’Israeli’ Messages to the Resistance: We Are Not Concerned with the Escalation
Hamza al-Khansa
Hizbullah's refraining from commenting on the "Israeli" attack, which targeted a convoy of the Islamic Resistance in Quneitra, until this moment, represented a disturbing response that engaged the military and political leaders of the entity in a maze of expectations. As a matter of fact, silence is not the response that "Israel" expected, nor was it what the mass of the resistance awaited. Thus, several considerations were involved in determining the quality, timing and effect of the response.
The timing of the "Israeli" aggression after 48 hours of [Hizbullah Secrteary General]Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's speech played a big role in pushing the sentiments of the mass public towards thinking that the resistance's response would be quick and in a matter of hours. But the experiences of the resistance and its leadership indicated that they do not respond hastily, nor are they tempted to act as what the enemy expects of them. On the contrary, they are present where they should be. Thus, logic implied that the resistance's leadership was considering several scenarios and possibilities concerning the motivations behind the recent "Israeli" aggression; as it would adopt a strategy to respond in accordance with the conclusions of the investigations it conducted.
The leadership took several possibilities into consideration, including that "Israel" carried out the aggression of Quneitra against the Mujahidin convoy without prior knowledge of their identities, that is, they wanted to send messages to the resistance's leadership related to the rules of the game which Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had established in his recent speech.
In this context, information had it that the military attachments in European embassies in Beirut conveyed "Israeli" clarifications about the raid. They said that the "Israeli" leadership did not have information about the identity of the targeted group, especially the late Iranian Brigadier General Mohammad Ali Allah Daddy, and therefore were not interested in any escalation or any intensification of any frontier, be it from the Lebanese or Syrian side of the border. There is no doubt that these messages may come in the context of "probing" the resistance and trying to measure the degree of escalation in the expected reaction.
The Resistance Leadership also considered the probability that the "Israelis" had prior knowledge of the identity of the targeted group as well as the names of its members. This possibility, despite the insistence of the "Israelis" to deny either by way of indirect messages through military attachments, or through the news leaked by Reuters, that was attributed to an "Israeli" security source on condition of anonymity, which stated that the Iranian general was not the target and that "Israel" thought it was attacking an ordinary convoy, was being dealt with very seriously because of its indicators and serious repercussions.
Bearing in mind these possibilities does not mean that "Israel" did not commit the folly for which it must be punished. In any case, the "Israeli" aggression happened and killed martyrs whose blood would be a curse upon the occupation and its leaders. However, the study of all possibilities aimed at drawing lessons and accomplishing results and conclusions essential in the military - security work of the resistance; thus, it becomes the basis for the response and its form, timing and place.
Nonetheless, the putative possibilities of the Quneitra aggression are not limited to messages related to the "war of rules" exchanged between the Resistance and the "Israeli" enemy. A bright prospect emerged as the raid that targeted the resistance on Syrian territory was related to the war waged by the regional Takfirist powers on Syria, and an attempt to open a front with "Israel" from Syria. This front would be an opportunity for "Israel" to intervene directly on the line of the war imposed on Syria, and work in a clear and explicit incitement with regional Takfirist powers seeking to overthrow the rule of President Bashar al-Assad, under the banner of the fight against the Syrian-Iranian alliance in Syria on the edge of the occupied territories. Thus, the recent aggression can be read as an attempt to lure the painful response by the resistance, from outside the Lebanese border and specifically from inside Syria. According to this, the "Israeli" mastermind believed that it imposed a geographic response on the resistance... and is prepared to invest.
Hence, everyone is aware that the resistance would respond but lack information on the nature, time and place of the response; only God and those who are firmly grounded in the Resistance have knowledge. Apart from intimidation and wailing among some Lebanese media and political leaders, Yossi Melman, the security commentator in "Maariv Weekly" summarized the collective "Israeli" mental status after the Quneitra folly saying, "I hope that whoever made the decision of the raid does not regret, and that "Israel's" breach of the rules of the game be not a gambling decision leading to a large fire on the northern border."
Source: al-Ahed news
Comments
