No Script

Please Wait...

Ashura 2019


Sayyed Nasrallah Speech on Resistance and Liberation Day

Sayyed Nasrallah Speech on Resistance and Liberation Day
folder_openSpeeches-2008 access_time11 years ago
starAdd to favorites

The following is the text of the televised speech given by Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, broadcasted live on Al-Manar TV, on the seventh Resistance and Liberation Day anniversary.

May Allah`s peace, mercy and blessings be upon you all and happy seventh Resistance and Liberation Day.

I speak with you live directly through Al Manar channel, regarding the anniversary and a number of issues.

I thank God the glorious to whom we owe all our fortune, thanks be to God who granted us victory and aided us to continue along this path.

Dear brothers and sisters,

On the Resistance and Liberation Day, I am filled with pride, but we all miss the festivity and joy. There certainly is a pang of sorrow brought by events taking place at this time now in Iraq, and at this hour in Gaza-occupied Palestine and in Lebanon particularly in the North. All these events disallow feelings of joy and festivity.

On this anniversary, greetings and salutation to the great souls of the martyrs and especially the Master of the resistance Sayyed Abbas Musawi and his family, to Sheikh Ragheb Hareb and all the martyrs in Lebanon, to the Palestinian people, to the martyrs of the Lebanese army and security forces, to the Palestinian resistance factions, to the martyrs of the Syrian Arab army and to every martyr who fell on Lebanese soil by the bullets of the Zionist occupation.

After the martyrs, greetings and salute to the families of the martyrs, to the wounded and their families, to the prisoners and their families, particularly those remaining in enemy prisons awaiting freedom that is inevitable coming to them, also to the resistance fighters who spent their youth in fighting and resistance, moving between mountains and valleys, greetings and salutes to their patient families.

To the people who suffered the brunt of living under the occupation or in contiguous zones with our enemy for many long years, to all the Lebanese, to our Arab and Islamic nation and to world nationals who championed the oppressed and exulted in the triumph of right over wrong.

Dear brothers and sisters,

Undoubtedly the 25th of May 2000 witnessed an historic victory over the "Israeli" enemy acknowledged by all the world as well as leaders in the enemy entity; yet, unfortunately, this victory was not justly recognized in all its aspects in the world.

I would like to address three titles and speak to you from the heart.

• The first title relates to an important quality in the character and truth of the resistance, if to be fair to it.

• The second part relates to Hizbullah entering the Lebanese political arena in the past two years, and the resolve reached on this stance and vision, because there are many questions surrounding our entering politics in Lebanon.

• The third title relates to the recent events in the north, our position on the current events and our vision of what is to come.

On the first part:

After the National Lebanese resistance, the Islamic resistance became the backbone of the Lebanese resistance. This is well known. One of its most basic features is its commitment to Islamic, moral and national values.

To the resistance, the removal of the occupation and enemy aggression, liberating the land and freeing the prisoners, to us, formed a sacred cause, as well as a religious and moral obligation. That is reflected in the resistance, the resistance fighters, and its performance, conduct and morality. Therefore, we find that this resistance's goal is made of its essence.

From the outset, military operations targeted the occupation forces and not innocent civilians. Resistance fighters after planting explosives against the occupation used to delay or cancel attacks when civilian presence was encountered and an operation would be postponed.

Postponing an operation was not to be seen as a problem, since the principal of resistance is based on attrition. Hence, the resistance always took into consideration the safety of the family members of traitors or collaborators. Everybody knows what happened with the traitor Aql Hashim when he stood right above an explosive. Yet, the operation was postponed because his family was around him at the time.

But this is not the American way of the American occupation forces in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan.

The resistance took all the care for people`s lives and their property. Resistance fighters had to ensure operations with minimum losses. Bloodshed was not a hobby of the resistance. Its operations focused on blood draining the "Israelis" only.

In year 2000 on liberation day, traitors gathered at the Fatima Gate. The resistance could have killed many of them, but instead they left them the freedom to return, the opportunity for reflection and repentance. When the resistance fighters entered the previously occupied villages, they brought safety and security with them.

After the victory, we attributed and offered the victory to all the Lebanese, the whole Arab nation and in particular the Palestinian people, the most important reason for the victory.

I say today it is not possible to beat such a civilized, sober and ardent resistance or inflict it defeat.

Here, we recall the essential nature of the resistance, which is its love, yearning, affection and the love relationship shared by the freedom fighters and the people of this nation. This dimension, if overlooked, the 2000 and 2006 victories could not be understood.

Hence, from this point, we move onto internal Lebanese affairs. On May of year 2000, I stood in Bint Jubeil, clearly presenting the victory to the Palestinian people and all peoples were honoured by it, and I said on that day that I did not ask for a reward or a price for what we did. I said what we did was a duty.

The louder reverberation was in Palestine, which started with a huge uprising.
Had we not fulfilled our duty of resistance we would have been inflicted with humiliation in this world and loss in the after life.

We do not want any reward from anybody, we never said that we want fortune of money.
The only request I made at the time was the State to show care to those border regions of Bint Jbeil and its surroundings, which had long suffered from deprivation under the occupation.

That was all I requested at the time. We did not try to capitalize on our victory, so much so that we were accused by some analysts of being simple and naïve.

For the duration of the last period we were watching events happening at home, but our central effort was to prepare for the day to come, because we knew the Zionists would not take a defeat and remain quiet about it.

It is why our performance remained unchanged from year 2000 to 2005, until we entered political life on February 14 of 2005, particularly on the day a huge earthquake hit Lebanon, and it seemed Lebanon had entered a dark tunnel, none knew where it leads.

At the time, we found it our duty to join the political domain, but quickly realised that fighting against "Israel" was cleaner, purer and more honorable than engaging in politics. We found we had to be strongly present with all our popular and political reserve created by the resistance, and I speak truth even if it is difficult.

We feel the responsibility and there are many who sacrificed for the sake of Lebanon, but we were among those who sacrificed most for the sake of Lebanon.

The issue of freedom and independence is indivisible and it was our duty to be present wherever there is a battle of this kind.

We felt, from the first moment after we entered the enormity and magnitude of our responsibility and discovered our reserve, that our priorities were to spare Lebanon any internal dissension or inter Lebanese fighting, whether sectarian, denominational, or any Lebanese-Palestinian conflict.

Because talk of weapons in the Palestinian camps quickly began soon after, and this would have led to confrontations, any Lebanese-Syrian clashes were also to be avoided, as a very harsh atmosphere was prevalent at the time over the whole of Lebanon, especially since all this conflict and confrontation was based on mere political accusation, and not criminal or investigative evidence.

We were concerned for the state and its institutions, particularly the Lebanese army, whose leadership is aware of our position and how we acted in that period.

The army institution has become the guarantee for the interior.

One of the axioms we entered the dialogue with, was the basis of openness to everyone involved in the discussions, overcoming all past conflicts, while calling for dialogue and for gathering.

We kept emphasizing and reiterating this openness, so much so that we were even ready to discuss "the weapon of the resistance", something we had regarded as sacred, the resistance which protects Lebanon, together with the Lebanese army, because the resistance was being targeted in all its facets.

It is even targeted for its name, and I say it again this anniversary is called the Resistance and Liberation Day anniversary, and for some the word ‘resistance' is being dropped out making it the Liberation Day anniversary. Hence, the resistance is being targeted even for its name, presence and weapons.

Furthermore, because we do not allow matters inside Lebanon to reach a clash with the resistance, or allow dragging the army into conflict with the resistance, we joined government.

We also worked on making Lebanon for the Lebanese because the Americans fully entered the Lebanese life and there are many examples of their interference in daily political domain.

We did not ask to join the political domain, nor did we join out of greed for posts or ministries, besides we joined the quadripartite alliance out of trusting there was goodwill. We joined the first two governments and accepted to discuss everything at the dialogue table. We revealed our entire strategy, which the Israelis read more than some of us did at the home front, and they benefited from it.

We did this out of duty.

Our background was what I already mentioned; we came here to exercise our moral and spiritual obligation, just as we did in militant resistance. Unfortunately, we discovered things were the opposite on the inside, as we found that the other side does not want to seriously discuss matters namely the issue of the International Tribunal, which they, unfortunately even smuggled out of the Cabinet to the Security Council.

The latest of their errors was their sending a letter to the Security Council under Chapter VII, a dangerous turn. We found that the other team does not want our participation, and used our presence in government as a decoration only, since the other team insisted on our exclusion, and we were a part of the representation of a large section of the Lebanese society.

After that came the operation of capturing Israeli prisoners and the Israeli war on Lebanon, which you have all lived with and know what happened.

The war ended with victory, yet we saw how their entire team conducted themselves after the war with regards to reconstruction, and the key issues that require basic approval.

What crime did Hizbullah commit after the war? Is calling for a national unity government a crime? We never said we did not want you as part of a national unity government, despite everything that happened before, during and after the war.

We did not betray anyone. All our discourse was one of solidarity and unity, while in contrast and throughout the war you regarded us as traitorous.

When I talked about a government of national unity, when no solution was to be found in Lebanon but through a government of national unity, would I have been demanding for increased share of Cabinet Ministers for Amal movement or Hizbullah?

I rather called for co-participation reality in Lebanon and a national unity government, a rescue government.

They left our people in the street after the war; one hundred thousand families without any aid or assistance. We only did our duty towards them. We were told we were a state within a state.

Well then where is your government and its services? Where is it in relation to compensations, reparation and rebuilding?

We said let us resort to the people through referendum and an early parliamentary elections. Their rejection of this democratic political path of using such democratic tools and means, led to our exit from government together with our brothers in Amal, but we are still moving along the same parameters and principles.

The other team continues with its conduct without recognising the difficulties and dangers in this country. And I call for a revision of the period between the year 1975 and 2007.

No one can impose their will on the Lebanese, and in this Lebanon, no Lebanese can impose their will on the rest of the Lebanese even with international and regional endorsement.

Therefore, here lies the problem and the solution. So, let us not waste our time and that of the Lebanese people.

Unfortunately the other team insists on continuing with their conduct and performance. Unfolding events in the north occurred against a background filled these matters.

I wish to stress and emphasize that we will not abdicate our responsibility in Lebanon, nothing will break any of our resolve. What we are doing here supplements the duty of jihad through resistance, with the same patience and diligence, and we will continue to stand by all those who are nationalistic in their effort, in order to preserve our country, its freedom and independence.

We do not want any posts, and experience taught us that working in co-operation overcomes all obstacles.

The last part concerns the painful events that took place and are still continuing in north Lebanon.

I will touch on this subject because it is not isolated from the general climate, of accusations, political events and the security risks currently faced by Lebanon.

On Sunday morning, Hizbullah, like others, heard what happened and started following events, gathering information and making calls to make sense of what is happening in Tripoli, at Nahr el-Bared camp and surrounding area.

Of course, we are facing a very sensitive, very complex and very dangerous subject. Let no one present such issues as being simple. The matter is extremely complex, overlapping and in Lebanon everything is sensitive.

Today on this subject there is an Islamic public opinion and a Christian public opinion, an Islamic mood and a Christian mood. There are also sectarian and religious sensitivities, as well as the issues of the Lebanese, Palestinian, regional, international, American, the war on terrorism, the camps' weapons, the camps and Palestinian settlement.

Today, the whole of Lebanon faces a new dilemma and everyone is looking for a way to save the country from this new predicament. We do not take a position on an incident when we do not know its details and background, especially if any taken stand will have consequent political, moral and humanitarian responsibilities, as well as the responsibility for the blood, money and fate of a country along with the fate of the two peoples.

The Lebanese army protects the security and stability of Lebanon. It has also been the protector of national unity and if it wasn't for the army, a civil war may have broken out unfortunately during the last two years, as it was possible for many of the past events to have very serious repercussions and developments.

Putting the country's political gravitations aside, both pro-government and opposition must look to the army as the last and only remaining institution capable of maintaining security, peace and national unity, and therefore oppose abusing this institution. This is what remains for us in this difficult and troubled political situation, still holding all the security forces and apparatus with utmost respect.

But even the security forces resort to the army when they find things began spiraling out of control. Hence, preserving the Lebanese army and defending it does not target anyone specifically, but intends to preserve Lebanon`s unity, peace and security.

The attack on the Lebanese army and army posts was, to say the least, out of the picture, as it was clear the army was not prepared for the committed massacre against it, the reason for the incurred high number of martyrs.

Any attack on the army, the Lebanese security forces, on the security and stability in Lebanon is condemnable from any side because this is a red line that must be adhered to by everyone and crossing it must not be tolerated by anyone.

Another point is that preserving the stature of the army is part of maintaining this institution, its role and function. We like other Lebanese voices say justice must take its course.

Those accused of Ayn-Alak bombing which took the lives of several Lebanese martyrs must get a fair trial. Those who attacked the Lebanese army and the security forces must also have a fair trial, and this is fairness and justice.

The second point is the subject of Nahr el-Bared camp, the Palestinian civilians and factions there, and the camp as such must be a stable constant and a red line, if we want to be just and fair that is, with the rest of the civilian population, the Lebanese and the Palestinians.

If the state is waging a war on terrorism, it does not mean that people should be killed in the streets. You are a state and you should act as such; an arrest warrant, then an arrest, and arrest procedures to be observed, people are to be taken to the courts and tried and not have a war on terror the ‘Bush' style.

That people are killed in the streets, where a security man becomes the prosecutor, lawyer, judge and executioner is a dangerous thing. That will threaten peace and security in Lebanon.

On the first day of the events I heard one of those pretend-champs calls for storming the refugee camp! A camp where 30 to 40 thousand people live and are not related to the problem.
Is it conceivable that we attack 40 thousand people and destroy the camp if we want to arrest gunmen?

From a humanitarian, moral and even legal point of view, the Palestinian camp is like any Lebanese town or village.

Those calls come from people living in old dreams and projects. This is a mistake and a very dangerous one, which brings back many painful, harsh and difficult memories.

In all frankness and clarity as far as we are concerned the army is a red line, and must not be harmed, and whoever killed these officers and members of the army must be tried, in a fair trial and must not be pardoned.

But Nahr el-Bared camp is a red line, the civilians are Lebanese and Palestinians, we can not condone, cover or be partners to covering a camps war of this kind, since we do not know where it leads.

After all whose war would it be should one erupt?!

We must be attentive to the American intervention in this incident.

An investigation must be carried out later as to the causes of the incident, whose decision it was and how the decision was taken.

Today the Americans established an aerial bridge to send ammunition to the Lebanese Army, may be at Siniora's request, this is something serious.

During the days of the war on Lebanon, the Lebanese government, at least that is what was said, was requesting the United States to intervene and stop the war against us, but the United States refused to ask the Israelis to stop the war, but rather pushed for continuing the war!

Why this sudden concern for the Lebanese army now today?!

This question is directed to the Lebanese, Palestinians and the Arab peoples, as well as March 14th and 8th.

When Bush spoke of the war on Iraq and to refute his critics on the losses the US army is suffering in Iraq, Bush said in defense of his strategy, "When we went and occupied Iraq, we brought Al Qaeda into Iraq in order to fight it there. Which is better for us? Let Al Qaeda attack us in our own home or create a battle front and confront it there with our armed forces?" This was repeated by George Bush more than once at more than one occasion.

Here Bush admits that one of his objectives in Iraq is the liquidation of Al Qaeda through attracting Al Qaeda and its supporters from all over the world and polarizing it in Iraq. The Iraqi people now pay the price with all their religious denominations, cities and sanctities.

Is Lebanon also required to turn into a battleground between the Americans and Al Qaeda?
In a clear case acknowledged by the ministerial statement which refers to the resistance, Shibaa Farms and the prisoners, we still find someone claiming ours is an Iranian/Syrian battle. Do you want to battle out other people's war on Lebanese territory?

Are we interested in starting a conflict with Al Qaeda in Lebanon and, therefore, this allowing this conflict to attract Al Qaeda elements and fighters from all over the world to polarize them in Lebanon?

We may start with Al Qaeda, but no one knows where we end up and where we finish. This threat is serious and must be taken into account. Lebanon today faces a difficult and very serious stage; no one can hide from their responsibility by claiming this is nothing serious.

Do we really have to go through these acts? What is the desired interest and outcome of such acts? This is presented here for discussion and not as an accusation.

What took place in the North could be dealt with political, military and judicial manner that preserves the army, the Palestinian brothers, the state, civil peace and stability without transforming Lebanon into a battlefield on behalf of the Americans to fight Al Qaeda and its splinter organisations that run under different names.

As for the solution, it is represented in non-monopolization by the political team. None in Lebanon could cancel out any other. There are core movements and faiths in Lebanon. Whether large, medium and small sects, all confessions are core in the Lebanese fabric.

No one can cancel out anyone else. Today, the courageous decision is to form an emergency rescue government which should not ignore anyone within this government. I am not talking here of representation and representation ratios.

Let us all together establish a rescue government with real and not superficial participation, within which everything and all issues can be discussed.

Logic says that we are in an emergency situation. Hence, let us form an emergency government in which all core political forces of the country are represented. This government shall become the permanent national dialogue table. Also, it has to develop the implementation mechanisms for all decisions approved at the dialogue table in order to be put for endorsement and execution.

As for anyone wanting to have monopoly on power through unconstitutional methods, to then go on to wage wars, when you had being problematic over our capture of "Israeli" soldiers, accusing us of not consulting with anyone on the subject. We ask you now ‘who are you currently consulting with, and where are you leading the country?'

The solution lies in the formation of this government in which we can preserve the accomplishments of the resistance and liberation, as well as our country`s sovereignty, independence and freedom and correct political track. It is where cooperation among one another can take place, work on conflict prevention whether sectarian or religious, Palestinian-Lebanese or any other conflicts; a government that enables a restored quorum.

As far as we are concerned we have the courage to take such a courageous decision.