Two years after the assassination of former Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, the group has not fully overcome the absence of the man who led it for more than three decades and transformed the secretary-general's office into a center of political, organizational, military, and popular influence that is difficult to replace.
Hezbollah will mark the second anniversary of the assassinations of Nasrallah and his successor, Hashem Safieddine, on Sunday with a public rally at Nasrallah's shrine in Beirut's southern suburbs. Its new Secretary-General, Naim Qassem, will speak at the event. Security measures will include closing roads leading to the shrine from the direction of the old airport road and Ziad Rahbani Highway and diverting traffic to other routes.
According to people close to the group and its opponents, current Secretary-General Naim Qassem does not appear to have succeeded in filling the vacuum left by his predecessor. At the same time, there has been an increasing shift in the center of decision-making within the group, with the room for internal initiative narrowing in favor of decisions coming directly from Iran.
The group's opponents say the issue is not simply a matter of the difference in charisma and popular presence between the two men, but also the nature of the role Nasrallah played within Hezbollah. He combined political, organizational, and military leadership, and served as the principal link with the group's supporters and its Iranian ally. Hezbollah today, by contrast, appears to have a more collective and structured leadership, but with a more direct Iranian role in shaping its choices and decisions.
While people close to Hezbollah believe that, despite the blows it has suffered, the group has managed to reorganize its ranks and maintain its cohesion under Naim Qassem, its opponents argue that the period following Nasrallah has exposed a leadership crisis and a decline in its ability to mobilize supporters, as well as internal divisions resulting from Qassem's performance.
A New Approach to Confronting the Challenges
Political writer Dr. Qassem Qassir, who is closely familiar with Hezbollah's position, acknowledges that after Nasrallah, the group "faced many internal and external obstacles" following a long period of centralized leadership during which Nasrallah held the reins of the organization for about 33 years, from 1992 until 2024, before his assassination under extremely difficult circumstances.
He notes that despite losing both of its secretaries-general, Nasrallah and Hashem Safieddine, along with a number of its cadres and leaders, Hezbollah succeeded in reorganizing its ranks and putting its security and organizational affairs in order under Sheikh Naim Qassem.
In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, Qassir says Hezbollah now faces new challenges, which has prompted it to adopt a different approach at both the domestic and external levels. He adds that while Hezbollah was previously a major regional player, it is now focusing to a much greater degree on its internal situation, southern Lebanon, and confronting Israel.
He continues that while Hezbollah is no longer the strongest political player on the domestic scene as it once was, it remains a major political force, and domestic and external actors continue to treat it as a key party in the Lebanese equation.
Asked about the charisma Nasrallah possessed, which many believe Qassem lacks, Qassir says there is no doubt that Nasrallah's charisma was distinctive. However, he describes Sheikh Naim as a highly important organizational and administrative figure who succeeded in reorganizing the group's ranks and preserving its cohesion during an extremely difficult period, given that Hezbollah is entering a new phase that requires a new approach at the political, military, and militant levels.
A Missing Leadership
Jad Al-Akhawi, head of the Lebanese Democrats Coalition and a Shiite opponent of Hezbollah, takes a different view. He says it is difficult to argue that Naim Qassem has so far succeeded in filling the vacuum left by Hassan Nasrallah.
The issue, he says, is not solely about charisma, but about the nature of the leadership Nasrallah built over more than three decades and his ability to combine organizational, political, and military leadership while maintaining direct communication with the group's supporters. Qassem, by contrast, came from a more organizational and ideological background than a popular one and spent decades serving as deputy secretary-general rather than as the group's primary center of gravity.
In remarks to Asharq Al-Awsat, Al-Akhawi says what stands out about Qassem's appearances is their format. He appears on screen, but without the direct interaction with supporters that was an essential part of Nasrallah's public image. Some of Qassem's appearances, he adds, appear to be so tightly controlled and produced that they can at times give the visual impression of an image or persona generated by artificial intelligence rather than that of a political leader interacting directly with his supporters.
He adds that Nasrallah was not merely a secretary-general, but for Hezbollah's supporters he was part of the mechanism for mobilization, persuasion, and decision-making. Naim Qassem, by contrast, has not yet demonstrated that he can inherit all of these functions collectively.
The question, therefore, is no longer simply whether Qassem can fill the vacuum left by Nasrallah, but whether Hezbollah itself can produce a comparable leadership after the collapse of a significant part of its former leadership structure.
The Decision-Making in Iran
Political activist and Lebanese University psychology professor Dr. Mona Fayad, for her part, focuses on Hezbollah's ability to mobilize people. She considers that ability to have declined significantly under Qassem's leadership, pointing to internal divisions within the group between those who support Qassem and those who oppose him, which she says have affected the way decisions are made and the current phase is managed.
Fayad believes Qassem's current performance "serves Israel," making it not in Israel's interest to target him. She also believes that decisions within Hezbollah now come directly from Iran, with the scope for Lebanese decision-making reduced to a minimum.
In this context, Fayad speaks of an Iranian "determination" to keep the Iranian ambassador in Beirut, saying his role goes beyond diplomatic work to include security responsibilities. She describes him as an "intelligence operative" whom Tehran seeks to keep in place to complete his missions.
