The Illusion of a Solution: Killing Hassan Nasrallah

by Dr Binoy Kampmark

The ongoing Israeli operation against Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia group so dominant in Lebanon, is following a standard pattern.  Ignore base causes.  Ignore context.  Target leaders, and target personnel.  See matters in conventional terms of civilisational warrior against barbarian despot.  Israel, the valiant and bold, fighting the forces of darkness.

The entire blood woven tapestry of the Middle East offers uncomfortable explanations.  The region has seen false political boundaries sketched and pronounced by foreign powers, fictional countries proclaimed, and entities brought into being on the pure interests of powers in Europe.  These empires produced shoddy cartography in the name of the nation state and plundering self-interest, leaving aside the complexities of ethnic belonging and tribal dispositions.  Tragically, such cartographic fictions tended to keep company with crime, dispossession, displacement, ethnic cleansing and enthusiastic hatreds.

Since October 7, when Hamas flipped the table on Israel’s heralded security apparatus to kill over 1,200 of its citizens and smuggle over 200 hostages into Gaza, historical realities became present with a nasty resonance.  While Israel falsely sported its credentials as a peaceful state with dry cleaned democratic credentials ravaged by Islamic barbarians, Hamas had tapped into a vein of history stretching back to 1948.  Dispossession, racial segregation, suppression, were all going to be addressed, if only for a moment of vanguardist and cruel violence.

To the north, where Lebanon and Israel share yet another nonsense of a border, October 7 presented a change.  Both the Israeli Defence Forces and Hezbollah took to every bloodier jousting.  It was a serious affair: 70,000 Israelis displaced to the south; tens of thousands of Lebanese likewise to the north. (The latter are almost never mentioned in the huffed commentaries of the West.)

The Israeli strategy in this latest phase was made all too apparent by the number of military commanders and high-ranking operatives in Hezbollah the IDF has targeted.  Added to this the pager-walkie talkie killings as a prelude to a likely ground invasion of Lebanon, it was clear that Hezbollah’s leader, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, figured as an exemplary target.

Hezbollah confirmed the death of its leader in a September 27 strike on Beirut’s southern suburb of Dahiyeh and promised “to continue its jihad in confronting the enemy, supporting Gaza and Palestine, and defending Lebanon and its steadfast and honourable people.”  Others killed included Ali Karki, commander of the organisation’s southern front, and various other commanders who had gathered. 

Israeli officials have been prematurely thrilled.  Like deluded scientists obsessed with eliminating a symptom, they ignore the disease with habitual obsession.  “Most of the senior leaders of Hezbollah have been eliminated,” claimed a triumphant Israeli military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani. 

Defence Minister Yoav Gallant called the measure “the most significant strike since the founding of the State of Israel.”  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated with simplicity that killing Nasrallah was necessary to “changing the balance of power in the region for years to come” and enable displaced Israelis to return to their homes in the north.

Various reports swallowed the Israeli narrative.  Reuters, for instance, called the killing “a heavy blow to the Iran-backed group as it reels from an escalating campaign of Israeli attacks.”  Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr opined that this “will be a major setback for the organisation.”  But the death of a being is never any guarantee for the death of an idea. The body merely offers a period of occupancy.  Ideas will be transferred, grow, and proliferate, taking residence in other organisations or entities. The assassinating missile is a poor substitute to addressing the reasons why such an idea came into being.

A dead or mutilated body merely offers assurance that power might have won the day for a moment, a situation offering only brief delight to military strategists and the journalists keeping tabs on the morgue’s latest additions.  It is easy, then, to ignore why Hezbollah became a haunting consequence of Israel’s bungling invasion and occupation of Lebanon in 1982.  Easy to also ignore the 1985 manifesto, with its reference to the organisation’s determination to combat Israel and those it backed, such as the Christian Phalangist allies in the Lebanese Civil War, and to remove the Israeli occupying force.

Such oblique notions as “degrading” the capacity of an ideological, religious group hardly addresses the broader problem.  The subsequent shoots from a savage pruning can prove ever more vigorous.  The 1992 killing of Hezbollah’s secretary-general Abbas al-Musawi, along with his wife and son, merely saw the elevation of Nasrallah.  Nasrallah turned out to be a more formidable, resourceful and eloquent proposition.  He also pushed other figures to the fore, such as the recently assassinated Fuad Shukr, who became an important figure in obtaining the group’s vast array of long-range rockets and precision-guided missiles.

Ibrahim Al-Marashi of California State University, San Marcos, summarises the efforts of Israel’s high-profile killing strategy as shortsighted feats of miscalculation.  “History shows every single Israeli assassination of a high-profile political or military operator, even after being initially hailed as a game-changing victory, eventually led to the killed leader being replaced by someone more determined, adept and hawkish.”  Another Nasrallah is bound to be in tow, with several others in incubation. 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.

War of Legitimacy – How the ICJ, UNGA Challenged Decades of Israeli, US Arrogance

 by Dr Ramzy Baroud

Presiding Judge Nawaf Salam reads the ruling in the International Court of Justice, or World Court, in The Hague, Netherlands, Friday July 19, 2024. [AP Photo/Phil Nijhuis]

Two historical events regarding the Israeli occupation of Palestine have taken place on July 19 and September 18.

The first was a most comprehensive ‘advisory opinion’ by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which reiterated that the Israeli occupation of Palestine is illegal and must come to an immediate end.

The second, by the United Nations General Assembly, two months later, set, for the first time in history, an exact time frame of when the Israeli occupation of Palestine must end. 

Many Palestinians welcomed the international consensus that essentially declared, as null and void, any Israeli attempt at making what is meant to be a temporary military occupation a permanent one. 

However, many understandably were not impressed, simply because the international community has proven ineffectual in bringing the catastrophic Israeli war on Gaza to an end, or in enforcing its previous resolutions on the matter.

Israeli media largely ignored both events, while mainstream western media repeatedly emphasized that both the advisory opinion and the resolution are ‘non-binding’.

Though it is true that international law without enforcement is largely useless, one must not be rash to conclude that the latest actions by the ICJ and the UNGA deserve no pause. 

To appreciate the importance of both dates, we must place them within proper context.

First, the ICJ’s legal opinion. Unlike the ICJ’s advisory opinion of 2004, the latest opinion does not focus on a specific issue, for example, the illegality of the Israeli so-called Separation Wall in the West Bank. 

Indeed, the latest decision by the world’s highest Court was the outcome of a specific request by the UNGA on January 20, 2023 to opine “on Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.”

Second, the ICJ reached its conclusions after listening to the testimonies of representatives of 52 countries and three international organizations, which fully sided with the Palestinians in their historic quest for freedom, justice and respect for international law. 

Third, the ICJ’s opinion touched on numerous issues, leaving no space for any misinterpretation on the part of Israel and the United States. 

For example, it called on Israel to end its “unlawful presence” in occupied Palestine,  and for it to “withdraw its military forces; halt the expansion of settlements and evacuate all settlers from occupied land; and demolish parts of a separation wall constructed inside the occupied West Bank.”

Fourth, the ICJ’s opinion follows years of supposed Israeli achievements in marginalizing the Palestinian cause, and exacting American support, which effectively recognized Israeli sovereignty over occupied Palestinian and Arab land.

If the ICJ pressed the reset button on the illegality of the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the UNGA pressed the political button.

Indeed, UN Resolution A/ES-10/L.31/Rev.1 on September 18 has ended any Israeli illusions that it will be able, through pressure, threats or the passage of time, to end the conversation on its military occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza. 

The resolution “calls for Israel to comply with international law and withdraw its military forces, immediately cease all new settlement activity, evacuate all settlers from occupied land, and dismantle parts of the separation wall it constructed inside the occupied West Bank.”

124 countries voted in favor of the resolution, while 14 voted against it, thus, once again, separating between those who believe in the primacy of international law in conflict resolution and those who don’t.

Also significant is that the UN has, for the first time, set a time frame of when the Israeli occupation must come to an end: “no later than 12 months from the adoption of the resolution”.

In international law, military occupations are meant to be a temporary process, regulated through numerous treaties and legal understandings including the Fourth Geneva Conventions, among others. 

Israel, however, has turned that temporary process into a permanent one. 

If the Israeli military occupation does not end within the resolution’s specified time frame, Israel would then be in violation of two sets of laws: previous UN resolutions on the matter, including the ICJ’s advisory opinions, and the latest resolution as well. 

The emphasis by western media on the ‘non-binding’ element of these resolutions does not, in any way, alter the illegality of the Israeli occupation, or undermine the unanimity of the international community regarding the righteousness of the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation and all other injustices. 

Ultimately, Palestine will not be liberated by a UN resolution. UN resolutions are merely an expression of the balances of power that exist on the international stage. Therefore, Palestinians and their supporters should not expect that a UN resolution, binding or otherwise, will drive the Israeli military out of the West Bank and Gaza.

Indeed, the Palestinians will liberate themselves. But the position of the international community remains significant as it re-emphasizes the legitimacy of the Palestinian struggle, creates space for solidarity and helps further marginalize Israel for its continued violations of international law and the rights of the Palestinian people.

Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out’. His other books include ‘My Father was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth’. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA).

A better future for humanity cannot be achieved without upholding globalization and multipolarity

 By ZHANG Yuan

SHANGHAI, China - The curtain descended on the United Nations Summit of the Future on September 23 in New York. It ushered in many new opportunities and new ideas for global governance. Although the world is still facing a series of global challenges such as war, poverty and displacement, there is a general consensus among participants that working together to reduce the security deficit, promote sustainable human development, oppose zero-sum games, and enhance the discourse power of the Global South can cope with chaos and risks.

 It should be acknowledged that since the end of the Cold War, globalization, which advocates freedom and people's livelihoods, and multilateralism, which promotes equality and respect, have been conducive to the realization of global justice from the goal to the path. To build a peaceful, prosperous, equal and innovative future for humankind, people-centred globalization and multi-polarization that respects sovereignty and security are indispensable.
 

Adherence to globalization is a powerful rebuff of supremacism and narrow developmentalism

Globalization has been in full swing since the 1990s, and with its great quality of openness, it has contributed to the great prosperity of the world economy in the past few decades. All countries have benefited from the process of globalization. The term “globalization” used to imply a warm and romantic spirit of openness and tolerance. Regrettably, anti-globalization, reverse globalization and de-globalization have slowly entered the mainstream discourse of world politics and have even begun to shape the political agenda of some countries. 

In particular, some developed countries are no longer willing to share the fruits of development and have deliberately reduced the magnitude of the flows of capital, trade, information and people, disregarding the widening development gap between countries. State-centrism and nationalism, which divides the world, cannot solve global problems or save mankind and future generations. Continuing to adhere to globalization and promoting economic globalization that is beneficial to all and inclusive is the only way to effectively respond to the “supremacism” and “narrow developmentalism” that are blinded by isolationism. 

Upholding multipolarity can protect the legitimate rights and interests of developing countries on a fair and just footing
    
Multipolarity means that the sovereignty and dignity of all countries do not have to be subordinated to the hegemonic countries, and that developing countries and small and medium-sized countries have more rights in world politics, and that their national interests and rights and interests will not be trampled upon and sacrificed by the hegemonic countries at will. In today's political environment, adherence to multilateralism and multipolarity in the world is first and foremost a matter of respect for the United Nations framework, and United Nations resolutions should be complied with. It is only by adhering to the multipolarity of the world and to the settlement of controversial matters through consultation and negotiation on the platform of multilateralism that the use of violence by hegemony and power to undermine peace and stability can be avoided and limited.

The hegemony-obsessed superpower should be blamed for the current conflict tragedies
    
The tragedy of recurring wars in many regions of the world is the result of the United States' ever-expanding ambition to project its influence and the implementation of a blindly parochial and failed foreign policy. Even if there are reflective voices within the United States that want the United States to focus more on safeguarding narrowly defined American interests, they are quickly overridden by the sentiment of American supremacy. The U.S. has long been caught in a self-constructed hegemonic disorientation, obsessed with the world order in which the U.S. is absolutely dominant, while those U.S. followers who do not want to bear the full cost of their country's security and defense have contributed to the U.S.'s overly high judgment of its national power.

The U.S. has abandoned the principles of economic liberalism that it promoted at the beginning of the era of globalization, and left behind the concepts of relative interests and interdependence that can lead to cooperation and compromise. Instead, the U.S. equates reasonable trade and commerce activities with challenges to its own world domination, and unilaterally pursues absolute comparative advantages in economy and technological innovation, which will ultimately limit its own development on the line, and also reduce the chances of the world's economic revival and growth.

Only by firmly pursuing national rejuvenation through a path to modernization that is in line with its own national conditions will it be able to enhance its strength in upholding international fairness and justice.

Through a Chinese path to modernization, China has firmly stepped out on a successful development path that is in line with its national conditions, meanwhile, China’s prosperity has created more new opportunities for development in the world. China does not export its ideology and values to shape its foreign policy. China actively delivers the fruits of its development and shares its experience in governance with the world, especially with developing countries. On the issue of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, China supports the unity of Arab and Islamic countries in order to bring about lasting peace in the region.

As Special Representative of President Xi Jinping, H.E. Wang Yi said in his statement at the UN Summit of the Future, “Humanity has only one planet Earth to call home, and we belong to the same world community.” It is only through a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization that people can enjoy the fruits of development and countries can achieve common prosperity; it is only through equal and orderly multipolarity that can reject the law of the jungle, and hegemonic practices such as unilateral sanctions can be countered.

People live in the same world community with a shared destiny. When the countries of the world work hand in hand and make concerted efforts to concentrate on development and cooperation, a better tomorrow with universal security, and mutual understanding of civilizations based on respect, prosperity and peace will come. 

ZHANG Yuan is a Professor of the Middle East Studies Institute at Shanghai International Studies University

Tags

• United Nations
 
• September
 
• Cold War

Tehran urges Islamic support for Gaza, Lebanon in face of intl. inaction

TEHRAN – The Iranian Vice President has stated that Islamic nations must act promptly and decisively to assist Lebanon and Palestine, given the international community's inaction and lack of resolve in addressing their crises.

Mohammad Reza Aref made these remarks during a conversation with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati on Sunday, where he expressed his condolences for the loss of Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who was assassinated in an Israeli airstrike in Beirut two days prior.

Aref described the extensive assault on residential areas in the Dahieh neighborhood and Nasrallah's martyrdom as a stark demonstration of the Israeli regime's brutality, which he attributed to U.S. backing and emphasized, “Israel bears responsibility for this atrocity.”

He criticized the international community, particularly the UN Security Council, for its failure to respond effectively and urgently to the crises in Lebanon and Gaza, urging all nations committed to law, security, and peace to oppose such unlawful actions boldly.

Aref called for the full utilization of political and diplomatic resources to intensify pressure on Israel to cease its violent attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, insisting that Islamic countries must implement swift, practical, and resolute measures to support Lebanon and Palestine.

Additionally, the Iranian official reiterated Iran’s commitment to providing political and economic support to Lebanon.

In response, Prime Minister Mikati acknowledged Nasrallah's death as a significant loss for Lebanon and urged all nations to extend their support to the country. 

Tags

• Iran
 
• Mohammad Reza Aref
 
• Lebanon

Araqchi critiques UN Security Council's inability to curb Israeli crimes

TEHRAN – Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi has expressed frustration at the UN Security Council’s failure to address the ongoing crises in the West Asia, particularly following the recent assassination of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary general of Hezbollah.

His comments came at the conclusion of his visit to New York, where he participated in the 79th session of the United Nations General Assembly.

In an interview with Iranian reporters, Araqchi expressed his condolences over the loss of “the great Resistance commander.” 

He emphasized that Nasrallah's sacrifice would only serve to strengthen Hezbollah’s resolve. “While this martyrdom is indeed a significant loss, it will not undermine our resilience,” he stated.

The foreign minister highlighted that Israel's recent military actions in Gaza and Lebanon indicate that the Zionist regime has no future in the region and will remain in a state of perpetual conflict. “The natural outcome of these actions is the acceleration of the Zionist regime’s demise,” he added firmly.

Araqchi further criticized the United States, labeling it a "partner" in Israel's aggressive actions. He reminded the UN Secretary-General of his duty to galvanize the international community to put an end to Israel’s violent conduct.

The assassination of Nasrallah, which took place in the southern Beirut suburb of Dahiyeh, is seen as part of Israel's escalating campaign of terror and aggression in Lebanon over recent weeks. Tensions have been running high between Hezbollah and Israel, especially since the onset of Israel's offensive against the Gaza Strip earlier this month. In the past year alone, Israeli strikes have resulted in the deaths of at least 1,640 Lebanese and injured over 8,400 others.

In response to Nasrallah’s assassination, Hezbollah vowed to continue its fight against the Israeli regime, pledging support for Gaza and Palestine, as well as defending Lebanon and its resilient population. This pledge reflects Hezbollah’s commitment to resist what they view as ongoing oppression and aggression from Israel.

FM warns of serious repercussions of Israeli aggression for regional peace

In a series of separate meetings with Antonio Guterres, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and Volkan Bozkir, the President of the UN General Assembly, Abbas Araqchi, Iran's Foreign Minister, raised alarms about the serious repercussions of the recent aggressive actions by the Israeli regime in Lebanon. 

These actions have resulted in the martyrdom of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and several of his associates. Araqchi stressed the urgent need for the UN to take decisive action to safeguard both regional and international peace and security.

During his discussions, Araqchi criticized the UN Security Council for its inaction, pointing out its failure to issue any effective resolutions or even a simple condemnation of Israel's acts of genocide and aggression. He reminded Guterres and Bozkir of their legal and moral obligations to galvanize the global community against the atrocities committed by the occupying regime.

Labeling the ongoing obstruction by the United States in the Security Council as "illegal" and "shameful," Araqchi accused the U.S. of being a direct accomplice in Israel's crimes. He highlighted the use of American-supplied bunker-buster bombs in the assassination of Resistance leaders as a clear indication of U.S. complicity in these violent acts.

Reaffirming Iran's commitment to defend its vital interests and national security, the foreign minister declared that the ideals of Resistance against Israel's aggression would remain steadfast. He asserted that the ongoing crimes of the Zionist regime would only strengthen the resolve of the people in the region to reclaim their rights and resist the regime's malevolent actions.

Continuing his meetings, Araqchi also met with Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mali Abdoulaye Diop, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus Maksim Ryzhenkov, Foreign Minister of Venezuela Yvan Gil Pinto, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Sweden Maria Malmer Stenergard, Foreign Minister of Nicaragua Valdrack Jaentschke, and Foreign Minister of Syria Bassam Sabbagh to discuss the bilateral relations between Iran and respective countries.

Tags

• Abbas Araqchi
 
• Israel
 
• United Nations

Hassan Nasrallah was martyred with US greenlight

 TEHRAN PAPERS

TEHRAN - Shargh devoted its editorial to the assassination of Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah by Israel and the crimes committed by this regime.

The paper said: The events of the last few days in Lebanon and the southern suburbs of Beirut, which led to the martyrdom of the beloved Secretary General of Hezbollah and a number of his comrades, undoubtedly is one of the most important and perhaps the most heinous crimes committed by Israel. Israel's recent actions and the escalation of conflicts in the region have not only been done with the green light of America, but in these actions, all the military, security, intelligence, cyber, and technological facilities were at the service of Israel. As we witnessed in the terror operation against senior Hamas officials, including Ismail Haniyeh, and during Iran's missile attacks on Israel called "Operation True Promise", the United States was completely on Israel's side and helped it. An important point that should not be overlooked is that the Resistance movement in Lebanon, Palestine, and the whole region will suffer a sudden shock for a short time over the loss of great commanders, including martyr Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah, but Resistance will continue its path.

Jam-e-Jam: Steps necessary to counter cultural invasion 

In a note, Jam-e-Jam addressed the cultural onslaught and Western lifestyle in Iran and said: One of the important aspects of the enemy's cultural influence and lifestyle is to devalue Iran's achievements. America sees itself in conflict with Islamic principles and cannot tolerate an independent system based on Islamic values. But the pro-Western intellectuals, by turning the facts upside down, consider Iran's desire for independence to be the cause of the tension and not the arrogance of the United States. In this context, by abusing the atmosphere of consensus created in the country some domestic media are pushing for consular communication between Iran and the United States. The enemies of Iran, who are afraid of a direct military confrontation with Iran, have infiltrated the cultural sphere to change the people’s lifestyles and mindset to gradually expand their dominion. Therefore, the media and the education system have a serious duty to prevent cultural invasion by enemies.

Donya-e-Eqtesad: Priorities of the Axis of Resistance 

In an analysis, Donya-e-Eqtesad discussed the need to restore the Lebanese Hezbollah’s deterrence power in particular and the Axis of Resistance in general. It said: The first step is to quickly revitalize the deterrence power of Hezbollah and the Axis of Resistance, reconstruct the command staff, choose a successor, and appoint new commanders. Assessing the situation and the domain of the response is the second and more important step for which not only Hezbollah but all members of the Axis of Resistance, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, will fully study. The response must create such a deterrence that would stop Israel from considering a ground attack and force it to observe red lines. All assessments indicate that Israel is looking for a regional war with Iran to actively involve the U.S. in the Middle East and provide a situation for Netanyahu to influence Israel's domestic environment and the election atmosphere in the United States in a way that Trump can return to the troubled scene of the Middle East by winning the November 4 elections to continue (normalizing relations between Arab countries and Israel based on) the Abraham Accords.

Iran: The strategist of the Axis of Resistance

In a commentary, the Iran newspaper dealt with the martyrdom of Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah. It quoted Abed Akbari, an expert on international issues, as saying: Martyr Hassan Nasrallah, as a clever strategist, turned Hezbollah into Israel's main enemy that at the same time considered a role model among the Palestinian resistance groups. He also had a great emotional relationship with Iranians and always praised the spirit of resistance among the Iranian people. He believed that the countries that normalize relations with Israel should feel ashamed and not the resistance groups for their relations with the Islamic Republic. During the past four decades, he sympathized with the Iranians when natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes happened and stood on the side of the Iranians at hard times. We faced great challenges and lost leaders in these events, but threats turned into opportunities, and this caused new movements and life. 

Tags

• Iran
 
• Tehran papers
 
• Newspaper