independent government that stands against
the Israeli occupation.
Normalization with the Israeli occupation

Turning to recent signs of Syrian normalization with the Israeli regime,
Sheikh Qassem issued a stern warning: “Such steps are extremely dangerous,”
emphasizing that any move by Syria to engage with the Israeli occupation
would be viewed as a betrayal of its resistance legacy. He expressed
confidence, however, in the Syrian people: “Our trust in the Syrian people
is high. We believe they will reject normalization, but how they do that is
their responsibility, not ours.”

Sheikh Qassem reiterated Hezbollah’s consistent opposition to
normalization, whether by Syria or other Arab regimes: “We have always
opposed normalization. Israel will not stop its aggression just because
someone shakes hands with it. That’s an illusion.” He criticized the
continued Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights and the constant strikes
inside Syria, noting that the Zionist regime has “taken 600 square
kilometers of Syrian territory and stripped the Syrian army of much of its
military capacity, yet its demands and attacks never cease.”
'Israel' is not to be trusted

Sheikh Qassem concluded with a stark reminder: “Israel is a predatory
entity. It’s expansionist, insatiable, and criminal. It has no problem
committing acts of mass killing. It is a rampaging beast backed by the
greatest tyrant, the United States.”

His remarks encapsulate Hezbollah’s long-held view that the only viable
approach to the Israeli occupation is resistance, not appeasement or
normalization and that any regional actor entertaining otherwise is playing
with fire.

In his continued commentary on regional developments, Hezbollah Secretary
General Sheikh Naim Qassem firmly rejected any notion that the party is
involved in shaping or influencing Syria’s internal resistance landscape,
stressing that Hezbollah opposes normalization with the Israeli occupation
in principle, but would not interfere directly in Syria’s domestic
decisions.
Hezbollah opposes normalization, plays no role in Syria

When asked if Hezbollah’s opposition to normalization was purely
theoretical or would involve practical efforts inside Syria, Sheikh Qassem
replied: “We will not intervene on the ground to try to change the
direction of the Syrian regime. We have no relation to that. We are against
normalization in theory.”

He further clarified that Hezbollah has no ties to any current Syrian
groups claiming the mantle of resistance: “Even those who now call
themselves ‘the Resistance’ or ‘the People of Valor’, maybe they liked the
name or someone suggested it, but we have no connection to them. We have no
organized resistance project inside Syria.”

He added that even during earlier border disturbances in Lebanon’s Hermel
region, Hezbollah explicitly distanced itself from the events and
coordinated with the Lebanese Army to ensure state control.

Sheikh Qassem stressed Hezbollah’s complete detachment from both the Syrian
regime and any armed groups active within the country. “We are not involved
on the borders, that’s the army’s responsibility. We’re also not involved
in the coastal events in Syria, nor in determining the nature of Syria’s
regime or whether a resistance exists there.”

He reiterated that Hezbollah’s stance toward Syria is expressed only in
political terms, emphasizing: “The responsibility lies with the Syrian
people; they make the decisions.”
No direct contact with new Syrian authorities

On whether any contact had occurred with the new Syrian administration,
Sheikh Qassem said: “There was no direct communication. There were some
very limited, indirect attempts by ground-based groups, but they didn’t
lead anywhere.” He revealed that in the immediate aftermath of the Assad
regime’s fall, some Hezbollah-affiliated individuals with ties to other
groups initiated informal conversations, but those efforts quickly stalled,
and no meaningful dialogue emerged.

Sheikh Qassem addressed growing speculation about the potential for Syria’s
new rulers to be used as a tool against Hezbollah: “We have the right to be
cautious. We’ve received reports from both Western and Arab countries
suggesting that such ideas exist, that someone wants the new Syrian regime
to serve a role in destabilizing Lebanon.”

He warned Lebanese officials to be vigilant: “Some countries speak
positively to Lebanon but offer nothing in return. Meanwhile, they hope to
use Syria as leverage against us.” He added that certain regional and
international powers are exploring ways to resurrect past models of Syrian
dominance over Lebanon, albeit in a different guise. “As Syria once
controlled Lebanon in various ways and sometimes served foreign agendas,
some actors are looking to repeat that experience with a new formula.”

Without naming specific states, Sheikh Qassem underscored the importance of
political awareness: “We hope these ideas remain theoretical and are never
implemented. Lebanese political leaders must stay alert to those who offer
words without action.”
Hezbollah's Qassem: Attack on Hezbollah Is an Attack on Lebanon Itself

Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem stressed that the current
political pressure facing the party is not merely targeted at Hezbollah but
constitutes a broader assault on Lebanon’s sovereignty and its national
fabric.

"The current stance is not against Hezbollah, but against the Shiites and
against Lebanon itself,” Qassem declared, pushing back against narratives
framing the political crisis as a partisan conflict.

He praised Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri for his steadfastness, calling
him “a man known for taking positions worthy of pride,” highlighting
Berri’s commitment to Shiite unity, national unity, and the broader Islamic
cause.

“Sheikh Qassem warned that calls to disarm Hezbollah align with Israeli
demands and aim to strip Lebanon of its only real source of strength: its
resistance.”

“Lebanon’s strength lies in its people, its army, and its resistance.
Anyone advocating to disarm the resistance is, in effect, weakening the
entire country,” he said.
Existential Threat to Lebanese Shiites?

When asked whether Lebanon’s Shiite community is under existential threat,
Qassem responded affirmatively, noting that “there are those who believe
that elections and national governance can proceed without the Shiite
sect’s participation.”

He cautioned that without Hezbollah’s deterrent power, "Israel" could
expand its aggression into southern Lebanon, posing a direct danger to
Shiite-populated areas.

“When they say they want a Shiite MP in parliament who doesn’t belong to
Amal or Hezbollah, their aim is to eliminate both. We are one family, one
land, one resistance,” Qassem stated, defending Speaker Berri's firm stance
under regional and Western pressure.

He emphasized that while there is indeed a looming existential threat, the
Shiite community is not powerless:

“Let no one think we are weak. We are strong by God, and our resilience,
sacrifices, and steadfastness are what keep Lebanon standing.”
Hezbollah's Relations with Internal Political Parties

Regarding inter-party relations, Sheikh Qassem accused the Lebanese Forces
party of aligning ideologically with "Israel" and obstructing
reconciliation. In contrast, he revealed that Hezbollah maintains
intermittent and discreet dialogue with the Kataeb Party and ongoing,
albeit infrequent, communication with the Future Movement.

He lamented that the absence of former Prime Minister Saad Hariri has
weakened the Future Movement’s political structure, but noted that
Hezbollah’s past coordination with Hariri was substantial and respectful.
Strategic Recalibration Underway

Sheikh Qassem announced an internal strategic review within Hezbollah,
noting that various committees have been tasked with assessing the party's
performance and recalibrating its operational approach in media, education,
politics, and public engagement. The process, he said, may take up to two
months.

“Our principles remain fixed, but our methods must evolve,” he noted.
Openness to Gulf States and Turkey

Qassem affirmed Hezbollah’s willingness to engage with Arab and regional
powers, including the Gulf and Turkey, provided the relationship is one of
mutual respect and sovereignty.

“We welcome any Arab or foreign effort that contributes to Lebanon’s
reconstruction, but not on the basis of turning Lebanon into a client
state,” he stressed.

He confirmed ongoing communication with Ankara and other Arab capitals,
adding that Hezbollah is part of the government and open to any
constructive relationship.
Support for UNIFIL, with Conditions

On UNIFIL’s presence in southern Lebanon, Qassem reiterated Hezbollah’s
support for its mandate, provided it respects Lebanese sovereignty and
coordinates operations with the Lebanese Army.

“We support the extension of UNIFIL's mandate, but we reject any unilateral
operations by UNIFIL within villages and private properties without army
coordination,” he said.
The Role of Arms in Hezbollah’s Identity

Qassem dismissed calls to disarm Hezbollah as misframed, asserting that the
party is more than its arsenal.

“Hezbollah is a movement, a belief, a national project. The weapon is just
one part of it, and not the defining part.”

While he acknowledged that discussions around arms are valid in the proper
context, he underscored that disarmament is not a viable path so long as
Lebanon’s sovereignty is at risk.
Rebuttal to Critics: “What Have You Accomplished?”

In a firm rebuke to Hezbollah’s detractors, Qassem challenged those
demanding the party’s dissolution:

“What have you accomplished for Lebanon? Our track record speaks for
itself: the liberation of southern Lebanon in 2000, the deterrence of
Israeli aggression, and 17 years of security since the 2006 war.”

He blamed political rivals for past internal conflicts, foreign
interventions, and the rise of groups like ISIS.
On the Absence of Factionalism Within Hezbollah

Qassem laughed off recurring media speculation about internal divisions
within Hezbollah.

“They speak of wings and factions, but I see no wings flying. The party is
united, the leadership is united, and our decisions are made collectively
through the Shura Council.”

He described Hezbollah’s internal cohesion as one of its greatest strengths.
Final Word: Loyalty to Nasrallah and the Resistance Axis

Qassem closed the interview with an emotional tribute to Hezbollah’s late
Secretary-General, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

“My love for Sayyed was deep, personal, and beyond formality. His
leadership lifted burdens from all of us. His martyrdom is a badge of
honor.”

He reaffirmed Hezbollah’s unwavering alliance with Iran and the broader
Axis of Resistance, praising allies in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria.

“We are continuing on this path with loyalty and strength. Our journey is
long, with ups and downs, but it is a journey of great reward.”
Al Mayadeen’s 13th Anniversary

The interview coincided with the 13th anniversary of the *Al Mayadeen*
network, prompting Sheikh Qassem to offer heartfelt congratulations to its
staff and viewers. “They succeeded in hearing and seeing something that
clarified the truth for them, so they wouldn’t be misled by the wrong
sources,” he said.

He praised* Al Mayadeen*’s editorial mission, describing it as “the most
prominent force confronting the resistance project, the dignity project,
the unity project, and the project of a united, resilient nation.”
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20250708/f1ead49f/attachment-0001.htm>