“Newspaper Discusses the ‘Illusion’ of Lebanon’s Hezbollah Collapse… ‘Different Tactics’”

“Al-Akhbar” Newspaper on the “Illusion” of Hezbollah’s Collapse: “Different Tactics”

The Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar discussed what it described as the “illusion” of Hezbollah’s collapse in the aftermath of the devastating Israeli war and the assassination of key party figures, including its former secretary-general, Hassan Nasrallah.

In an article by its Israeli affairs editor, Ali Haidar, the newspaper stated, “The war on Lebanon did not end with the declaration of a ceasefire; rather, it has entered a new phase with different pace and tactics. This clearly indicates an admission that Israel’s strategic objectives were not achieved, despite the unprecedented, harsh blows it dealt to Hezbollah.”

It continued: “There are also serious concerns in Washington and Tel Aviv about Hezbollah’s ability to rise again. This context is inseparable from the remarks made by Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir during an assessment session in the northern region, in the presence of its commander, Major General Uri Gordin, and other officers, stating that the battle against Hezbollah has not yet ended and that ‘we will continue to pursue and weaken it until it collapses.’”

The article noted that “although such statements aim to bolster the sense of security among northern settlers, they certainly fall within a strategic framework, reflecting an operational choice that embodies an overall assessment of the war’s outcomes and an ambition to achieve what was not attained.”

It added, “This discourse comes amid a broader regional context, most notably the historic strategic shift witnessed in Syria. The new regime in Damascus has not concealed—even after the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government—its intention to move closer to the West and adopt strategic priorities in the region that include safeguarding Israel’s security. It has adopted a political rhetoric that contributes to tightening both political and non-political nooses around the Palestinian resistance, and—as expected—cutting off the supply lines to the resistance in Lebanon, which has its strategic depth in Iran. This was a pressing priority for both the United States and Israel, and a fundamental demand placed on Syria for decades.”

The article pointed out that “another equally important feature in the post-war regional transformations is the emergence of a new political authority that publicly embraced an anti-resistance stance, demanding the disarmament of Hezbollah under the pretext of ‘monopoly on arms,’ while ignoring the Israeli threat that endangers Lebanon’s present and future. Instead of supporting the reconstruction of what the war had destroyed, this authority resorted to blackmailing Hezbollah’s constituency by preventing the arrival of Iranian and Iraqi aid and tying reconstruction efforts to compliance with Israeli demands.”

It further noted, “Despite the military push and the U.S. administration’s direct oversight of the war’s continuation, the Israeli enemy faces complex, multifaceted obstacles that make the weakening of Hezbollah to the point of collapse more of an aspiration than an attainable objective, for several reasons.”

The first reason, the newspaper explained, is that “Hezbollah does not conform to a conventional military model; rather, it is a flexible, decentralized entity, deeply intertwined with its society and environment. This makes it difficult for Israel to deliver a decisive blow that would collapse the organization. The importance of this characteristic emerged during the war: despite the massive and unexpected strikes, the new leadership continued to manage the war, successfully containing the repercussions of earlier blows, and rebounding to confront the enemy in an ascending trajectory until the last day.”

It continued, “Second, what distinguishes Hezbollah from other forces is that it embodies the cultural identity of its community in the face of external and internal dangers. It is therefore not an entity separate from that community but rather part of its daily life—in southern Lebanon, the southern suburbs, the Bekaa, and other areas. This means that striking the resistance equates to striking a social fabric, not merely specific individuals, which complicates the Israeli task.”

The third reason, the newspaper stated, “has become evident over time: despite the severe strikes against the resistance community, it continues to rally around Hezbollah at levels that have astonished all its adversaries. This phenomenon demands detailed study, as it reflects the community’s awareness of the internal and external dangers facing it, which has helped it withstand disinformation campaigns and psychological warfare. The funerals for Hezbollah’s two former secretaries-general—Martyrs Sayyid Hasan Nasrallah and Sheikh Hashim Safieddine—reflected this reality, as did the popular movements toward the occupied territories before the 60-day window had closed, and the results of the recent municipal elections.”

The paper stressed that “no observer can ignore the principal role of the resistance’s creed within its environment, and how it cements and propels them. This ideological element, combined with political awareness, guarantees their orientation toward protecting their people and homeland. This ideological component has effectively neutralized many of the destructive and criminal means that underpin the Israeli military doctrines of deterrence and decisive victory.”

It noted that “Hezbollah took operational steps during and after the fierce war that demonstrate its learning from the harsh blows. It began by restructuring its internal organization during the war (…),” and added that “the performance of both the United States and Israel reveals their overt fear that Hezbollah will rebuild its military capabilities—especially since it already possesses very extensive infrastructure that enables it to do so. Therefore, Tel Aviv, Washington, and some internal adversaries of the resistance treat the matter as if there is only a limited window to accomplish the mission and achieve their objectives. Some estimates have already emerged in Israel warning that Hezbollah’s lack of immediate response to Israeli strikes is part of a plan to buy more time to redevelop its military capabilities and adapt them to new conditions.”

The newspaper explained that “Hezbollah took advantage of the war to raise awareness about the existential threats facing Lebanon and its resistance. This has translated into demands from the grassroots to the new leadership to learn from the past and draw lessons.”

It confirmed that “in light of the Lebanese state’s failure to perform most of its duties toward a broad segment of its population, Hezbollah reaffirmed its commitment to its social responsibilities. It continued to provide its base and environment with whatever it could to alleviate suffering. It is clear that this poor performance by the state, contrasted with Hezbollah’s very positive performance, has had profound effects and a significant impact on the overall scene in Lebanon.”

It concluded: “In summary, Hezbollah was deeply affected militarily, but it still possesses an underlying, effective fighting force and the capacity to respond and defend, which is on an upward trajectory. Politically, all attempts to isolate and marginalize it in pivotal challenges and events have so far failed. Meanwhile, its resistance community continues to view it as a source of social support. Therefore, Israel’s aspiration for Hezbollah to collapse will not suffice to make it so; it will encounter a complex reality that shows the Party is more than a mere military structure. It is an ideological, social, and political entity that possesses the ability to adapt and endure.”