Repelling the Invaders
Hezbollah, however, has fortified its positions in southern Lebanon, developing an even more extensive network of underground tunnels, bolstering its ground forces exponentially, and establishing the elite Radwan Forces to defend its critical border. These preparations reflect a strategic shift following the 2006 war, in which Hezbollah not only survived but also cemented its reputation as a formidable opponent capable of resisting Israeli troop incursions.
While Tel Aviv has invested heavily in pre-emptive airstrikes and targeted assassinations to weaken Hezbollah, the resistance movement’s resilience remains clear on that key border. In the past few days, Israeli ground troops have already faced with reports of Hezbollah fighters detonating explosive devices targeting Israel’s “elite” Golani Brigade and killing and injuring dozens of enemy troops. Common tactics like economic sanctions, military interventions, and targeted assassinations have been repeatedly used by the US and “Israel” to dismantle Resistance groups. However, history has shown that these strategies have failed.
Take the Gaza Strip, for example—besieged since 2007. “Israel” not only attempted to crush the Palestinian Resistance through relentless military assaults and a blockade but also to turn the people of Gaza against the Resistance by deepening their humanitarian suffering. The plan was clear: starve the population, deny them basic necessities, and push them to blame the Resistance for the hardships. Yet, rather than fracture the relationship, “Israel’s” siege had the opposite effect. The daily brutality, from bombings to the blockade that strangled their livelihoods, only reaffirmed for many in Gaza why resistance was essential for their survival and dignity. This resilience was particularly clear in 2008 when Hezbollah lost its top military leader, Imad Mughniyeh. He was not only a key figure but also the innovator of the Resistance’s “New School of [hybrid] Warfare.” Instead of weakening Hezbollah, his martyrdom, along with that of his successor, Mustafa Badereddine, in 2013, actually led to a significant increase in the group’s military strength. Hezbollah’s tactics have since been adopted by its allies throughout the Resistance Axis.
Following the assassination of Imad, Hezbollah significantly advanced its rocket technology and strategic approach, building upon the robust foundation he had established. The group enhanced its missile capabilities by acquiring more sophisticated, longer-range, and precision-guided systems while refining its military tactics and operational planning to ensure its growth as a powerful force. Additionally, Hezbollah expanded its cyber capabilities, enabling it to conduct intelligence operations and engage in cyber warfare. A prime example of Hezbollah’s evolution is its performance in Syria during the crucial Battles of Qusayr in 2013 and Aleppo, where the group demonstrated a range of tactical, strategic, and logistical strengths that significantly bolstered its global position.
Similarly, after the assassination of Fuad Shukr on July 30, Hezbollah significantly increased its military operations, indicating a strategic change from simply retaliating with rocket strikes to executing more precise and impactful attacks. The group’s ability to carry out such strikes showed a significant advancement in its military capabilities, showing that Hezbollah could not only respond but also directly target the heart of “Israel”, despite the loss of a key military leader.
After the assassination of Nasrallah, Hezbollah began hitting more high-value targets and showcasing its ability to strike with precision, striking the heart of “Israel”. This not only reinforced the group’s strength but also demonstrated the depths of its operational capabilities, all without revealing the full extent of its military power. “If you strike Beirut, we will strike Haifa and beyond to Haidera,” Nasarallah 2006.
On that note, Hezbollah has established a system with multiple lines of commanders. Several individuals have overlapping roles, which helps quickly fill any gaps left by fallen leaders, enabling fast reorganization and continuous operations. This ability to regenerate leadership is crucial to Hezbollah’s resilience, as the loss of leaders has never crippled the movement. “In the name of the martyrs and injured… The Lebanese front will not stop until the aggression on Gaza ceases no matter the consequences.” Hassan Nasrallah, September 19, 2024.
Features of the Israeli Strategy so Far – The Brutality of the Current Offensive
Since the start of its recent escalation with Lebanon, Israel appears to be executing its war on five simultaneous tracks. First, it seeks to strike Hezbollah’s command and control system, mainly through targeted assassinations against key resistance military leaders, the most recent target being drone unit commander Abu Saleh Sorour.
Second is to directly strike Hezbollah’s military capabilities based on an existing bank of targets established by Tel Aviv: Last Monday, the Israelis announced that they had successfully struck including weapons depots, missile stores, and launching pads. Notably, they claimed the same kinds of successful strikes in the July 2006 war, which turned out to be grossly inaccurate.
Third, Israel aims to apply internal Lebanese pressure on Hezbollah by harming its constituents, supporters, and even detractors. Tel Aviv has intensified its bloody targeting of civilian populations and areas in the past two weeks, killing over 2,500 civilians, injuring thousands, and displacing nearly 500,000 people.
Fourth, is an attempt to influence the broad, general Lebanese environment to turn against the resistance through systematic media campaigns – in cooperation with Lebanese media outlets and personalities who parrot Israel’s intimidation narratives in order to tame and curb Hezbollah’s actions? The fifth and final track, so far, is the growing threat and preparation for an Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon – albeit a limited one – with a goal to confirm Israeli field superiority by controlling Lebanese areas, even for short periods.
US and Israeli Plans for Post-Hezbollah Lebanon
US and Israeli officials are reportedly preparing for a post-Hezbollah phase in Lebanon, anticipating a scenario in which Hezbollah is excluded from political power and based on its defeat on the battlefield yet to be fought. The proposed regime change strategy reflects a shift away from Lebanese governance, potentially replacing Hezbollah’s influence with a pro-Western, authoritarian system that would effectively transform the country into a US client state or an unstable country ravaged by civil war. Efforts to marginalize Hezbollah politically suggest that the US and Israel are seeking to compensate for potential Israeli military shortcomings. They see the conflict as a unique opportunity to weaken Hezbollah’s role in Lebanese state institutions permanently. The US has pursued a strategy of reshaping the country’s political landscape by promoting factions opposed to Hezbollah, such as right-wing Christian groups and self-styled independent reformists.
To achieve this, Washington is pushing for early parliamentary elections and ending the presidential deadlock by installing the army chief, Michel Aoun, as president. The strategy would involve banning Hezbollah as a political party and removing its influence from key state sectors such as the civil service and security forces, effectively disenfranchising Lebanon’s Shia population, which makes up around a third of the country. The installation of a president backed by foreign military occupation forces, the dissolution of an elected parliament and the repeal of laws prohibiting normalization with Israel would effectively mark the end of Lebanon’s sovereignty. The United States’ push to implement UN Security Council Resolutions 1559 and 1701 is aimed at forcing Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensuring its disarmament. However, a critical issue with the US plan is that it seeks to enforce these resolutions without reciprocal guarantees for Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the same resolutions. Disarming Hezbollah without addressing Israeli violations would leave Lebanon vulnerable to future Israeli actions, thus undermining Lebanon’s security and sovereignty, especially in light of Hezbollah’s role as a deterrent against Israeli aggression.
Israel’s attempt to assassinate Wafic Safa, a senior Hezbollah liaison officer, underlines its broader strategy to destabilize Hezbollah’s political network and fits into the above plan. Safa is crucial in coordinating Hezbollah’s relations with Lebanese state institutions, including the internal security forces and the judiciary. The attempt on his life, which resulted in 22 civilian deaths and 102 injuries, reflects a willingness to target Hezbollah’s non-military figures, further escalating tensions in an already volatile environment. The timing of the attack is significant. More than 1.1 million Shia civilians have already been displaced by Israeli military operations, creating a humanitarian crisis that is exacerbating political instability in Lebanon. Netanyahu has called on the Lebanese people to rise against Hezbollah, while the US ambassador in Beirut has called for Hezbollah’s exclusion from the political arena. Safa’s assassination would have undermined and weaken Hezbollah’s internal coordination in line with broader efforts to incapacitate the movement politically. Had the assassination attempt been successful, it would have dealt a significant blow to Hezbollah’s political infrastructure. Safa’s deep connections within Lebanese institutions, particularly in coordinating security matters, are central to Hezbollah’s strategy. His death would have disrupted the group’s internal networks and delayed its ability to maintain influence over state structures. However, it would not have destroyed Hezbollah’s infrastructure, as its social and political ties remain deeply rooted in Lebanese society.
The assassination took place in a densely populated area of Beirut, underlining Israel’s willingness to take significant risks to target Hezbollah’s leadership. Israel’s decision to target a non-military figure such as Safa signals a broadening of its operational scope, aiming to dismantle Hezbollah’s political leadership in addition to its military command. This shift in strategy appears to be part of a long-term effort to reduce Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon and possibly provoke internal unrest or even civil war. This scenario could weaken Hezbollah’s pressure on Israel’s borders. The assassination attempt on Safa, coupled with ongoing efforts by the US and Israel to marginalize Hezbollah politically increases the risk of escalating internal conflicts in Lebanon. Hezbollah’s political opponents, emboldened by external support, may see an opportunity to challenge the group’s dominance, leading to domestic instability. The growing pressure on Hezbollah, both from external forces and internal rivals, raises concerns about the possibility of renewed civil conflict, particularly as Lebanon’s economic collapse continues to deepen divisions within the country.
Israel’s actions, combined with the US push for political change, reflect a broader attempt to reshape Lebanon’s future in a way that serves Western interests, potentially at the expense of the country’s unity and stability. As Hezbollah faces increasing challenges from within and without, Lebanon’s fragile political environment teeters on the brink of further destabilization.
The CIA stands behind Nasrallah’s Assassination
The CIA has sent additional agents to Lebanon and has increased its communications with Lebanese military, security, and political officials in an effort to obtain information about Hezbollah, and may have played a role in Israel’s recent attempt to assassinate a Hezbollah political leader. Three senior officials in the official security services acknowledged that the US, have initiated intensive daily communication with all Lebanese military and security forces since the outbreak of the open war between Lebanon and Israel. US intelligence officials were very interested in whether Hezbollah leaders are “still communicating with the military, security and executive forces in Lebanon after the war, with questions about the form and content of the communication.”
A security team of 15 CIA officers arrived at Beirut airport last Thursday, 10 October, and moved in a convoy of armored cars without license plates to the headquarters of the American embassy in Awkar. The team joined the work cell based in one of the embassy wings in Beirut, to help manage the Beirut station, which includes 12 main officers, in addition to others with different specialties, including recruiting and managing agents, collecting information through technical means, and analyzing data. These contacts between the CIA and Lebanese security officials may have played a role in Israel’s recent attempt to assassinate a Hezbollah political leader, Wafiq Safa. On 10 October, Israeli airstrikes a residential building in central Beirut, killing 22 people and injuring 117. Israel stated that Safa was the target of the attack. However, they were unsuccessful in killing him.
Just prior to the assassination attempt, the leadership of Hezbollah had asked Safa, in his capacity as head of the resistance movement’s Liaison and Coordination Committee, to communicate with a number of Lebanese security officials on matters related to the ongoing war. The contacts took place despite the fact that the resistance knew that the mere occurrence of the phone call would constitute a security threat to Safa. These fears were confirmed when Israel carried out the bombing in Beirut and leaked news that the target was Safa.
Hezbollah “estimates that American intelligence had a direct role in the attempt to assassinate Safa” and that “the operation was carried out based on information provided by the Americans. “The US wanted to kill Safa, who has no military role in Hezbollah, as part of a campaign launched by the US Ambassador to Beirut, Lisa Johnson, who recently “called on Lebanese political and non-political forces to begin working to establish the of “post-Hezbollah Lebanon.” The assassination of Wafic Safa represents a calculated escalation by Israel, in line with broader US-Israeli efforts to weaken Hezbollah both militarily and politically. Safa’s role as a key figure in Hezbollah’s political coordination made him a prime target, and his elimination would have sent a strong symbolic message to Hezbollah and its supporters. However, the assassination also risks inflaming internal tensions and provoking further unrest in Lebanon.
As the 2 families continue to put pressure on Hezbollah, the risk of civil conflict increases in the entire region. Ultimately, US and Israeli efforts to reshape Lebanon’s political order echo the events of 1982, when Israel’s invasion and subsequent civil war were designed to weaken Lebanese factions and shift the balance of power. However, those efforts failed to achieve their long-term goals, and Israel’s current strategy may face similar limitations in changing the power dynamics within Lebanon, given Hezbollah’s entrenched influence.
The Kornet Redefined the Battlefield
In the days following 8 October, Hezbollah’s battlefield updates have consistently emphasized one key phrase: direct hits – Israeli radar stations obliterated, military convoys shattered by precise strikes, and armored vehicles reduced to smoldering wreckage. These operations, carried out in support of the Palestinian resistance in Gaza, have been so devastatingly effective that Tel Aviv invoked military censorship, desperate to conceal the full extent of its losses, as it has been doing throughout the conflict on the northern front over the past year. But behind the phrase “direct hits” lies a weapon few might recognize – the Kornet missile. Although not always visible to the viewer, the Kornet’s role is unmistakable. First deployed by Hezbollah in 2006, the Kornet transformed into a battlefield game-changer, proving its worth in ambushes against Israeli Merkava tanks.
On 11 August 2006, 24 Merkava tanks rolled into a deadly trap, as if swallowed by the Bermuda Triangle, vanishing under a barrage of Kornet missile fire. By the end of it, 11 tanks lay in ruin – charred remains of Israel’s once-feared armored division. This decisive moment showcased Hezbollah’s mastery of asymmetric warfare, where small, mobile units equipped with precision-guided Kornets could dismantle Israel’s armored might. The Merkava, long regarded as the symbol of Israeli dominance in ground warfare, was designed to excel in direct combat. However, in the unforgiving Lebanese terrain, the Kornet missile revealed a critical vulnerability: the Merkava’s reliance on heavy armor, which, despite its thickness, was helpless against the Kornet’s ability to pierce reactive plating. The missile’s precision focused on the tank’s soft spots – its engine and lower hull – areas that conventional defenses struggled to protect against long-range, guided strikes. The once-formidable Merkava, crippled in its ability to maneuver through Lebanon’s rugged landscape, became an easy target for well-planned ambushes.
Now, with Israeli convoys’ once again making daily incursions into Lebanon – repeating the very missteps of 2006 – it’s as if history is whispering its warnings, only to be ignored. Israel’s persistence in retracing these familiar steps shows a refusal to reckon with past lessons, locked in a cycle that leads to the same inevitable failures.
The Kornet missile, first deployed by Hezbollah during the 2006 war, has become a defining force in its tactical operations. This Russian-made, laser-guided anti-tank missile, capable of penetrating up to 1,200 millimeters of reactive armor from distances of up to 5.5 kilometers, turns Israel’s Merkava tanks into unsuspecting prey caught in carefully planned ambushes. The Kornet’s role has expanded beyond targeting armored vehicles, as Hezbollah has creatively adapted it to strike at military installations, including radar stations, blinding Israel’s northern defenses. This tactical shift has forced military analysts to reconsider the missile’s potential, showing how even a relatively simple weapon can reshape the dynamics of warfare when wielded with ingenuity and precision.
Israeli engineers quickly sought solutions to protect their armored vehicles following the significant vulnerabilities exposed in 2006. By 2007, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems unveiled the Trophy APS, specifically designed to safeguard Merkava Mark 3 and Mark 4 tanks. Equipped with the Elta EL/M-2133 radar, Trophy provides 360-degree detection and launches explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) to intercept incoming threats. This system enabled Israel to maintain its technological edge, significantly reducing anti-tank missile threats. However, Trophy’s 1.5-second reload time created a narrow but exploitable window – an opportunity Hezbollah quickly seized. In response to Israel’s technological advancements, Hezbollah sought a way to exploit this reload time. The solution came with the Tharallah Twin Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) system, equipped with Dehlavieh missiles, an Iranian variant of the Kornet-E.
Designed by Iran’s Aerospace Industries Organization, the Dehlavieh, introduced in 2012, boasts a range of 10 kilometers and tandem warheads capable of penetrating 1,200 millimeters of reactive armor. The Tharallah system fires two missiles in rapid succession. The first missile triggers the Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA), while the second penetrates the main armor, exploiting Trophy’s reload time. Acquired by Hezbollah in 2015, the Tharallah system is mounted on a quad launcher, configured for both day and night precision strikes.
This clever countermeasure reveals the Axis of Resistance’s strategic ingenuity, turning modest resources into powerful, game-changing tactics – much like a master chess player outwitting an opponent with far superior pieces.
‘Not Tank Co
Fast forward to 2024, and the scene is eerily familiar. Israeli helicopters, their rotors slicing through the morning air, shuttle the dead and wounded from the battlefield to Rambam Hospital in Haifa, a stark reminder of an offensive spiraling out of control. And still, the same efforts are underway to cover the mounting damage and losses.
As the late Hezbollah secretary-general warned in July, “If your tanks come to southern Lebanon, you will not suffer a shortage of tanks, because you will have no tanks left.” One can’t help but wonder – how long will it take for Israel to understand, as Einstein warned, that repeating the same actions and expecting a different result is the very definition of insanity? Again, history reverberates through the mountains and valleys of south Lebanon.
On 2 October, Israel launched its ‘limited ground incursion’ – a renewed attempt to force Hezbollah behind the Litani River. But what began with familiar arrogance quickly unraveled into disaster. Three Merkava tanks left smoldering in the dirt, and eight soldiers from the Egoz unit eliminated. Yet, as the sun rose on 13 October, the grim pattern persisted.
Anti-tank fire struck again, wounding 25 Israeli soldiers in separate incidents. Overhead, helicopters cut through the morning sky, ferrying the wounded and the dead from the battlefield to Rambam Hospital in Haifa – each flight a harsh reminder of an offensive spiraling out of control. Despite its technological edge and attempts at military censorship to hide the extent of the losses, the US-backed Israeli army pushes onward, blind to the lessons carved in its past. Hezbollah’s resistance, precise and unyielding, exposes the same fatal flaws of an aggressor clinging to force.
As this new chapter unfolds, one can’t help but wonder – how many times will the occupation army tread this doomed path before considering Einstein’s warning – that insanity is repeating the same thing over and over, expecting different results?
Hezbollah’s Reactions?
Naturally, the resistance intends to thwart Israel’s strategies through a set of interconnected steps. After each assassination, Hezbollah confirms that its command and control system remains unaffected, then launches a controlled escalation to confirm its readiness in the face of enemy shocks. This was evident on 24 September, when Hezbollah launched a strike the day after Israel’s air campaign, essentially to confirm that its missile capabilities were locked and loaded, ready to go.
Finally, Israel’s goal of turning Lebanese public opinion against the resistance has not advanced, to date. Rather, Israeli aggressions have increased national cohesion. Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and other religiously-based Resistance groups are much more formidable opponents than the secular PLO ever was. One reason is that they are much harder to infiltrate. It seems that genuinely pious people have a good nose for sincere piety among their close associates. But more importantly, sincere Muslims (alongside other religious people) fear God more than they fear death. For them, there is no higher honor than martyrdom.
The rise of the religious Resistance in and around historic Palestine has greatly intensified an already-existing asymmetry in how much pain each side is willing to absorb. From the very beginning of the genocidal Zionist onslaught on Palestine, the indigenous people could tolerate more pain than the invaders could. Such is almost always the case when an invader attacks a defender: The defender’s advantage is that he is willing to suffer and die to defend his home turf, while the invader will tolerate much less pain and risk to try to steal someone else’s property. That asymmetry grows greater when the invaders are richer and more cosmopolitan than the defenders: they can easily go somewhere else and live comfortably, while the defenders can’t.
So even prior to the rise of the religious Resistance, the people of the Levant had a huge advantage in their struggle against the invading Zionist settlers: They could tolerate far more pain. But that advantage took a quantum leap when the baton of Resistance was passed from the PLO to the Islamic Resistance, thanks to the series of Mossad assassinations. Since the Islamic Resistance replaced the secular one, the Zionists have martyred many great leaders—and each time one falls, another arises. When they killed Hezbollah’s leader Abbas Musawi in 1992, they got Nasrallah. Likewise, their murder of Hamas’s founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, simply paved the way for leaders like Yahya Sinwar.
A significant proportion of Earth’s population now realizes that it has a psychopathic monster in its midst, a cancer that has to be removed by any means necessary. That dawning realization will lead inexorably to the psychopath’s demise. The ball is now moving to public opinion all across the lands of Islam. Nearly two billion Muslims to a great extent will also drive the new phase of the Axis of Resistance. The killing machine, for its part, will continue to kill, kill, kill – mostly civilians, unarmed women and children. Now nothing prevents the Axis of Resistance from stepping up to the next level. There’s simply no diplomacy, compromise, ceasefire, “two-state solution” or any other procrastination tactics in the horizon. Just a do-or-die existential fight against a relentless killing machine exhibiting. And the rage of the lands of Islam will be focused not only on the killing machine, but on its suckling she-wolf: the US.
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Turkey, and Pakistan, scores of Global Majority actors should be getting ready for a historical first: coordinate diplomacy, geo-economics and military potential to the max to finally confront the bacteriological infection head on. The politically emerging Global Majority will then establish its own global organizations – leaving the racists to wallow and rot inside their own walls. Meanwhile, in the battlefield, velvet gloves should be removed: the time has come for death by a thousand cuts.
An auspicious scenario now becomes quite plausible: BRICS assuming the role of chief diplomatic channel for the lands of Islam. The next logical stage would be to get the UN out of Israeli/American territory and establish a HQ in a nation that really respects international humanitarian law.
Troops from Britain and America rush to Cyprus
After Israel’s pager attack, both the US and Britain rushed military forces to Cyprus. Plus the US sent another 800 National Guardsmen to Kuwait. Meanwhile, the United Kingdom currently had many more troops positioned in Cyprus ready to help with contingencies related to the emergency in Lebanon. The US and UK governments have long had a significant military presence there. Cyprus lies a little over 240 kms away from Lebanon.
It should be recalled that Hezbollah has already issued threats aimed at Cyprus. Months ago Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah warned that if Cyprus plays host to IDF jets for bombing runs in Lebanon, it too could come under Hezbollah’s “The Cypriot government should be careful,” he said. He specifically laid out that Cyprus would be considered “part of the war” if it allowed Israeli jets and military assets to use its bases as staging grounds for an attack on Lebanon. For many, the announcement was a shock. Cyprian President told reporters: “Cyprus is not involved, in any way, in the military conflicts,” in response to Nasrallah’s comments.
Our next article is titled “Operation True Promise 2: Iran retaliates for Nasrallah “.
