The story continues from Part 1 – – –
During the first day of the war the Israeli Air Force, artillery and navy conducted more than 100 attacks mainly against Hezbollah bases in south Lebanon, among them the regional headquarters. Attacks from land, sea and air continued in the following days. Among the targets hit were the Hezbollah and petrol stations in south Lebanon. American officials claimed that the Israelis overstated the effectiveness of the air war against Hezbollah and cited the failure to hit any of the Hezbollah leaders in spite of dropping twenty-three tons of high explosives in a single raid on the Beirut Southern suburbs of Dahiya. The Israeli assessments are “too large,” said one US official. Al-Manar TV station only went dark for two minutes after the strike before it was back into the air. The TV station was bombed 15 times during the war but never faltered after the first hiccup. There is “little evidence” that the Israeli Air Force even attempted, much less succeeded in, wiping out the medium- and long-range-rocket capability in the first days of the war. Hezbollah long remained silent on the question of its rockets, but on the sixth anniversary of the war, chairman Hassan Nasrallah asserted that Israel had missed them, claiming that Hezbollah had known about Israeli intelligence gathering and had managed to secretly move its platforms and launchers in advance.
During the war the IOF flew 11,897 combat missions, which was more than the number of sorties during the 1973 October War (11,223) and almost double the number during the 1982 Lebanon War (6,052). The Artillery Corps fired 170,000 shells, more than twice the number fired in the 1973 October War. A senior officer in the IDF Armored Corps told Haaretz that he would be surprised if it turned out that even five Hezbollah fighters had been killed by the 170,000 shells fired. The Israeli Navy fired 2,500 shells. The combined effect of the massive air and artillery bombardment on Hezbollah capacity to fire short-range Katyusha rockets on northern Israel was very meager. The IOF shelling succeeded only in destroying about 100 out of 12,000 Katyusha launchers. The massive artillery fire led to a severe shortage of ammunition towards the end of the war. Northern command had prepared a list before the war on potential Hezbollah targets, identified by the Israeli intelligence, to be struck in case of renewed hostilities. By the fourth day of the war the IDF ran out of targets, as all the 83 targets on the list had already been hit. Headquarters in the southern suburbs of Beirut as well as the offices and homes of the leadership, the compounds of Al Manar TV station and Al Nour radio station, and the runways and fuel depots of the airport in Beirut. Also targeted were Hezbollah bases, weapons depots and outposts as well as bridges, roads. Large parts of the Lebanese civilian infrastructure, however, were destroyed, including 640 kilometres (400 miles) of roads, 73 bridges, and 31 other targets such as Beirut’s airport, ports, water and sewage treatment plants, electrical facilities, 25 fuel stations, and 900 commercial structures, up to 350 schools and two hospitals, and 15,000 homes. Some 130,000 more homes were damaged.
During the war, the Hezbollah Rocket Force fired between 3,970 and 4,228 rockets at a rate of more than 100 per day, unprecedented since the Iran-Iraq War. About 95% of these were 122mm Katyusha rockets, which carried warheads up to 30 kg and had a range of up to 30 km. Cities hit were Haifa, as well as dozens of towns, and kibbutzes and villages in the north and the northern West Bank. . One million Israelis had to stay near or in bomb shelters or security rooms, with some 250,000 civilians evacuating the north and relocating to other areas of the country. Hezbollah rocket attacks also targeted and succeeded in hitting military targets in Israel.
After the initial Israeli response, Hezbollah declared an all-out military alert. Hezbollah was estimated to have 13,000 missiles at the beginning of the conflict. Hezbollah engaged in guerilla warfare with IDF ground forces, fighting from well-fortified positions, often in urban areas, and attacking with small, well-armed units. Hezbollah fighters were highly trained, and were equipped with flak jackets, night vision goggles, communications equipment, and sometimes with Israeli uniforms and equipment. An Israeli soldier who participated in the war said that Hezbollah fighters were “nothing like Hamas or the Palestinians. They are trained and highly qualified. All of us were kind of surprised.” During engagements with the IDF, Hezbollah concentrated on inflicting losses on the IDF, believing its unwillingness to absorb steady losses to be Israel’s strategic weakness. Hezbollah countered IDF armor through the use of sophisticated Iranian-made (ATGMs). According to Merkava tank program administration, 52 Merkava tanks were destroyed. During the last days of the war on Lebanon, Hezbollah literally massacred the enemy’s Merkava tank, viewed by the Zionists as the “throne of God”.
Hezbollah ambushed the Israeli armored tanks advancing into the Lebanese villages in Khiyam and Hujeir valley, destroying 30 Merkava tanks.
Zionist soldiers who were in the targeted tanks told the Israeli media about their hard moments, explaining how Hezbollah struck most of the advancing tanks and hit a large number of the enemy soldiers. The Israeli soldiers also pointed out that Hezbollah fighters ambushed the occupation troops who were reinforcing the advancing tanks in Ghandouriyeh area.
The Zionist soldiers illustrated how Hezbollah fighters opened fire at them from all the directions in the two battles in Ghandouriyeh and Hujeir valley.The above mentioned testimonies confirmed that the Israeli leadership fell in the trap of miscalculating the aspects of the confrontation with Hezbollah which emerged victorious from the war.
Hezbollah fighters often used tunnel warfare to emerge quickly, fire an anti-tank missile, and then disappear again.
During the war, the Lebanese Army did not engage in direct hostilities, but threatened retaliation if IDF troops pushed too far northward into Lebanon. In several instances, Lebanese troops fired anti-aircraft weapons at Israeli aircraft and attempted to disrupt landing operations. During the first days of the war, Lebanese Defense Minister Elias Murr said that “the Lebanese army will resist and defend the country. If there is an invasion of Lebanon, we are waiting for them.” However, the Lebanese Army mostly stayed out of the fighting.
July 14, 2006 is considered by Lebanese people as one of the most significant days in the 33-day Israeli war on Lebanon. Nasrallah’s words are still resonating as he declared the missile strike on an Israeli Navy ship. “Now… In the middle of the sea… Look at the warship that has attacked Beirut, while it burns and sinks before your very eyes,” Sayyed Nasrallah said in a voice message via Al-Manar on Friday, July 14, 2006, in the third day of the Israeli war in Lebanon. The strike on the Israeli Navy ship (INS) Hanit – also known as Saar-5 – was the first direct strike on an Israeli warship in decades. The attack took place west of Beirut, when the Saar-5 Class destroyer was on patrol as part of the naval blockade imposed on Lebanon since July 12, 2006.
At least 4 Israeli soldiers were killed in the strike, with many others injured, according to Israeli media. Israeli assessments showed that the ship was struck by a C-802 radar-guided anti-shipping missile manufactured in Iran using Chinese technology, with range being estimated to be about 110 km. “The strike on the Hanit symbolized for many how overconfidence fed into that failure,” Times of Israel wrote in August 2019.
The US and Israel ignored calls for a ceasefire by Hezbollah, as they thought they were winning. But their tune changed in the second half of the war, when they began to lose, and lose badly. Eventually, Hezbollah agreed to a ceasefire. In this war, Hezbollah won, while Israel was defeated. It is estimated that Israel lost around 500 soldiers, while Hezbollah’s losses came to between 80 and 180. These figures are estimates as Israel hides its losses, and Hezbollah rarely reveals losses on its side.
The 2006 July war was widely seen as a mishandled one that failed to achieve the objectives set by then-premier Ehud Olmert, including the so-called “destruction of Hezbollah.”
Israel’s inability to win the war brought about various changes, particularly at the political and military levels. The government lost much of its public credibility. People called for the prime minister and the minister of defense to resign. They blamed successive governments for allowing Hezbollah to acquire more than 12,000 missiles
For Iran, the war was an indirect “show of force.” Hezbollah’s survival provides it several elements of power. It employs the anti-American sentiments that spread within the Arab world, during the war, to discourage some Arab governments from overtly supporting American threats against it. Militarily, this war demonstrated to Israel that, in an asymmetric war, tanks, air forces or navy are not necessarily effective. High-tech systems could easily be avoided and deceived, and ground forces, especially infantry and Special Forces and highly-trained individual combatants remain essential. There is a feeling of disappointment in Israel and a sense that it has lost its deterrent capability, especially against non-state groups.
The underlying reasons were in the long conflict between Lebanon or Hezbollah and Israel. Hezbollah and Israel each had their initial objectives. Hezbollah’s main goal became its survival, while Israel’s goal was the elimination of Hezbollah. Each party made major efforts to achieve its objectives at any price, threatening Lebanon’s stability and economy. Hezbollah celebrated its “divine victory” since it prevented the huge military machine of Israel from achieving its political goals. As the Qana massacre on Sunday carried the tragic face of Israel’s Lebanon offensive across the world, the anger of Arab public opinion was directed not only at Israel but at a US administration that has resisted international and regional pressure for an immediate ceasefire. The gruesome killings follow a week in which US has faced a torrent of criticism on Arab television screens and newspaper pages for its refusal to stop Israel’s relentless bombings. The latest wave of anti-Americanism has been exacerbated by Condoleezza Rice’s description of the war as the “birth pangs of a new Middle East”. Ms Rice might have been simply reiterating US policy. But rarely has a phrase caught as much attention and provoked as much anger from radicals and moderates, who have seen in it a new and more determined American strategy aimed against Arab interests.
It is an attitude, however, that Arabs have long regarded as an Israeli plot to control the Arab world without withdrawing from occupied lands. The expression “concealed a plan designed to impose US-Israeli hegemony by eliminating the option of resistance through the destruction of the Palestinian and Lebanese resistance movements”.
Matériel losses in the Israeli Defense Forces accounted for fewer than 50 tanks, three helicopters were lost to accidents and one to Hezbollah missile fire. One fixed-wing F-16 was lost. Three Hermes 450 drones were lost during the war. On 14 July, a Hezbollah operated a Chinese CS2 anti-ship missile, that struck the Israeli Navy’s flagship the INS Hanit killing 4 sailors and damaging the warship on the waterline, under the aft superstructure. Damage to various industries occurred during the war. A report from the Lebanese Council for Development and Reconstruction (CDR) said that the IDF bombing campaign had destroyed more than 900 small enterprises with damage to Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure estimated close to US$2.5 billion.
On 27 August 2006, Nasrallah said in an interview that the abduction of the two soldiers did not cause the war. It only advanced a long planned war for a few months. But he added: “If there was even a 1 percent chance that the July 11 capturing operation would have led to a war like the one that happened, would you have done it? I would say no, absolutely not, for humanitarian, moral, social, security, military, and political reasons. … What happened is not an issue of a reaction to a capturing operation… what happened was already planned for. The fact that it happened in July has averted a situation that would have been a lot worse, had the war been launched in October.”
By surviving this war with Israel, Hezbollah effectively emerged with a military and political victory from this conflict. Though outgunned and outnumbered, Hezbollah managed to hold off Israel’s advanced armed forces and proved its ability to damage Israel by launching rockets at its territory until the end of the war. Israel’s inability to eliminate Hezbollah as a “humiliation for Israel’s supposedly all-powerful army,” and Hezbollah’s survival propelled it to hero status throughout many Muslim nations.
The fighting resulted in a huge financial setback for Lebanon, US$5 billion (22% of GDP) in direct and indirect costs, while the cost for Israel was estimated at US$3.5 billion. After the war, the Lebanese Army deployed 15,000 soldiers, backed by a UNIFIL force of 12,000, deployed South of the Litani river to replace Hezbollah, although the Lebanese government said that it cannot and will not disarm Hezbollah by force. On 11 August 2006 the United Nations Security Council unanimously approved Resolution 1701 in an effort to end the hostilities. It was accepted by the Lebanese government and Hezbollah on 12 August, and by the Israeli government on 13 August. The ceasefire took effect on 14 August.
This was the 34-day war in Lebanon and Northern Israel.
On 12 February 2008, Imad Mugnieh the head of Hezbollah’s military wing, was assassinated by a car bomb in Damascus. Mugniyah had been the target of previous Mossad assassination attempts. Israel considered Mugniyah a “significant force behind actions against Israel”. On Wednesday 16 July 2008, in accordance with the mandates of Resolution 1701 Hezbollah transferred the coffins of captured Israeli soldiers in exchange for incarcerated militant Samir Kunta and four Hezbollah militants captured by Israel during the war, and bodies of about 200 other Lebanese and Palestinian militants held by Israel. On 4 November 2009 of boarded the ship in the eastern and seized 500 tons of Iranian disguised as civilian cargo. Israel said the weapons were bound for Hezbollah and originated from Iran. armaments
Between 2006 and 2008, led by groups opposed to the pro-Western Prime Minister demanded the creation of a national unity government, over which the mostly Shia opposition groups would have veto power. When Émile Lahoud’s presidential term ended in October 2007, the opposition refused to vote for a successor unless a power-sharing deal was reached, leaving Lebanon without a president.
On 9 May 2008, Hezbollah forces, sparked by a government declaration that Hezbollah’s communications network was illegal, seized western Beirut, leading to the Lebanese government denounced the violence as a coup attempt. At least 62 people died in the resulting clashes between pro-government and opposition militias. On 21 May 2008, the signing of a accord ended the fighting. As part of the accord, which ended 18 months of political paralysis, a new president and a national unity government was established, granting a veto to the opposition. The agreement was a victory for opposition forces, as the government caved in to all their main demands.
In early January 2011, the accord collapsed. The Special Tribunal blamed Hezbollah for the Hariri killing. Hezbollah leader insists that Israel was responsible for the assassination of Hariri. A report leaked by the newspaper in November 2010 stated that Hezbollah has drafted plans for a takeover of the country if the Special Tribunal for Lebanon issues an indictment against its members.
In 2012, the Syrian war threatened to spill over in Lebanon, causing more and armed clashes between pro and anti- Syrian groups. As of 2023, more than 1 million Syrian refugees are in Lebanon. As the number of Syrian refugees increases, the fear the country’s sectarian based political system is being undermined.
11. The Collapse of Lebanon’s Economy
In October 2019 in response to many of the government’s failures and malfeasances. In the months leading up to the protests there was a series of about 100 major wildfires in Chouf, Khroub and other Lebanese areas which displaced hundreds of people and caused enormous damage to Lebanese wildlife. The Lebanese government failed to deploy its firefighting equipment due to lack of maintenance and misappropriation of funds. Lebanon had to rely on aid from neighboring Cyprus, Jordan, Turkey and Greece. In November 2019, commercial banks responded to the liquidity crises by imposing illegal capital controls to protect themselves, despite there being no official law by the BDL regarding banking controls. The protests created a political crisis in Lebanon, with Prime Minister tendering his resignation and echoing protesters’ demands for a government of specialists.
At the same time, The Lebanese Central bank, the Bank du Liban (BdL) in March 2020 defaulted on $90 billion of foreign debt , triggering a collapse in the value of the currency. Simultaneously, commercial banks imposed “informal capital controls limiting the amount of dollars depositors can withdraw as well as transfers abroad.” Lebanon, whose population is under 7 million, produces little and imports about 80 percent of the goods it consumes. Debt servicing had consumed 30 percent of recent budgets. It came to light in an audit of 2018, whose results were revealed on 23 July that the governor of the BdL, had fictionalized assets, and cooked the books.
The unfolding economic and financial crisis that started in October 2019 has been further exacerbated by the dual economic impact of the COVID-19 outbreak, and the massive Port of Beirut explosion in August 2020. Of the three crises, the economic crisis has had by far the largest (and most persistent) negative impact. Unfettered spending after war has brought Lebanon to its knees. Gulf States withdrew support as Iran’s influence increased. Political paralysis and infighting have hampered recovery. The regional turmoil and the Beirut blast added more pressure on the economy. Lebanon is grappling with a deep economic crisis after successive governments piled up debt following the 1975-1990 civil war with little to show for their spending binge. Banks, central to the service-oriented economy, are paralysed. Savers have been locked out of dollar accounts or told that funds they can access are now worth a fraction of their original value. The currency has crashed, driving a swathe of the population into poverty.
Lebanon’s financial collapse since 2019 is a story of how a vision for rebuilding a nation once known as the Switzerland of the Middle East was derailed by mismanagement as a sectarian elite borrowed with few restraints. Downtown Beirut, levelled in the civil war, rose up, with skyscrapers built by international architects and swanky shopping malls filled with designer boutiques that took payment in dollars or Lebanese pounds. But Lebanon had little else to show for a debt mountain equivalent at the time to 150% of national output, one of the world’s highest burdens. Its electricity plants can’t deliver 24-hour power and Lebanon’s only reliable export is its human capital.
Some economists have described Lebanon’s financial system as a nationally regulated Ponzi scheme, where new money is borrowed to pay existing creditors. It works until fresh money runs out. But how did the nation of about 6.5 million people get there?
After the civil war, Lebanon balanced its books with tourism receipts, foreign aid, earnings from its financial industry and the largesse of Gulf Arab states, which bankrolled the state by bolstering central bank reserves. One of its most reliable sources of dollars was remittances from the millions of Lebanese who went abroad to find work. Even in the 2008 global financial crash, they sent cash home. But remittances started slowing from 2011 as Lebanon’s sectarian squabbling led to more political sclerosis and much of the Middle East, including neighboring Syria, descended into chaos. Sunni Muslim Gulf states, once reliable supporters, started turning away because of the rising influence in Lebanon of Iran, via Hezbollah, a heavily armed Lebanese Shiite group whose political power has grown. The budget deficit rocketed and the balance of payments sank deeper into the red, as transfers failed to match imports of everything from staple foods to flashy cars. That was until 2016, when banks began offering remarkable interest rates for new deposits of dollars – an officially accepted currency in the dollarised economy – and even more extraordinary rates for Lebanese pound deposits. Elsewhere in the world savers earned tiny returns?
Given the Lebanese pound had been pegged to the dollar at 1,500 for over two decades and could be freely exchanged at a bank or by a supermarket cashier, what was there to lose? Dollars flowed again and banks could keep funding the spending. Lebanon was still politically dysfunctional and rivalries had left it without a president for most of 2016. But the central bank, Banque du Liban, led by former Merrill Lynch banker Riad Salameh since 1993, introduced “financial engineering”, a range of mechanisms that amounted to offering banks lavish returns for new dollars. It was a tactic bankers say might have been appropriate if it was followed swiftly by reforms – but not if, as was the case, not enough happened.
Improved dollar flows showed up in climbing foreign reserves. What was less obvious – and is now a point of contention – was a rise in liabilities. By some accounts, the central bank’s assets are more than wiped out by what it owes, so it may be sitting on big losses. Meanwhile, the cost of servicing Lebanon’s debt surged to about a third or more of budget spending.
What Triggered the Collapse?
When the state needed to rein in spending, politicians splurged on a public sector pay rise before the 2018 election. And the government’s failure to deliver reforms meant foreign donors held back billions of dollars in aid they had pledged. The final spark for unrest came in October 2019 with a plan to tax WhatsApp calls. With a big diaspora and Lebanon’s low tax regime skewed in favor of the rich, slapping a fee on the way many Lebanese kept in touch was disastrous. Mass protests, driven by a disenchanted youth demanding wholesale change, erupted against a political elite, including ageing militia leaders who thrived while others struggled.
Foreign exchange inflows dried up and dollars exited Lebanon. Banks no longer had enough dollars to pay depositors queuing outside, so they shut their doors. The government also defaulted on its foreign debt. The currency collapsed, sliding from 1,500 to the dollar before the crisis, to a street rate of about 23,000 in late January 2022, after hitting 34,000 earlier in the month.
Compounding problems, an explosion in August 2020 at Beirut port killed 215 people and caused billions of dollars of damage. After a rapid economic contraction, government debt by some estimates was 49% of gross domestic product in 2021 – far more than levels that crippled some European states a decade ago.
Beirut Port Explosion and State of Emergency
On 4 August 2020, a massive blast occurred in the port sector of the city, destroying hectares of buildings and killing over 200 people. It was felt throughout the country. The prime suspect in this was Mossad. Amid much popular unrest, the entire cabinet resigned on 10 August, and a state of emergency, which gave “the army broad powers to prevent gatherings, censor media and arrest anyone deemed to be a security threat”, was declared on 13 August by the caretaker government.
On 14 August, Hezbollah leader”referred to the possibility of civil war” were the anti-government protestors to force an early election. Meanwhile, foreign minister complained about the presence of French warships that were deployed off Beirut.
As of 2023, Lebanon is considered to have become a nation suffering from chronic poverty, economic mismanagement and a banking collapse. As of early 2023, the situation remained calm, despite both sides violating the ceasefire agreements. But an increase in violence during the Israeli-Lebanese shelling, the spillover of the Gaza war and the broader Lebanon border conflict led to fears of another war and the beginning of a conflict between Hezbollah and Israel.
Energy Strangulation of Lebanon
Part of the plan to cripple Lebanon has been to reduce its energy use, on a per capita basis as well as a whole. As Kissinger stated in the 1970s, “control the flow of oil, and one can control the destinies of nations”. Starting in the 1990s, a slow process of reducing energy in Lebanon began.
“For almost 30 years, Lebanese authorities have failed to properly manage the state-run electricity company, Électricité du Liban (EDL), resulting in widespread blackouts. The decades of unsustainable policies and fundamental neglect, the result of elite capture of state resources, alleged corruption, and vested interests caused the sector to completely collapse in 2021 amid the ongoing economic crisis, leaving the country without power through most of the day.” – Human Rights Watch, March 2023.Things got to a head in 2021, when Lebanon was facing an acute shortage of diesel. At this point, Iran sent a load of diesel, sparking anger in Washington and Paris. The ambassador’s phone offer came on 19 August, 2021, mere hours after Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah broke the US-led siege on Lebanon by announcing the imminent arrival of fuel to the country. Shea’s response to Nasrallah was to announce an ambitious, World Bank-funded initiative that called for the transport of fuel – via Syrian territory – to Lebanon. The Zionist faction in Washington claims that helping Lebanon receive energy via Syrian territory will undermine US Caesar Act sanctions against Syria.
Lebanon’s Energy Minister Walid Fayyad sheds light on the intricate web of circumstances preventing Lebanon from securing the much-needed energy resources from Egypt and Jordan, not least, the complicity of the US in undermining Lebanon’s energy security.
“A deal was agreed to transmit electricity from Jordan and pump Egyptian gas to Lebanese power stations, via Syria, and financed by the Rockefeller’s World Bank, and for which Syria would receive a transmission fee of 8 %. A good deal for everyone involved. The World Bank has been trying to put obstacles on this deal, listening to the Zionist elements in Washington, as this idea goes against their cherished dream of taking over southern Lebanon. The World Bank refused to provide guarantees to Egypt on this deal. What is said and what is done, are two different things. So typical of the West “. Currently, Lebanon pays $1 billion for 700 megawatts. Egyptian gas and Jordanian electricity will enable us to obtain 700 megawatts for $500 million. That is, the savings that will be achieved amount to $500 million annually. In addition, increasing the hours of power supply reduces the cost of electricity in all sectors and reduces the use of generators, thus reducing the cost of production and commodity prices. The US vetoed Lebanon receiving diesel from Iran, claiming that the US has sanctioned Iranian oil. The Iranians were going to provide us with $350 million worth of diesel fuel, which would provide us with 4 hours of electric power daily. We would have been able to secure 10 hours of electricity per day, if we secured oil from Iraq and Iran and gas from Egypt. Lebanon, which generates about 25 percent of its electricity from renewable energy, requires an additional few thousand megawatts of solar capacity to complete its energy transition, which could cost a couple of billion dollars”, he said.
Lebanon is going through what some has called one of the worst global financial crises since the 19th century. The country has been without a president since the end of October 2022, when the six-year term of Michel Aoun ended. It is being run by a caretaker cabinet led by Prime Minister Najib Mikati, with limited powers. Lebanon’s political class, fuel companies and private electricity providers blocked an offer by to build three renewable energy power plants to ease the Lebanese caretaker economy minister said in May, 2024. Lebanon’s electricity crisis worsened after the country’s in October 2019. Power cuts often last for much of the day, leaving many reliant on expensive private generators that work on diesel and raise pollution levels. Although many people have installed solar power systems in their homes over the past three years, most use it only to fill in when the generator is off. Cost and space issues in urban areas have also limited solar use.
Qatar offered in 2023 to build three power plants with a capacity of 450 megawatts — or about 25% of the small nation’s needs — and since then, Doha didn’t receive a response from Lebanon, caretaker Economy Minister Amin Salam said. Qatar only offered to build one power plant with a capacity of 100 megawatts that would be a joint venture between the private and public sectors and not a gift as “some claim.” Salam said that after Qatar got no response from Lebanon regarding their offer, Doha offered to start with a 100-megawatt plant. People currently get an average of four hours of electricity a day from the state company, which has cost state coffers more than $40 billion over the past three decades because of its chronic budget shortfalls. He blamed “cartels and Mafia” that include fuel companies and 7,200 private generators that are making huge profits because of the electricity crisis.
Lebanon hasn’t built a new power plant in decades. Multiple plans for new ones have run aground on politicians’ factionalism and conflicting patronage interests. The country’s few aging, heavy-fuel oil plants long ago became unable to meet demand.
12. Immigration Blackmail
Nasrallah also called for “taking a Lebanese national stance to open the sea for the voluntary departure of Syrian refugees to Europe,” explaining that this is when the West and the EU “will rush to Lebanon and pay 20 billion dollars instead of one” to prevent so when such a decision is made. Hezbollah is taking its cue from Erdogan.
Just as Turkey is host to millions of Syrian refugees, and for which the EU has pledged to give Turkey billions of euros, the money given to Turkey is far below what has been pledged. Periodically, whenever the EU threatens Erdogan, he brings up this potential of releasing these millions of refugees to flood Europe. This terrifies the EU politicians.
“When we are our own masters and not slaves and we possess the elements of power, that is when we can impose our conditions on the enemy,” Sayyed Nasrallah affirmed. He also emphasized that Syria is capable of getting back on its feet within a few years once the sanctions imposed on it are lifted.
13. Western Intel Agencies Target Lebanon
Starting in the 1950s, US involvement in the Middle East took off, in tandem with Rockefeller oil companies. Lebanon was a low priority for the CIA.
For the Rothschilds, Lebanon was important in that it overlooked Israel’s water supplies. In addition, Lebanon would soon host large numbers of Palestinian refugees, which saw an increase following the 1967 war. From this date on, the Mossad began to focus on the PLO, whose base was in Beirut. In 1975, Israel and the CIA initiated the 15 year long civil war in the country. By the mid-1980s, the various Shia militias coalesced under the new group, Hezbollah. They drove Israel out of Lebanon in 2000, and defeated Israel in the 2006 war.
Israel’s brutal, nine-month military assault on Gaza has full support from several western-allied states, not only in supplying the occupation army’s war machine with a broad range of armaments and ammunition but also through direct military participation. The United States and Britain, for example, have provided vital reconnaissance and intelligence data and have sent their special forces to assist Israel in military operations. An 8 June report revealed that US forces assisted the Israelis in retrieving four Israeli captives from Gaza’s Nuseirat refugee camp, killing at least 274 Palestinian civilians and three additional captives and leaving over 698 wounded. According to the paper’s Israeli sources, the US and UK provided intelligence from the air and cyberspace that Israel could not obtain on its own.
On 29 May, the media project reported that London authorized an unprecedented 80 Israel-bound flights using cargo planes that took off from the UK’s RAF Akrotiri air base in Cyprus, a facility used by the US Air Force to move weapons to Israel. The British government has not revealed the content of the air cargo transported – and maintains that no “lethal aid” is included. London instead claims that RAF flights to the occupation state are used to support its “diplomatic engagement” with Tel Aviv and repatriate British subjects – an odd use of military aircraft when Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport is still operational for regular passenger travel. But all those concealment efforts were cracked open during Israel’s disproportionate military operation to secure the release of captives during the recent Nuseirat camp fiasco. appeared of an Israeli helicopter landing next to the recently-installed $320 million US ‘aid pier’ and of ‘aid trucks’ carrying special ops teams that were flanked by armored vehicles during the operation. Media then reported that dozens of US and UK drones assisted in the Nuseirat camp assault, ostensibly by providing reconnaissance services to the Israeli military. These incidents highlight not only direct western military participation in the war on Gaza but also the brazen exploitation of diplomatic cover or humanitarian work to prepare and carry out military actions that have led to mass civilian casualties and war crimes, as described by many United Nations institutions. The question now is whether western facilities and troops will come under target as the war expands, potentially to Lebanon, given the evident collusion of western states in Israel’s aggressions – especially those in flagrant violation of international norms and law.
Although the use of embassies and civilian institutions – in the modern sense – as bases for and launching special missions is not a new practice and dates back to at least the nineteenth century, current developments in technology and computing have enabled these facilities to act as spying and eavesdropping centers, for an entire country. What was previously impossible has become reality through wireless communication and the Internet. Signal intelligence formerly gained by planting eavesdropping and listening devices can now be accessed via the net – with data funneled to these centers inside sovereign states.
The parents of Israel- Britain and France are heavily involved in the destabilization of Lebanon, along with the US.
14. The US Embassy in Beirut
‘Second-biggest US Embassy in the world’
Sprawling approximately 174 thousand square meters, around 13 kilometers from the Lebanese capital of Beirut, lies the second largest embassy in the Middle East – and the world. The new US Embassy in Beirut is surpassed in size only by its counterpart in Baghdad’s “Green Zone.” Subtracting from the massive size of the embassy and its cost , there are many questions about the need for such facilities and what they contain. The computer-generated images published by the embassy show a complex featuring multi-story buildings with tall glass windows, entertainment areas, a swimming pool surrounded by greenery, and views of the Lebanese capital. According to the project website, the complex includes an office, representative housing for employees, community facilities, and associated support facilities. The massive billion-dollar complex will include a data collection facility, as the new regional headquarters for US intelligence. Due its proximity to Syria, Lebanon is considered a safe and strategic location for the deployment of intelligence agents already in the region as well as new personnel, who are selected directly from Washington-based agencies.
Although it is not possible to obtain precise information about the design of this embassy, the excavations below surface level, the use of reinforced concrete in the structure, and its fortified location on top of a hill suggest that there is more to its operations, especially since several precedents of the US Beirut diplomatic mission being implicated in the work of intelligence services exist.
The 1983 bombing of the American Embassy revealed a high CIA death toll, with eight killed, including the CIA’s chief Middle East analyst and Near East director, Robert Ames, station chief Kenneth Haass, James Lewis, and most of the CIA’s Beirut employees. The embassy was not only used as a CIA hub but also as a key regional intelligence base due to Lebanon’s proximity to both the sea and two British NATO bases in southern Cyprus, Dhekelia and Akrotiri, from which reinforcements or helicopter transfers can arrive rapidly onto Lebanese soil. These events and a myriad of other examples show that some western governments continuously use western diplomatic and civilian facilities to gather intelligence or conduct special missions training in sovereign Lebanon.
It is not yet known to what extent western governments can expect to maintain their double standards in the application of international law and customs, especially if the Gaza war they are materially supporting expands to Lebanon or other Middle East regions. The Resistance Axis, which has, in the past nine months, normalized military strikes on Israel, missile attacks on Israel-destined shipping vessels, and weekly strikes on US and UK naval fleets, are but one escalation away – as in, a declared war on Lebanon – to create a new set of target banks that surpass their last ones. That may then include the US embassy in Baghdad, the largest in the region – and the world – hosting 10 thousand American employees and troops, or, the second largest embassy in the region, the US embassy in Beirut. It is difficult to imagine that such facilities will remain immune if remains apparent, which we already know to be a constant, daily flow of armaments to fuel Israel’s war machinery and which also provide Tel Aviv with military intelligence and target banks. It will be even harder to protect diplomatic missions if they reveal themselves to essentially act as military command centers or intelligence hubs during the conduct of war. Targeting these facilities – which are already in breach of the Vienna Convention – can easily fall within the framework of self-defense and reciprocity as long as western states and Israel continue to normalize these illicit activities.
If the Gaza war established entirely new rules of engagement throughout the region, do Israel’s western allies expect to escape unscathed in an expanded war? How do they think they can arm military aggression against a country and yet remain safely in its capital city?
US Military Involvement
The conflict has been escalating for weeks. Israel has increased attacks aimed at the group. Current and former Israeli officials have also spoken publicly about shifting their attention from Hamas to the more powerful Hezbollah.
After Israeli officials warn of the possibility of launching a war that would send Lebanon back to the stone-age, the White House is trying to forestall a conflict that U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said could create a tinderbox that could explode into a regional conflict involving Iran, Syria, and, to an even greater extent than now, the United States.
Lebanon and Israel are both U.S. allies, and America has poured billions of dollars in military aid into Lebanon, trained tens of thousands of its troops, and operated a proxy commando unit run by U.S. Special Operations forces there for years. After all that aid and billions of dollars in support, Hezbollah remains Lebanon’s dominant military force and a state within a state that wields significant influence in Lebanon’s government, and the current conflict has only bolstered the group’s support . While Hezbollah’s popularity is centered in Lebanon’s south and east, the group has increased its popularity among non-Shiite Lebanese across the country since the outbreak of the war in Gaza due to its resistance to Israel,
Lebanon has been in crisis since well before the Gaza war began, having been the reduced to near poverty; systemic corruption; and the aftermath of an explosion by the Mossad of a warehouse full of fertilizer at Beirut’s port that killed several hundred and wounded another 6,000, and demolished significant portions of the capital, causing billions of dollars in damage. Since then, Lebanon’s economy has collapsed, with its GDP falling from $55 billion in 2018 to $31.7 billion in 2020 — one of the steepest depressions in modern history. About 80 percent of the population is now estimated to be living in poverty.
The US has a long and checkered history in Lebanon, including a 1958 intervention by U.S. Marines to forestall an insurrection there. In 1983, during a civil war that lasted 15 years, of the bombing of the U.S. Embassy and the U.S. Marine Corps barracks in Beirut killed more than 300 people. The United States blamed Hezbollah for both attacks and has long designated the group as a terrorist organization. For years, the U.S. has poured funds into the Lebanese Armed Forces to provide a counter-force to Hezbollah. Since 2006, America has provided foreign assistance to Lebanon, including military aid. The U.S. government has facilitated almost $2 billion in Lebanese purchases through the Foreign Military Sales program, including light attack aircraft, helicopters, and Hellfire missiles. The U.S. separately provided Lebanon with 130 armored and tactical ground vehicles. From 2016 to 2021, the United States also authorized the export of more than $82 million in U.S. military equipment to Lebanon.
“U.S. security assistance to Lebanon has been quite extensive — one of the largest assistance programs in the world,” said US State Department official Binder, noting that the U.S. has even rerouted tens of millions of dollars withheld from Egypt due to human rights concerns to Lebanon. “Despite the assistance, however the country remains incredibly unstable and its security forces remain unable to respond to Hezbollah’s domestic or regional operations.”
In addition to pumping military aid and arms into Lebanon, the U.S. also maintains its own small military presence in the country. For years, the U.S. has waged a secret war in Lebanon against Sunni terror groups like the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. The U.S. arms, trains, and provides intelligence to foreign forces. But unlike traditional foreign assistance programs, which are primarily intended to build local capacity, targeting U.S. enemies to achieve U.S. aims. The US program in Lebanon — code-named Lion Hunter — supported an elite unit known as the G2 Strike Force and was in operation as recently as 2019.
Central Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in the greater Middle East, did not respond to questions about Lion Hunter and the number of U.S. troops who have been, and may still be, involved. U.S. commandos are “postured to prepare for a wide-range of contingency operations in Israel and Lebanon.” The U.S. has trained more than 10,000 Lebanese, including 6,000 schooled in the United States since 1970.
15.British Watchtowers on Lebanon’s borders
On 3 May, Lebanon announced the visit of an official delegation to discuss the construction of new UK-built watchtowers. These are in addition to the more than three dozen watchtowers built by Britain during the Syrian war along the sensitive border between Lebanon and Syria.
According to leaks reported by Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the British delegation had asked the Lebanese army “to approve a plan to establish watchtowers along the border with occupied Palestine, similar to those existing on the eastern and northern borders with Syria.”
Following the low-profile visit, Lebanese caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati disclosed: “Establishing the towers and taking measures along the border are Israel’s conditions for stopping the war with Lebanon.” Last February, the Lebanese Foreign Ministry received an official Syrian protest note classifying the British watchtowers as a spying installation on several levels. The main threat is the tower systems’ sensitive intelligence and espionage equipment, which “shines deep into Syrian territory and collects information about the Syrian interior.” The information output from this equipment reaches the hands of the British, and the Israeli enemy benefits from the output to target Syrian territory and carry out strikes deep inside Syria.
They contain thermal monitoring, eavesdropping, signal intelligence, and communications equipment – especially in light of the close relationship between Tel Aviv and London and the periodic presence of British officers in these towers. The aim of the towers today is to monitor the movements of Hezbollah and Iranian aid to Hezbollah .
British Intelligence’s Unrestricted Access to Lebanon?
On 21 November, informed sources brought to light a covert initiative by Britain to secure unfettered access to Lebanese territory for its armed forces. A leaked document on the proposals revealed that, had the memorandum been approved, it would have granted “all British military personnel” unprecedented access to Lebanon’s ground, air and sea territory, bypassing the need for “prior diplomatic authorization” for “emergency missions.” The nature of those missions was not specified. Essentially, British soldiers would have been permitted to travel in uniform with their weapons visible anywhere in Lebanon, while enjoying immunity from arrest or prosecution for committing any crime.
Yet, London had good cause to believe that Beirut would capitulate to its exorbitant demands this time round. British intelligence has over many years run multiple operations to infiltrate Lebanese military, and intelligence agencies at the highest levels, while inserting its operatives and allies into key state ministries. Each of these operations were agreed to by a memorandum of understanding, the precise terms of which have never been publicly disclosed by either side.
Britain maintains a watchful eye on the resistance group’s military wing from a listening post in Cyprus. This strategic oversight is justified by the anticipation of potential involvement in a conflict alongside Iran if a “war of annihilation” unfolds in Gaza.
Britain is a Rothschild colony. While France is the so-called “owner” of Israel and Lebanon. These two arms of the Rothschild Empire illustrates how these two parents work in tandem to “protect” their child- Israel. Part of the Rothschild strategy is to weaken the Lebanese state and society to the extent that its sovereignty is compromised. Plus, the fact that Lebanese economy is broken, and it is starved of funds to buy the essentials to govern the country. The IMF is a Rothschild entity, and the IMF calls the shots in Lebanon, The family’s arrogance and power makes them think that everyone will say – “yes boss” and play along. The times are changing and the power of this family has declined. Its ability to influence events has dropped. Its enemies sense the weakness of their oppressors and are planning accordingly.
That “war of annihilation” is now well underway. The exposed UK-Lebanon memorandum, if enacted, could have positioned British troops strategically in the Levantine state, potentially escalating tensions to the brink of an all-out war.
15. Bibi’s Washington Trip, the 3 Assassinations & BRICS
In late July, Bibi went to Washington to get help for more arms and to get a green light to entice Iran to enter the war. We all saw the spectacle of the Zionist lobby’s political prostitutes cheering Bibi. The political prostitutes in Congress and the Senate are, in one form or another, working for the 2 families. The Rockefeller family needs to blow up Eurasia, in order to hold onto global dominance for longer. If the war were to end in Ukraine and Gaza today, then their empires will come to end quickly. If the war continues for long (1-3 years), then their empires will die a slow death. Faced with these two options, the family has chosen the latter option.
The Rockefeller game-plan, titled Fortress America, https://behindthenews.co.za/fortress-america/, explains it all. The aim is to put on fire the western part of Eurasia (Ukraine) to the eastern part of Eurasia (Taiwan/China). Finally, the Middle East (Israel & surrounds). If this plan is successful, then Eurasia will burn, just like it did in the 2 previous global wars. Were this to happen, then the Rockefeller Empire and America hope for a repeat of the aftermath of World War 2, when America came in at the last minute, and its global dominance began . This is their plans and hopes, but this time, America is in a much, much weaker position than it was in August 1945. The problem in the Middle East is that both Egypt and Iran are not getting directly involved in the war. The provocation against Egypt is failing after Israel’s Rafah move. See our next article. Now, Israel and the US are hoping that Iran responds in a way that a regional war breaks out. Good Luck with that. All the regional states are very aware of Putin’s advice: “Exercise strategic patience. Do not enter the war. Let the various Resistance groups lead. The longer we wait, the weaker Israel and its supporters become, and do not fall for the baits and provocations , as that is exactly what the 2 families want “.
Part of this move is to keep on “provoking“ Iran, hoping that Iran will escalate. This was the reason why the Mossad killed Haniyeh in Teheran. The Iranians are furious as they considered Haniyeh a guest. The problem for the 2 families is that all the states in the region are very aware of their plans. The escalation is limited to actions by the Resistance Fronts key actors – Hezbollah, the Houthis, the IRI and Hamas.
On the evening of the 31st, Israel carried out three assassinations in the region. The first was Ismail Haniyeh- the political leader of Hamas and its chief negotiator. Israel does not want peace, and it has a nasty habit of killing those it is negotiating with. The second was a senior Hezbollah commander in Beirut. The third was a senior IRGC commander in Damascus. With these three hits, Israel is daring both Hezbollah and Iran to respond. The response may be the sign of the US to intervene on Israel’s side. Were this to happen, then Iran may get involved.
Another issue is the game-plan to push Hezbollah back to the Litani river- about 40 kms from the border. Here, Israel may use tactical nuclear missiles in southern Lebanon to “clear out” any Hezbollah forces to make the IOF task easier. But, if this happens, then no one knows in what direction the war will head to.
Both aerial defenses to counter the expected retaliation. Israel and the US are preparing
Ismail Haniyeh’s funeral took place on Thursday – the 1st of August. That same evening, the key representatives of all the Resistance Fronts met to discuss the appropriate response. It’s going to be something to witness. Many Israelis are fleeing the north, and many are fleeing the country since these assassinations. The funny thing is that many countries have contacted Hezbollah, both threatening and pleading with Hezbollah NOT TO RETALIATE! Nasrallah promised a retaliation, and so did Iran. In fact, on the 1st of August, the Resistance factions in Gaza destroyed 5 tanks and 2 bulldozers, besides killing and wounding many IOF soldiers. This is just the beginning. The US has sent between 12 and 15 warships to the eastern Med to act as a back-up support for Israel. If the US decides to get directly involved in the war, then Hezbollah and Iran will sink those ships. It’s a lose-lose proposition for Israel and the US.
A final point, but the most important one from New York’s view is BRICS.
The Rockefeller family did 9/11 in order to occupy Afghanistan in order to forestall this very development. Now, more than 2 decades later, BRICS is alive and growing stronger. Both Egypt and Iran have become the latest BRICS members, having joined in January this year. Were Iran to become directly involved in the war, it will weaken BRICS. That’s what David Rockefeller Jnr in New York is hoping for, irrespective how much destruction and loss of life takes place.
We do live in interesting times. Our next article switches back to Gaza, and is titled “Why Rafah, Now?”
