Highlights of Sayyed Nasrullah`s defensive strategy

Wednesday, 17 May 2006
The Secretary-General of Hizbullah, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, presented the national dialogue conference with a reading of the "Israeli" enemy`s threat to Lebanon, the nature of this threat and the forms it takes. According to familiar sources, Sayyed Nasrallah called for a comprehensive defense strategy covering military, security, political and economic topics as well as the two topics of national development and infrastructure.
Sayyed Nasrallah in a precise, organized and methodical manner dwelt on the presentation of the advantages of resistance, in detail in terms of flexibility, dynamism, discipline, strict confidentiality and the ability to take quick decisions without the routine protocols of administration. He also presented the geographical situation in South Lebanon, the special attributes of Lebanon as a whole and the weaknesses in the "Israeli" enemy the resistance focused on when confronting this enemy. Sayyed Nasrallah also divulged facts that aroused everyone`s interest that lead to a complete attentive silence...Absolute attention.
According to information, Sayyed Nasrullah`s interjection, which lasted seventy minutes, included the importance of establishing, from the onset, whether there is an enemy or not. "Determining the enemy as being that of "Israel", he went on explaining the "Israeli" threats and ambitions for land and water since 1948. He stopped at the regional "Israeli" project which extends from the Euphrates to the Nile, as confirmed by the "Israeli" flag. But with the existence of the resistance, this enemy began to build a wall and a fence and even began to withdraw from occupied territories. The "Israeli" enemy has grown unaccustomed to withdrawing from territories it had occupied, as this contradicts its strategic plan, but due to the resistance, not only did it withdraw from Lebanon, but from the very State, the enemy had announced as its own country, Palestine. Besides, during many stages in history, we find the enemy flees forward whenever faced with an internal problem. He always resorts to opening new wars with other nations to get out of his problem."
Nasrallah said: "We want to start a national defense strategy to protect Lebanon. This means that there is a threat to Lebanon we should face with this strategy, and that this threat comes from an enemy; this enemy either has ambitions, or desire to expand, or aggression which is inherent in its nature or that the regional and surrounding conditions impel it on jumping forward to escape a problem it suffers. Either way, we are supposed to be ready to face such a threat."
He added: "in military science, if there is an imbalance between opposing military forces, the aggressor army can only be met with an army of equivalent ability to the aggressor army`s, or exceeding his ability, so that it can achieve balance and prevent the threat exercised by the enemy."
In this sense, Sayyed Nasrallah continued, "we greatly appreciate the sacrifices, heroism and courage of the Lebanese army, however, the reality is that this army needs to be higher in numbers, requires defensive supplies and equipment. On the one hand this has a high cost to the state, and on the other hand, if the ability to pay is available, no one in the world will give us the weapons with which we can achieve superiority over the "Israeli" enemy`s weapon."
Our experience in resisting the "Israeli" occupation was based on advantages inherent in the resistance, the distinct advantages of southern Lebanese region, in addition to weaknesses we discovered in the "Israeli" enemy. Through combining these advantages and keeping in mind the enemy`s weak points, we were able to defeat the "Israelis", and discourage the possibility of their staying in Lebanon and subsequently drive them out of our land, without agreements, negotiations or acquiescing to any conditions."
He also drew attention to the fact that this matter was "based on full coordination with the Lebanese national army, the community`s embrace, especially that of the South additional to the credibility, earnestness and discipline exercised by the resistance against the occupation."
At the end of his lengthy interjection, Sayyed Nasrallah concluded that "in a situation such as Lebanon, "we can not achieve a balance with the enemy except through a popular resistance. Such resistance needs to coordinate with the Lebanese Army to have the ability to effectively move, without holding the State responsible for the performance of any popular resistance." He also concluded that the resistance, which has protected Lebanon, especially in the post-liberation years, since 2000, has done so through the balance it created within the balance of forces, and through the enemy`s awareness that the resistance had accurately diagnosed its weaknesses, and possessed the ability to hit those points to cause significant harm and disrupt the enemy`s ability to make use of a land or air sweep invasion, or a wide sea attack."
Sayyed Nasrallah concluded: "the successful experience of the resistance within the adopted protection strategy, made it a model for resistance movements who want to create a balance of power with the enemy, given there is an imbalance on the formal military army front."
After Sayyed Nasrallah finished his interjection, President Berri asked if any of the attendees wanted to speak, and Samir Geagea said: "these are very important and significant words; we want time to reply, contemplate and respond."
Hence Berri proposed the possibility of adjourning the meeting till evening, when MP Jumblatt on his turn, praised the interjection made by Sayyed Nasrallah, saying: "We have heard important and strategic words, therefore, postponement till this evening is not enough, and we need time."
On this basis a debate began which concluded to determining the 8th of June as the date for the next round of dialogue, allowing the majority time to respond to what came in the interjection made by Sayyed Nasrallah.