February in Lebanon: A Month of Resistance Anniversaries and Shifting Dynamics

According to the International Desk of Webangah News Agency, February in Lebanon is a month rich with occasions that honor the spirit of sacrifice and bolster the driving force of the Islamic Resistance. This month serves as a remembrance of the paramount sacrifices made by prominent resistance martyrs over decades of struggle against the Israeli regime, who gave their lives for authentic Islamic and national ideals.

Key anniversaries observed in February include the martyrdom of Haj Imad Mughniyah, the great jihad commander of Hezbollah, on the 12th; the martyrdom of former Hezbollah Secretaries-General Sayyid Abbas al-Mousawi and Sheikh Ragheb Harb on the 16th; and the grand global farewell to Sayyid Shuhada al-Ummah, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, and Sayyid Hashem Safieddine, the current Secretary-General of Hezbollah, on the 23rd.

Developments in February, particularly in recent years, have created an opportunity to compare two distinct phases in Lebanon: the period before October 7, 2023, when the resistance focused on internal deterrence, and the phase after this date, where the resistance has deferred initiative to the government.

The first phase of the resistance began in 1982, amidst a complete absence of state governance and in the shadow of Beirut’s occupation. It embodied the will of a nation that refused to succumb to occupation. The Lebanese Resistance, through successive achievements, compelled the enemy into a gradual withdrawal from Beirut, Mount Lebanon, Sidon, Tyre, and the Beqaa Valley. By the year 2000, the resistance culminated its successes by liberating territories, repatriating prisoners, and solidifying the deterrence equation, thereby preventing large-scale enemy aggression.

Following the developments of 2024, the resistance has entrusted the government with the responsibility of protecting the country, reclaiming territory, and achieving sovereignty, aiming to strengthen national partnership and consider the diverse opinions of the Lebanese people. However, this second phase has witnessed a significant and unprecedented regression in the achieved gains. The Israeli regime is utilizing drones to assassinate Lebanese citizens and targeting property, homes, economic interests, and public institutions.

The enemy has also engaged in the abduction of Lebanese citizens from within Lebanese territory and continues its aggressions against villages to displace residents and hinder reconstruction efforts. Most alarming are the whispers of potential settlement construction on Lebanese lands and attempts by settlers to infiltrate the borders.

This comparison starkly reveals the vast difference between the two phases, illustrating that the era of resistance was a period when the Lebanese people experienced dignity and honor. In the first phase, the resistance presented an advanced model where the tripartite forces of the army, the people, and the resistance complemented each other. Hezbollah, while maintaining the initiative, insisted on not replacing the state or usurping its duties.

Hezbollah also worked to revive national institutions and activate them, striving to preserve the state and contribute to its strengthening by understanding the unique characteristics of Lebanon’s reality. The Lebanese government, under current circumstances, is obligated to devise a formula for fulfilling its duties in protecting the country, liberating territories, and achieving sovereignty. However, instead of acknowledging the resistance’s achievements, it has pursued external demands and dictates, attempting to gain concessions from the United States by denying the history of resistance.

The developments in southern Lebanon should jolt the government out of its negligence and compel it toward serious and effective action, characterized by national responsibility and a halt to unwarranted concessions. The government must prioritize compelling the enemy to implement the ceasefire agreement, fully withdraw from Lebanese territories, cease aggressions, release prisoners, and commence the reconstruction of war-torn areas.

The responsibility of demonstrating readiness to exercise national sovereignty rests with the government. Should the government’s inability to fulfill its duties become evident, the resistance may once again supersede the state. Officials must comprehend the gravity of the current phase and endeavor to rectify their performance; otherwise, the resistance will be compelled to put an end to the daily foreign aggressions against the country and its people.