In his first televised interview after the July 2006 war, Hassan Nasrallah was asked: “If time could be turned back, would you change what happened at Khallat Warda?” “Certainly not. We never thought that our enemy would go to war over two soldiers,” he replied. Shocked by the devastation caused by that war, Nasrallah famously uttered his “Had I known...”
Nasrallah’s critique of this course of action amounted to little more than an effort to throw dust in the people’s eyes. The narratives portraying him as a man who had made his own decisions independently of Iranian Revolutionary Guards evaporated on the night of October 8, 2023, when he complied with the dictates of Esmail Qaani and dragged Lebanon into the war of “support” for Gaza.
Immense human and material losses, mass displacement, and the subjection of Lebanon, especially its South, to brutal collective punishment were the result. Hezbollah’s defeat was akin to an annihilation: the pager disaster, the elimination of the Jihad Council, the loss of first-tier and second-tier commanders, and the killing of Nasrallah and his successor, Hashem Safieddine. It thus pleaded for a ceasefire at any cost, allowing Israel to impose its claimed “right” to violate Lebanese sovereignty in order to “defend itself against planned or imminent attacks.”
For that reason, there was little surprise when Lebanon was dragged into a second “support” war, this time in retaliation for Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Even if it were true that the “Iranian weapons party” had been seeking to seize an opportunity presented by the American-Israeli war against Iran, and that it believed its contribution to the war could allow for improving the humiliating terms of the November 27, 2024 agreement, it should have recognized the vast disparity between the two sides, stepped back, and stood behind the Lebanese state.
Such a course might have limited the horrors now afflicting Jabal Amel, whose urban landscape continues to be erased after its residents were forced out. Tyre and Nabatieh have now met the fate that had befallen Bint Jbeil.
During the Gaza support campaign, American envoy Amos Hochstein warned Lebanese parliament Speaker Nabih Berri of catastrophic consequences and occupation, and that withdrawing north of the Litani River would remove this threat. The recommendations of Israel’s Alma Center, which developed the “Dahiya Doctrine,” were publicly stated: the response to fantasies of invading the Galilee should be the destruction of villages and cities, such as Bint Jbeil, Tyre, and Nabatieh, while preventing the reconstitution of a social environment that could enable future threats.
Those reassured by the capabilities of the “tunnel cities” built by Iran, however, dismissed the warnings. Berri reportedly told Hochstein that “it would be easier to move the Litani River to the border than to move Hezbollah north of it.” To this day, Berri has taken no step to prevent Jabal Amel and Lebanon from being handed to Israel on a silver platter in service of Iran.
It has become clear that behind government decisions banning Hezbollah’s military and security activities lies a conviction that this organization led by the IRGC seeks to revive Tehran’s “unity of arenas” strategy to serve its own interests, with little regard for the immense transformations that followed the catastrophe of October 7: the destruction and reoccupation of Gaza, the uprooting of southern Lebanese communities, and the emergence of a new Syria.
It has become even clearer that this organization is “a part of the Islamic Republic and an assault on the Lebanese state,” as the late minister Mohammad Chatah repeatedly argued before his assassination that is blamed on Hezbollah.
That Lebanon has been dragged into three devastating wars over 20 years in service of Iran is something that requires exposure, condemnation, and preparation for accountability. The path toward that goal requires making Shiite anger visible and raising voices in proportion to the magnitude of the suffering. The role of Shiite intellectual and social elites is pivotal in this regard. That can lead a process that halts the current trajectory of defeat and allows Lebanon to catch its breath and imagine a different future.
This is precisely why the appeal issued by notable figures from Tyre and Nabatieh is so crucial. Born from the heart of suffering, it declared that the mask had fallen, rejected collective suicide, and affirmed the right to a normal life. These appeals, accompanied by hundreds of signatures from local notables and activists, called for Tyre and Nabatieh to become open, demilitarized cities protected by the Lebanese army and legitimate state institutions.
It is indeed a historic appeal because it is the first of its kind to emerge over the past 41 years, since Hezbollah’s founding in 1985. It openly condemns Hezbollah, rejects the concept of “resistance,” which it argues has become a business enterprise, and demands that the organization leave the two cities.
In a sense, it represents the first rebellion against Hezbollah’s hegemony over the Shiite community and it is a rejection of narratives falsely promoted under slogans such as “We Protect and We Build” amid the confiscation of villages, cities, and their inhabitants, which have been rendered them into shields of Iran.
This appeal marks the beginning of a roadmap for liberating the South and saving Lebanon, and it should be expanded nationally. Moreover, it outlines a framework for exposing criminality and dependency and ensuring genuine accountability for “Iran’s party in Lebanon” and its allies. It heralds a long-awaited effort to expose and break Hezbollah’s deep alliances with the broader political system and corruption networks that facilitated its hold over key state decisions, thereby allowing it to impede the implementation of historic government decisions regarding the disarmament of non-state actors.
This process requires swift action to ensure a national protection network that serves those who are suffering - the majority of Lebanese citizens - and who are now being asked to shoulder the burden of this rescue mission as the very existence of the nation is being threatened. To the extent that such a process takes shape, the country’s ordeal will be contained. It will help resolve not only the ordeal of the Shiite community, but that of Lebanon as a whole, a country that the “yellow party” had, even before Benjamin Netanyahu, led to historic calamities.
