Saturday, August 26, 2006

Naim Qassem and Parallels to 1993

Recent events have led me to reread Naim Qassem's Hizbullah: The Story Within, since much has changed between date of publication and today. Although there are several passages worth noting here, the one that was of particular interest to me reflects Qassem's take on the July 1993 Aggression, which to a certain degree has an eerie resemblance to recent events.

---------

The enemy then launched another grand assault on the morning of July 25, 1993 that lasted for seven continuous days and ending on the night of July 31. The operation was labeled 'Accountability', and had a twofold objective as declared by Israel's foreign minister Shimon Peres:
To attack those who directly attack us, especially Hizbullah, and to alert the population of Lebanon and the concerned governments to the necessity of terminating the activity of Hizbullah.

Israeli Chief of Staff Ehud Barak warned the Lebanese government that it should 'disarm Hizbullah or watch Israel do it.' The objectives of the July 1993 aggression clearly revolved around:
1. Disarming Hizbullah and rendering it inactive by way of a fierce military offensive targeting the Party's infrastructure;
2. Breaking the Party's relationship with the populace, and providing the latter with a reason to exercise public pressure, thus building a civil cordon around the Party.
3. Exerting pressure on the Lebanese government, forcing it to take the necessary steps to impede resistance activity.

...

The enemy's army intelligence estimated that Hizbullah possessed around 500 rockets that would be depleted in the span of a few days, following which military control would completely be in the hands of the Israeli army. Hizbullah would then succumb, according to these calculations ... however, the enemy soon felt Hizbullah's serious readiness for a long war, and understood that annihilating the Resistance was not feasible.

...

Israel's aggression resulted in the death of 140 civilians ... thousands of homes were completely or partially destroyed. But the Resistance, and Lebanon, came out victorious. The enemy was unable to achieve its direct objectives.

----------

2 Comments:

  • I agree with most of what Ghassan said, except that the Syrian and Iranian (especially Iranian) connections of HA were always pronounced and obvious (remember their old slogan?).

    In 93, however, and up until 2000 in a different way until 2005 there was no room for dissent...

    By Blogger R, at 11:55 AM  

  • what exactly is syrian hegemony?

    By Blogger Unknown, at 10:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home