Al-Jazeera Beirut Bureau Chief Ghassan Bin-Jiddu had an exclusive interview
with Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah on Thursday 20 July 2006.
 

[Bin-Jiddu] It is sufficient to say that we are in the company of Hezbollah
Secretary General His Eminence Al-Sayyid Hasan Nasrallah at this time in
particular. The battles are still continuing. We are at a certain time in
a certain place of this world, and not only in Lebanon, as I used to say
earlier. This is why, without any introductions at all, I will start my
questions
to His Eminence Al-Sayyid Hasan Nasrallah. Your Eminence Al-Sayyid, first
of all, thank you for responding to [the request to hold] this interview
at this time in particular. Around 10 days have passed since the outbreak
of hostilities. What do you say militarily and politically? 

[Nasrallah] In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. Politically
and militarily all at once, it is difficult. Let us start... 

[Bin-Jiddu, interrupting] Not in detail. We will go into details with you.

[Nasrallah] Let us start militarily and in the field. The general headline
we can speak about clearly on the military level is steadfastness--the great
and significant steadfastness first and, secondly, full absorption of the
Israeli strike. Over the past few days, the Israelis, in our opinion, did
the maximum that they can do, from the air and the sea. Of course, we will
discuss the ground option shortly. There is no target--old, new, assumed,
expected, based on information or analysis--that they did not hit. Also,
when we speak about what was hit, this includes military and civilian targets,
but I want to speak now about the military aspect. 

I can confirm at this moment--this is not an exaggeration and not part of
psychological warfare, but facts--that the command structure of Hezbollah
has not been harmed. Yesterday night, they conducted a very violent raid
on a building in the southern suburb. They spoke about 22 tonnes of explosives
and a large number of aircraft that conducted the raid. They said that they
made an achievement and killed some Hezbollah leaders and a large number
of members of the resistance. This is not true. At any rate, your correspondent
reported that he saw the area and that no ambulances came to the scene and
no rescue efforts were made because the building is vacant and is under
construction.
The entire command structure of Hezbollah, including the political, jihadist,
executive, and social--so far, the Zionists have not managed to kill any
Hezbollah cadre or leader at any level. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Do you mean the political leaders or the military commanders?


[Nasrallah] All of them. Certainly, I would like to tell you and tell the
viewers that when a martyr falls, we inform his family and we then announce
this. We do not hide our martyrs until the end of the battle. We have never
done this. On the contrary, we always take pride in our martyrs. Until this
very moment, praise be to God, anything that could affect the command or
administrative structure that is managing the battle or that is not managing
the battle--those who are directly linked to the battle or have a relationship
to some aspects of the existing situation--this structure has remained intact.
This is especially true in the case of the military structure that is present
in the field. This is first. The second thing that I can confirm is that
all the Israeli talk that they hit 50 per cent of our rocket capability and
warehouses--all of this is untrue and nonsense. Until this moment, they have
not been able to hit anything in this context. I confirm this to you. The
evidence is that the resistance has continued to fire rockets--not the regular
Katyusha rockets that are fired on the frontline settlements--the resistance
is still striking Haifa, Tiberias, Safad [Zefat] and deep [into Israel] as
well. We control even the number of rockets that are fired. Today, the
resistance
can fire hundreds of rockets in a single day. There is no obstacle in the
field despite the intensive air activity of the Zionists. 

We control the number [of rockets] because we are managing our battle. I
will go back shortly to the management of the battle. There fore, as far
as the rocket structure is concerned, things are excellent and this structure
or capability has not been impaired at all. We have the ability to go on
for a long time. Also, the fighters in the field have not started action
so far. The ground confrontations that occurred over the past two days are
the beginnings of the confrontation. The fighters on the border have so far
not made a strenuous effort over the past few days. We are still at the
beginning
of action. Therefore, as far as the ground and rocket situation is concerned
and on the level of capabilities and cadres, leadership, and organization
in general, which is broader than the jihadist aspect or other political,
social, and media aspects, the structure is still strong and solid and
continuing,
praise be to God. 

The strike against the battleship off the coast of Beirut has made the Israelis
decide to keep all their warships away from the Lebanese coast by tens of
kilometres. What is reported sometimes in the media, to the effect that
warships
are bombarding the suburb or a certain area, is wrong. This is not true.
The warships are not bombarding most areas because they are far away from
the coast. The Israeli air force is the one that is conducting the bombing.
In all events, this air force is a superior force. This is the picture of
the field situation. Of course, in the confrontations that occurred, a number
of Mirkava tanks have been destroyed so far. Some of these tanks are Mirkava
of the fourth generation, which are the most advanced type of the Israeli
Mirkava. 

The Israelis admit the ferocity, power, and courage of the fighters on the
frontlines. Certainly, we are wagering on those fighters. I think that if
we take the picture of the military situation in general, I can confirm that
Hezbollah has so far remained steadfast; secondly, it has managed to absorb
the strike; thirdly, to move to the stage of taking the initiative; and
fourthly,
to offer some surprises, which it has promised. There is still a number of
surprises, which we reserve to ourselves in the next stage. In the field,
Hezbollah is still managing the battle calmly, slowly, quietly, and without
any emotional reaction. You can see this. There are no unnecessary threats
and no random rhetoric. We are following things closely and calmly and we
calculate the time, place, number, capability, combat, point, front, and
all details on the military level. This concerns the military aspect. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Excuse me your eminence, what guarantees that what you are kindly
describing as calm is not confusion, and what guarantees or confirms that
you are running the battle calmly, not with emotional reaction to conceal
the inflicted enormous military losses as Israel claims? 

[Nasrallah] First, you know Lebanon. Today, the Israelis tightened the noose
on the mass media in northern occupied Palestine and occupied Palestine.
No one can report any news or broadcast any footage. [News reports] are subject
to the Israeli censorship which permits and disseminates them. Even you at
Al-Jazeera Channel were subjected to arrests, interrogation, restricted
activities,
and the like. Why do the Israelis resort to concealing the truth on the other
side? Why? Do they do that only because they accuse the media outlets of
setting the coordinates? This is nonsense. We have the coordinates of these
Israeli settlements and military positions in the north, centre, or in any
part of occupied Palestine. We do not need anybody to give us information,
images, or the like. In that case, they want to conceal the true scene of
the war on the other side because it will have definite impact on the Israeli
street and media and the morale of the Israelis. This is what Olmert's
government
and the Israeli Army fear. On the other side, the media outlets in Lebanon
today are reporting on everything, including the raids, the civilian martyrs,
the combatant martyrs, and the roads. The towns are open even the Southern
Suburb. The media outlets entered it. The media outlets entered and videotaped
the place, which was bombarded yesterday at dawn, actually today at dawn.
So, everything is evident. You know Lebanon more than anybody else that there
are no secrets in Lebanon. If we have martyrs, we can only conceal them for
an hour or two because their families and the residents of their village
will know about it. Those are not fighters from another country; they are
from the citizens of this country. If one of the leaders of Hezbollah is
martyred, this will be made known within few hours. Therefore, we do not
conceal our martyrs and we are proud of them. Secondly, as for the structure
[of the resistance], its performance practically assert that things are still
ongoing well. Moreover, the Israelis gave a while ago a picture of trucks
to the mass media claiming that these trucks are transporting ammunition
to Hezbollah. Well, if they videotape every target they strike, let them
provide pictures of the rocket launchers, the launching pads, and the military
bases that were bombarded. Thus far, they have been bombarding wrong targets.
This indicates a technical failure on the one hand and an intelligence failure
on the other. The drilling machines in Al-Ashrafiyah are old machines. So,
they do not receive intelligence from the ground and I do not agree with
the analysis that suggests they pounded Al-Ashrafiyah because they want to
instigate the Christians and the residents of Al-Ashrafiyah against the
resistance.
We should not be hasty [in drawing conclusions]. They came and videotaped
the two drilling machines. They might have looked as rocket launchers in
the pictures and therefore they bombarded them. This is a failure. If they
are depending on the reconnaissance aircraft, this is a technical failure.
If they are depending on the agents on the ground, this is an intelligence
failure. So, if they have pictures, let them show them to the world. You
might wonder and says is it possible that no rocket launcher was hit. Neither
me, nor anybody can claim that. There might be, for example, one or two were
hit. After nine days, the strongest air force in the Middle East region and
one of the strongest air forces in the world that have access to the airspace
while we do not have the capabilities to face them at that level - an air
force effectively and strongly present in various ways with the reconnaissance
aircraft controlling the airspace of Lebanon - could not until this very
minute even stop firing rockets or target the missile force. It is very
evident.


[Bin-Jiddu] Can we say that the onset of the ground battle has begun or not?


[Nasrallah] We cannot say that accurately. Until now, what have been taking
place are infiltration attempts in certain points on the borders. In this
context, the Israelis are seeking to make any achievements. I tell that the
only achievement made by the Israelis can be made by any air force in the
world. It does not need the grandeur of the Israeli Air Force, namely
destroying
the bridges, the airport, striking at the ports, factories, the houses. This
does not need any [special air force]. Any army that has some aircraft can
do that. However, they failed in the face of the military infrastructure
of the resistance. They succeeded in killing the children, women, and the
elderly. They succeeded in displacing some people. As for the structure of
the resistance, I affirm to you that it is present. They know that they are
not hiding-- as they claim-- among the civilians. [The battle] is taking
place in the frontlines, the mountains, the valleys, and between the trees
in a wide area. They are looking for achievements. They talked at dawn today
about the bombing of this building in the Southern Suburb. I heard over the
past two or three days that they are talking about great, huge, fortified
Hezbollah barracks along the borders that were destroyed. I was discussing
the issue with the brothers. We discussed whether we should deny the claims
or not. Some said: Let them be happy about it as they are showing their people
that they made achievements. Let them be happy about their achievements and
this might ease the onslaught. They will be happy in the Israeli Army that
they made achievements. Others said: Let our public opinion know because
this would have positive and negative psychological impact. So, let our public
opinion know. Let me ask: Where are the fortified barracks on the borders
of the Islamic Resistance? The border posts are actually surveillance posts
consisting of a column on which an antenna is attached and another on which
a camera is placed. Beside these columns there is a room where one of our
youth stays. This is simply what these posts are consisting of. These posts
were evacuated right from the first day. If they come today to say that they
destroyed frontline positions. They mean these places. If they say that
occupied
frontline posts, these posts exist along the barbed wires and we evacuated
them since the first day when we captured the soldiers. Now that the Israelis'
helplessness has been proved, we affirm to you that they have a problem in
receiving intelligence from the air and from the ground. Most of their agents
are at large, some were arrested, and some disappeared. The agents are facing
difficulties in their movements now on the ground to locate or give some
information [to Israel]. At any rate, they need some commandoes groups to
enter the Lebanese territories, either to collect intelligence or to correct
some of the mistakes they made in their strikes on the frontlines. They also
need them to conduct operations to capture or kill some of the mujahidin
of the resistance, or even to say that they killed or made field achievement
since the Israeli Navy retreated and was hit. I do not believe that the air
raids are an achievement. So, they are looking for an achievement on the
ground. What is happening until know is within this context. I do not call
it the beginning of a ground incursion. However, I would like to affirm that
that these points were strongly dealt with. It would have been better to
provide pictures of the tanks that were destroyed, but the difficult travel
conditions prevented that. Anyway, they are admitting that some of the tanks
were destroyed, and that some people were killed and wounded. I promise them
more fighting and toughness from the mujahidin of the resistance along the
borders. As for the ground attack option, it is possible that they might
resort to it. We have been ready for it since the first day. I do not want
to raise the ceiling of expectations and I do not u se speeches. We are
fighting
a serious battle. I did not say one day that the Israelis will be unable
to enter any post in southern Lebanon. We are not a classic army extending
from the sea to Mount Hermon. We are a popular and serious resistance movement
that is present in many areas and axes. They might be able to enter a certain
point or a village or conduct a large-scale ground operation. They might
enter a mountain or a frontline village and claim a historical victory. In
order not to say that Hezbollah made a pledged, I did not promise one day
something like that or say that. This is not the case. This can happen at
any moment. As for us, our equation and principles are the following: When
the Israelis enter, they must pay dearly in terms of their tanks, officers,
soldiers. This is what we pledge to do and we will honour our pledge, God
willing. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Do you expect that the battles will be long? Are you preparing,
as one of the generals inside [ Lebanon ] warned, for a war of attrition?


[Nasrallah] The battle here, if we want to answer these questions, we should
discuss the background of the battle. We are not convinced at all--perhaps
during the first hours we can say that the reaction that took place was a
natural reaction to the capturing of Israeli soldiers--but hours after this,
the issue has gone far beyond a reaction to the capturing of the soldiers.
The Israelis entered [ Lebanon ] with a plan. The officials in charge of
this plan, commanders, and news media used to talk about it with varying
degrees, which we will analyse later. However, they, for example, spoke about
destroying Hezbollah, not the missile force, but destroying Hezbollah. Some
sides say the dismantling of the military structure of Hezbollah. Others
said the annihilation and destruction of the missile force of the military
structure, and others said we cannot destroy the military force of Hezbollah,
but we want to pain Hezbollah and weaken this force. Then they said pushing
Hezbollah far from the borders. Those who talk about pushing Hezbollah 10
or 20 km know that this does not mean pushing the missile force far from
the borders. The one who attacks Haifa, Afula, and farther villages, and
has the power to attack farther than this, then the story of 10 or 20 km
is considered simple details. Some sides said that the objective of the
operation
is to free the two prisoners. I assure you that the objective of the operation
is not to free the two prisoners. At any rate, the slogans on the one hand,
and the objectives that were announced for the operation on the other, means
that the operation would take a long time. I cannot say one week, two weeks,
three weeks, one month, more, or less. This issue depends on the field
developments
on the one hand, and the political developments on the other. Now... 

[Bin-Jiddu, interrupting] Excuse me. Does it depend on you or on Israel?


[Nasrallah] On us and on them. The course of the battle--I will say how--for
example, today, the talk began in Israel, and this is a logical analysis,
to the effect that the Israeli military operation has reached its peak. What
is more than this? I will answer you. What can the Israelis do more than
what they did? What is left is the ground incursion, which is costly at any
rate. There is an argument, not among the politicians on the political level,
even on the military and security levels there is a real argument on the
level of the military and security commands. What is left is the ground
incursion.
Except the incursion, everything the Israelis could do have done. So, they
have reached the peak. Now, they have one of two choices: When they reach
the peak they either proceed horizontally, or in other words, continue with
the same standard or the dose [preceding word in English] of the peak, or
they will begin to decline. So, the military operation will begin to decline
and to calm down gradually to pave the way for a political settlement. How
much time would this take? This depends on developments. When time drags--the
north is brought to a halt, northern Israel, excuse me, I apologize, I mean
northern occupied Palestine--there are two million Israelis who are either
in shelters or outside the area, displaced outside the area. The entire economy
in the north is brought to a halt. The factories, trade, tourism, and economic
movement are all brought to a halt. The number of the killed and injured
on their side could be much less than on our side, but this is natural. This
is because they have a huge arsenal. Our arsenal is not for destruction,
retaliation, and revenge, but a deterrent arsenal. They have a huge destructive
power. There is no exaggeration here. They also have shelters. Give me one
village in the south that has shelters in it. Up till now a large part of
the people of the south are still in the south. Had there been shelters,
the people would have remained there and would not have le ft . No one likes
to live in school to be given ration. However, on their side, from the borders
to deep in the north, there are shelters in the settlements. So, it is only
logical that the number of those killed and wounded on their side is less
than on our side. However, what affects the economy and the pressure the
people are exposed to as a result of displacement and living in shelters.
[Sentence incomplete as heard] They promised them with a quick operation
within a few days. The first day and then the second day passed, and every
day they say three or four times in the Israeli news media that they have
killed me, killed the Hezbollah leaders, and made false achievements. So,
what is next? Until when will this continue? The Israeli society is so far
rallying round the government. We have seen this experience in 1993, in 1996,
and in past wars, but this solidarity will begin to vanish with the passage
of time. So, if the military operation took a horizontal direction or began
to decline, then the peak that is higher than this is the ground incursion.
I am sure that the ground incursion will be a catastrophe to the Israeli
army. This is not a threat. You know from day one that I speak calmly and
objectively on these issues. The issue now, if it continues... 

[Bin-Jiddu, interrupting] Excuse me; you repeated the word disaster on more
than one occasion. 

[Nasrallah] I mean a disaster for their tanks, officers, and soldiers. There
will be a high price for them to pay. Right from the first day, I never
claimed,
even during negotiations and in my past speeches, that I can shoot down F-16's.
We have never claimed that. We did not claim such a thing even during the
[confrontation] in the sea, but we managed to surprise them in the sea. As
for the land, we have 24-year experience; we have long and real experience
in the land. We have high and efficient fighting capabilities, good armed
capabilities, and good reserves. 

It is a matter of time now. I rule out that the Israelis can make a military
achievement. It is a matter of time. On the one hand, there is our military
steadfastness, and on the other there is the political and popular
steadfastness.
They [the Israelis] are wagering on seeing the country's political situation
break up and weaken, and on seeing a decline in the popular support for the
resistance in order to achieve political results. We, on the other hand,
are wagering on our steadfastness and that of our people, and on seeing a
decline in the Israeli internal support for the military operation and on
the pressures on the enemy's government, the beginning of which we began
to see today. 

[Bin-Jiddu] We will discuss the political issues. I want to go back to what
you said about the popular steadfastness. Your Eminence, it is obvious that
there is a real popular support in the areas where members of the resistance
and Hezbollah are present. Now, the people who expressed their genuine support
for the resistance are displaced and exhausted, and there is destruction
as well. Honestly, do you still have faith in this popular support? Do not
you think that you might win militarily and lose popularly, even among your
own sect, not among other parties? 

[Nasrallah] Before I met you, the brothers, who visited all the places where
the displaced people are housed and talked to people, told me that the
embassies
of western countries are sending opinion-poll teams to the places housing
the displaced people. They ask people about their sect and religion.
Undoubtedly,
they are interested first and foremost in the Shi'is' opinion. Based on the
[religious] structure of the country, they believe that if the Shi'is begin
to leave and desert the resistance, it would be an indication that the other
sects will do the same - this is the [religious] structure of the country.
The opinion-poll teams were amazed during their visits and meetings. There
is strong support for the resistance; there is readiness to remain steadfast
and make sacrifices. They listened to many women who said that they are ready
to sacrifice their children, to fight, to remain steadfast and patient, and
to endure, and that they will not allow the resistance to lose, be humiliated,
or be stricken. Anyway, instead of me going to the people, anyone can go
and meet these people and ask them in an objective and honourable manner.
However, they should not ask a person who is not actually a displaced person
and says that he speaks on behalf of them. We have information about the
situation on the ground, and we are in constant contact with our people in
the villages and cities. Our impression, which I am sure that it is now shared
by the embassies that follow the situation and give information to the Israelis
and decision-making centres in the world, is that the answers they got today
will affect the course of the battle. Therefore, I thank the people for their
position and steadfastness, which will make the war shorter. Why? If the
opinion-poll teams see a sign of weakness and fragility, they will tell the
Israelis to continue [their operations], that they can achieve their
objectives,
and that the war will not take a long time. It is not of their interest to
fight for a long time. The US Administration, and other administrations,
will build on that, and there will be no intervention. Today, yesterday,
and the day before - especially today - they heard strong and honourable
words. I tell you that they have began to feel desperate. I want to repeat
what I said days ago that we have honourable people - I am talking about
the Lebanese people in general, not only the Shi'is. The Lebanese people
are honourable, dear, and great; I do not flatter when I say that. You can
go to all Lebanese areas where there are Christians, Sunnis, and Druze to
see how the rest of the Lebanese people deal with the displaced people. 

between sympathy with those displaced persons, since they are Lebanese, and
the attitudes towards the actions of Hezbollah and the resistance. It is
said that the other parties, factions, and segments are not satisfied with
Hezbollah's position, performance, and the way it got Lebanon involved, as
they say, in this battle? 

[Nasrallah] I am not talking about some political forces. I am talking about
the people, the good people, those who in hard times reveal their chivalry,
honour, and patriotism. This is especially since the political climate now
says what happened has happened, and that there will be time for
accountability.
We also say that there will be time for accountability. No problem. The
political
climate says let's be united to handle this battle. This level of political
rhetoric, which contains less incitement - I do not say it contains no
incitement
- but it contains less incitement, gives people a chance to approach matters
honestly. Today, neither the masses of the resistance feel alienated at the
national and popular levels, nor the resistance feels that its supporters
around it have begun to disperse. Never! I stress to you that the masses
of the resistance are firmer and more resolved. Even when we go to political
negotiations - for certainly there will be political negotiations and political
discussions - one of the most important issues that the Hezbollah leadership
must keep in mind is that behind it are masses who do not accept to offer
concessions that they might be humiliating or something like that. They might
demand high positions that are commensurate with people's steadfastness and
sacrifices. This is what we are building on. 

[Bin-Jiddu] At any rate, your eminence, some say that Hezbollah might be
strong militarily on the ground now, at least as you have said, but it seems
that it is internationally isolated, excluded, and chased. It is also
politically
embarrassed at home. Even your former allies, the political forces with whom
you used to hold discussions at home, do not conceal their dismay. True,
they say there will be time for accountability, but they do not conceal their
resentment. Moreover, they say: How could Hezbollah involve the country and
take it hostage after a unilateral decision? The government was neither aware
of that decision, nor does it bear its consequences or adopt it. Is this
reasonable to happen? 

[Nasrallah] Well, let us say that we have begun to go into the political
part. First, I just want to close the first part, since we have talked about
the battlefield, the shelling, and settlements. I would like to address the
family that was hit in Nazareth. In my name and on behalf of my brothers,
I apologize to this family. Of course, the word apology is not sufficient.
I bear full responsibility. That was not intended at all. However, at any
rate, we consider those who were killed in Nazareth martyrs for Palestine,
Lebanon, the nation, and the resistance. It is a tough and hard confrontation,
in which flaws of this kind might happen. I would like to send them my
condolences
and apologies. I hope that they would accept my condolences and apology.


Now I move on the political part. Politically, the international community,
first, has never been with us. So I cannot say that is not with us, isolating,
and forsaking us just today. It has never been with us. Moreover, it has
mostly been against. For example, we have been listed on the US terrorism
list since they created the terrorism list. We are among the first to be
listed on that list. Some European countries also list us as terrorists.
The position of the international community is clear. Consequently, we are
not surprised by the international community. We have never wagered on the
internatio nal community. The international community adopts international
resolutions of which Israel implements nothing. Even Resolution 425 was not
implemented by Israel; we imposed it on Israel. It has implemented none of
the resolutions concerning the Palestine question. It has implemented none
of the resolutions concerning the occupied Arab territories. For us, this
is neither a new factor, nor a factor of pressure. 

Regarding some Arab positions, this is new. True, this is new. In the past,
some Arab regimes abandoned the resistance and resistance men. I am so
objective
and realistic, so today we deem it acceptable if the Arab regimes are neutral.
Just like that. If you view the Hezbollah rhetoric, we accepted such stands
from them. Perhaps the brothers in Palestine - and rightfully so - have a
different rhetoric. Their circumstances are much harder than ours. So they
always attack, accuse, and denounce the regimes and rulers. This is not part
of our rhetoric and literature. Why? We have forgotten them. To attack someone,
you need to suppose that he exists. But if you feel that he does not exist
in the first place, then you would be troubling yourself to no avail if you
attack him. Once, we used to ask the international community to condemn the
executioner and to ask for mercy for the victim. We reached a stage where
we began to say we accept that they condemn both the executioner and the
victim. This became one of the natural expectations. So we began to consider
it a good thing to see a resolution condemning both the victim and the
executioner.


With regards to the Arab regimes, we expect them only to sit on the fence.
And, if they do not want to sit on the fence, then they should at least equate
between us and Israel. We even agree to have them equate between the victim
and the executioner. But we did not expect them to take part in shedding
the blood of the victim and cover the crimes of the executioner. Yes, this
was a surprise. 

[Bin-Jiddu] So? 

[Nasrallah] Nothing. This is nothing. 

[Bin-Jiddu] But these are principal countries, Your Eminence. They have
positions
and they can influence the Arab League and other Arab countries? 

[Nasrallah] Now, we are in a stage of war. There is a great deal of domestic
and Arab discussion, so let us postpone this. If we talk about settling
accounts,
we also have a long list of things to consider in this settling of accounts.
I agree with those who said before me - and these are not my words; they
were said before me, and I am only repeating them now - that the Israeli
reaction to the capture of soldiers could have been harsh, but limited, if
it were not for the international and Arab cover. 

Israel did not get a green light from the United States. Instead, Israel
was given a decision by the United States to go and finish this issue in
Lebanon. What are the elements of the US decision? We will leave this question
to the time of settling accounts? The world community did not give a green
light to Israel. The world community gave a decision to Israel to destroy
the resistance in Lebanon. Some Arabs then came to provide a cover and
encourage
Israel to continue the battle, and to tell Israel that this is the golden
and historic opportunity to destroy the resistance in Lebanon. I can tell
you that they do not want to destroy the resistance of Hezbollah in Lebanon.
They want to destroy any spirit of resistance in Lebanon, whether inside
Hezbollah or any other party. They want to push the country to the point
where words such as resistance would become unacceptable, and where words
such as martyr, jihad, wounded, steadfastness, confrontation, liberation,
freedom, glory, dignity, pride, and honour are unacceptable. All these words
should be erased form the Lebanese people's dictionary, from the press, from
the political literature, from the political mind, from the people's mind.
This is what Israel is doing, and this is what the United States, which wants
to re-arrange the entire region anew, needs. 

I can decisively say - and we will say this again at the time of settling
accounts, especially now that some people say that this or that party said
the truth, and so I want to say the truth. I can decisively say that if it
were not for certain Arab positions, this war would not have continued; it
would have stopped within hours. Then in the discussions [that follow]
everybody
can say what he has, and we will say what we have. 

Today, I do not expect anything from certain Arab rulers. Now if you ask
me about what I expect from the nation, I know that if you examine the hearts
of all people in the Arab and Muslim nations, they are with us. They may
sit in front of television screens, cry, and show emotions. If they hear
good news, they may stand up, clap, and show joy; if they hear sad news,
they may cry and feel sad; and if they have the chance to show genuine
emotions,
they would do so. I have no doubt about this. I am even certain that some
sons, daughters, and wives of some Arab rulers are with us. But I tell the
Arab rulers, I do not want your swords and I do not even want your hearts.
To say it in Lebanese slang, the only thing I want from you is leave us alone.
Sit on the fence and have nothing to do with us. You have said what you said,
thank you, go and rest. Today, there is a war that was imposed on Lebanon
whose aim is to liquidate everything called resistance and resistance men
in Lebanon and punish Lebanon for the defeat it inflicted on Is rael. In
fact, the war on Lebanon aims at liquidating the Palestinian cause. Everybody
knows that the wide-scale uprising in Palestine erupted following the victory
in Lebanon. 

What is happening in Palestine is similar to, and is a Palestinian version
of the Lebanese model. Now when we destroy the Lebanese model, what are we
telling the Palestinians? We are telling them you should lose hope. When
all these atrocities are taking place in Lebanon and the Arab world and the
international community are not doing anything, then this means that we may
see similar, or worse, atrocities in Gaza Strip and no one in the world would
make a move. So, inflicting a defeat on Lebanon means ending the resistance
movements in the region, which is their intention. It also means ending the
Palestinian cause and imposing the Israeli conditions in any political
settlement.
We heard Amr Musa say that there is no more a peace process. There was a
fair mediator, who was not fair from day one, and now the peace process was
handed over to Olmert. Before Olmert, George Bush used to tell the Arabs
and the Palestinians that they should accept what Sharon offers them and
that we should accept the leftovers that they offer us. The objective of
the operation in Lebanon is this. It was not a reaction to two prisoners.
The issue has gone beyond this, and I can confirm to you that they will fail.
We can talk about results later. 

Let me go back to your question about not telling them [the Lebanese
Government]
or asking them. First, the government statement, on the basis of which we
participated in the government, talks about the Lebanese Government's
endorsement
of resistance and its national right to liberate the land and the prisoners.
How could a resistance liberate prisoners? Go to George Bush for example?
I cannot and will not go to George Bush. When you talk about the resistance's
right, you are not talking about the Foreign Ministry's right. You talk about
an armed resistance, and you establish in the government statement its right
to liberate the land and the prisoners. So, I represent a resistance and
I have weapons. This was the government statement according to which the
government won the vote of confidence from the Chamber of deputies. That
was the first point. 

Second, all that was said at table of dialogue is available on tapes, as
some have now begun to say Al-Sayyid [Nasrallah] said so and so. Yes, I told
them we would maintain the border calm. That was our policy. However, there
are two issues that stand no... [Nasrallah changes thought]. I used to say
there are four points, two of which can stand delaying, procrastination,
and making reminders about them. No problem about that. The first issue was
the continued occupation of the Shab'a farms. In this respect we can take
our time. This is a limited piece of land. We do not want to go to war because
of the farms, not a war like the one taking place now. The second issue is
that of the air and maritime violations, and even the land violations. We
can put up with these. Yes, violations of our sovereignty are condemned,
but we would not raise hell because of them. However, there are two issues
that can stand no postponement. The first is the prisoners' issue, for this
involves humanitarian suffering. The second is any attack on civilians. I
told them on more than one occasion that we are serious about the prisoners
issue and that this can only solved through the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers.
Of course, I used to make hints in that respect. Of course I would not be
expected to tell them on the table I was going to kidnap Israeli soldiers
in July. That could not be. 

[Bin-Jiddu] You told them that you would kidnap Israeli soldiers? 

[Nasrallah] I used to tell them that the prisoners' issue, which we must
solve, can only be solved through the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Clearly? 

[Nasrallah] Clearly. Nobody told me: no, you are not allowed to kidnap Israeli
soldiers. I was not waiting for such a thing. Even if they told me no you
are not allowed [nothing would change]. I am not being defensive. I said
that we would kidnap Israeli soldiers in meetings with some of the key
political
leaders in the country. I do not want to mention names. When the time comes
for accountability I will mention names. They asked whether this would resolve
the prisoners issue if this happens. My answer was that it was logical for
such an act to solve the prisoners' issue. I assure you that our assessment
was not wrong. I am not being stubborn. In the entire world, tell me about
any state, any army, or any war that was waged because some people kidnapped
two soldiers, or even took hostages, not military soldiers. Tell me about
a war that was waged against a state because of two soldiers. This has never
happened in history. Nor has Israel done it anytime before. However, what
is happening today is not a reaction to the kidnapping of two soldiers. I
repeat that this is an international decision and an Arab cover. It is a
decision that has to do with...[changes thought]. I stress to you that had
we not captured two soldiers in July, which could have happened in August,
September, or some other time, the Israelis would come to this battle and
would create for it any pretext and any excuse. The issue of disarming and
finishing the resistance could not be achieved domestically, regionally,
nor at the negotiating table. The Americans were well aware that this issue
cannot be addressed domestically. Therefore, the Lebanese were told to step
back and to let Israel terminate and disarm Hezbollah. But a cover was needed.
So they provided an international and an Arab cover. This is what the issue
is about. Finally, I will tell you how any resistance in the world operates.
If I want to kidnap or capture two Israeli soldiers, the political leadership
would make the decision and hand it to me, but even my brothers [in the
leadership]
should not know that this would happen at such a time and such a place. If
60 to 70 people know such details, would a capt uring operation be successful?
No, no such operation would be successful, let alone when informing a
government
of 24 ministers, three key leaders, political forces, and political blocs.
On the table of dialogue, we hold discussions, and only one hour later the
minutes of the sessions become available to [foreign] embassies. So do you
expect me to tell the world I am going to capture [soldiers]? 

[Bin-Jiddu] But Your Eminence, through your statement now you seem to be
accusing the other party of having prepared for this plan, and that it might
have used the capture of the two soldiers as a pretext. But some say the
opposite. The statement of the 14 March forces was clear. Political statements
very clearly stated that what happened was part of a Syrian-Iranian scenario.
This way, you have returned the country to the time before 14 March. This
serves the nuclear programme of Iran, which is now waging a conflict with
the United States at this point. Syria wants to restore its influence. You
have thus turned the table upside down. 

[Nasrallah] This is a good point to discuss. This is a repeated tone in
Lebanon.
Whenever something happens, they talk about the Iranian-Syrian dimension.
Let me start directly with the capture of the two soldiers. True, I had not
informed the Lebanese Government, but neither had I informed my closest allies.
Syria and Iran had not been informed. No Syrian or Iranian person had had
any prior information. They had not been informed, and I had not consulted
anyone of them. We are a resistance group operating on Lebanese soil. We
have prisoners in Israeli prisons. It is our natural right to restore them.
There is a major government statement that stresses this right, according
to which we acted. These are the limits of the subject. Then we began to
hear some analysis. Some say Syria told them [Hezbollah] to do so. This is
ridiculous and shameful to say. They say Iran told us to do this. Why does
Syria want Hezbollah to carry out this operation according to some analyses
repeated by some politicians? This is in order to postpone or close the file
of the international tribunal. This is ridiculous. Why ridiculous? Let me
tell you why. If the international community is preoccupied with the Lebanon
war now, the war will come to an end in one, two, three, or four weeks. July
will end, followed by August and September, then the international tribunal
issue will be revived. Does anybody believe that a confrontation of this
kind will cancel the international tribunal decision if there is an
international
will to establish an international tribunal? This analysis involves too much
simplification and disregard for people's minds. Let me tell you the objective
of this. The objective is to empty the resistance in Lebanon of its national,
moral, and humanitarian content and to present it as a party or group of
Syrian and Iranian tools that work for Syrian-Iranian interests and disregard
or bypass the Lebanese interests, if not at the expense of the Lebanese
interests.
Regarding the Iranian issue, if a war takes place in Lebanon, a war will
come to an end in one, two, or three months. How long would a war take? A
war will eventually come to an end. What will this change in the Iranian
nuclear file? What will it change? On the contrary I tell you that if there
is a relationship with the Iranian nuclear file, the current war on Lebanon
is not in the interest of the Iranian nuclear file. The Americans and Israelis
have always taken into account that if a confrontation takes place with Iran,
Hezbollah might interfere in Iran's interest. If Hezbollah is hit now, what
does this mean? This means that Iran is weakened in its nuclear file, not
strengthened. How do those people read politics? 

What is happening now, on our part, is an act of defence that has nothing
to do with the international tribunal or with undermining the international
tribunal. This is the silliest argument and I hope they would not repeat
it. On 10 May, we took to the streets to say no to contractual employment
[in the civil service], no to starving people, no to denying the acquired
rights, no to submission to the International Monetary Fund conditions. We
were told then that we want to sabotage the country and torpedo the
international
tribunal. Today, we captured prisoners to end the prisoners file. A war was
imposed on us and we were told that we are starting a war to torpedo the
international tribunal. It is shameful to say this. This issue has nothing
to do with Syria or Iran. 

I want to add something else. Hezbollah has always given priority to the
Lebanese national interest over any other interest. On the table of [national]
dialogue, I argued with them and I told them that you have known us for 23
years or 24 years. I was ready to tell them, some of them and not all of
them, what battles they fought in the interest of foreign parties and not
in the interest of Lebanon. I asked them to bring anything against Hezbollah
and say if it did anything in Lebanon or fought any war in Lebanon that was
in the interest of another party, and not the interest of Lebanon. They could
not give me a single example. 

One person said there is the issue of the hostages. I told him that Hezbollah
did not take any hostages. Even the groups that took hostages in 1982 and
1983, they took them to exchange them for hundreds of Lebanese prisoners
from the Israeli prisons, especially in Atlit. Some witnesses are still alive.
Speaker Nabih Birri was one of the people who ran the negotiations and was
aware of this issue. So, if hostages were taken, they were taken to exchange
them for Lebanese, and not for Syrian or Iranian interests. I have nothing
to do with the hostages issues. So, I tell everybody now: Give us one example
before this war, which you are accusing us of, to implicate us and prove
that we have done anything against the national interest. 

On the national level, we have a large political force. Lebanon is small,
but relatively speaking, I can claim that Hezbollah is the biggest political
party in Lebanon. In military terms, and no one can argue about this issue,
it is the resistance today. In terms of popular presence, I can claim that
Hezbollah is the biggest popular current in Lebanon. But, tell us when did
we take advantage of this political, military, mass, and popular force in
Lebanon for our own interest, for our own party interest, or for the interest
of our sect, considering the sectarian structure of the country? Never! We
have always offered concessions for the national interest. 

I do not have to defend myself here as Hezbollah or the resistance masses
with regards the national interest. I say that we are fighting the war of
national interest because Israel wants to humiliate Lebanon, subjugate Lebanon,
and control Lebanon. If it succeeds in this war, then any future government
in Lebanon should have the approval of Olmert and the Israeli Mosad. Not
only the US ambassador, the French ambassador, or the British ambassador,
but we will have a fourth one to endorse the elections law, the government,
the new president; and that is Mr Olmert. 

I reject any such accusation and say that the aim of these accusations is
to void the resistance of any humanitarian, ethical, national, and jihadist
context. 

The people know us very well. Let me defend ourselves here a little bit.
I normally do not like to talk about our personal matters. Today, before
the homes of the people were destroyed, the homes of Hezbollah leaders and
cadres were destroyed. Can you mention the name of one of our publicly-known
brothers whose home was not destroyed? The families of Hezbollah leaders
and cadres are displaced, just l ike the other people. Therefore, we were
the first to pay the price. Today, our sons, families, relatives, and dear
ones are in the battlefield. No one is hiding anything. All of Hezbollah
is in the battle. Hezbollah masses are in the battle. Are we that crazy,
that I and my brothers want to sacrifice our souls, our families, our
honourable
masses, and our dear ones in order to have Syria return to Lebanon, or to
postpone the international tribunal, or for the sake of the Iranian nuclear
file. Can you imagine such statements! This is an insult. It is an insult
to our patriotism and commitment. Yes, we are friends of Syria and Iran,
but for 24 years we benefited from our friendship with Syria and Iran for
the sake of Lebanon. There are others who benefited from their friendship
with Syria for their own seats in power, houses, wealth, and bank accounts.
But, for me, tell me where my bank accounts are? Tell me where is the palace
that I built as a result of my connections to the Syrian officials in Lebanon?
Never! Hezbollah has never taken advantage of these friendships except for
the benefit of Lebanon. Today, Hezbollah is not fighting for the sake of
Syria or the sake of Iran. It is fighting for the sake of Lebanon. Yes, the
result of this battle in Lebanon will be seen in Palestine. If it ends in
victory, it will be victory there too; and if, God forbid, it ends in defeat,
then the Palestinian brothers will face difficult and tragic conditions.
But, God willing, there will only be victory. [Al-Jazeera Television at 2257
gmt interrupts airing of the interview, and starts interviewing Arab writers
and analysts, saying it will air the remainder of the interview after preparing
the tapes for air transmission. Al-Jazeera resumes airing the remainder of
the interview at 2310 gmt] 

[Bin-Jiddu] Here, what does victory mean, and what does defeat mean? When
we say that you have achieved victory, then what do you mean? How do you
understand that you were defeated? How does the world understand that you
were defeated? 

[Nasrallah] To succeed in defence is victory. How was victory achieved in
1996? The Israeli military operation did not achieve its objectives. This
is it. Hezbollah remained and the resistance of Hezbollah remained. We were
not the ones who began the war or the ones who launched a large-scale war.
It is not from the first moment after we captured two soldiers that we began
to shell Nahariya, Haifa, Tiberias, and Zefat and launched war. No. Even
in advancing, the Israelis were much faster than us. We were patient in the
hope that things would stop at this point because we do not want to take
our country to war. However, they launched war and we went to war. Victory
here does not mean that I will enter and capture northern Palestine and
liberate
Nahariya, Haifa, and Tiberias. This is not one of our rhetoric or slogans.
This is a process that concerns the Palestinians and the nation. This is
another issue. The victory we are talking about is that when the resistance
survives. When its will is not broken then this is victory. When Lebanon
is not humiliated and its dignity and honour are maintained, and when Lebanon
stands fast alone in front of the fiercest military power and does not accept
any humiliating conditions regarding a settlement of the issue, then this
is victory. When we are not defeated militarily then this is victory. As
long as there is a missile that is fired from Lebanon and targets the Zionists,
as long as there is one fighter who fires his rifle, and as long as there
is someone who plants a bomb against the Israelis, then this means that
resistance
is still there. I tell you now--some people say that this is the eighth day
[of the war] and others say it is the ninth day. Now, we believe that we
have achieved part of victory. Our steadfastness until today is victory.
This is Israel. Even at the dialogue table I used to say that we do not
belittle
Israel. Are we fighting militias, a party, an organization, or an army in
a poor state? No. We know that we are fighting an army that defeated a group
of Arab armies at one time. But we fought it and defeated it with God's help,
and we are fighting it now. Consequently, our survival and steadfastness
until now means victory. Our absorbance of the strike is victory, and our
continuation with the confrontation is victory. In addition to this, when
the Israelis begin to make concessions [then this means victory]. In the
first day, there were no negotiations. Now, the Israelis began to talk about
negotiations. In the first day, they said that they want to destroy Hezbollah.
A short while ago, I counted them to you and [words indistinct] politics.
Now, even the Israeli officials do not use the language of destroying
Hezbollah.
There is not even the language of dismantling Hezbollah. Today, some sides
talk about disarming Hezbollah, and other sides talk about weakening
Hezbollah's
missile force. Even the destruction of Hezbollah's military force is no longer
a military target. The Israelis today know that through military force they
cannot dismantle Hezbollah's military power or missile force. They have to
deal with this through politics. This is an Israeli failure. Every Israeli
failure is success to us. It is victory for us. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Your eminence, what are your demands now within this context?
You are talking about negotiations now. Are you required to extradite the
two captured soldiers without conditions, or is there anything else? We heard
the Israeli Foreign Ministry saying that the German mediator should begin
to move. What is there? There is a UN delegation, and there is [Javier]
Solana...


[Nasrallah, interrupting] Regarding the United Nations, you just see the
inappropriate behaviour with the Lebanese Government. The UN delegation arrived
and contacted the Lebanese officials. It offered a comprehensive ceasefire,
Hezbollah extradites the two prisoners to the Lebanese Government, and the
Lebanese Government will then begin negotiations on the exchange of prisoners
for a period of one month, and in light of this, a decision will be made
on how things go. Our authorized channel--and I announce this--for political
contacts in this regard, is [Chamber of Deputies] Speaker Nabih Birri for
many reasons. We are present in the government and we are in contact with
the prime minister. This is natural. However, for us, Speaker Nabih Birri
is the side with which contacts and negotiations are held. We are in a
continuous
contact with him. Of course, we are in a continuous contact with all our
friends and allies in Lebanon. Regarding the basic issues that we might reach,
we will certainly hold some consultations. What was conveyed to us and what
we understood was this offer. The offer was sent to me. I am not authorized
to reply to it by myself. I have my personal opinion, but I cannot commit
Hezbollah to my personal opinion. So, I sent a message to Nabih Birri telling
him that I need some time to hold a meeting for the leaders. And you know
the security circumstances of my brothers. We must not make any mistake in
this regard. Any way, he said that they [the UN delegation] will leave for
occupied Palestine at night. I said let them go and come back to know what
the Israelis will say and I will discuss this issue with the brothers. My
readiness to discuss this does not mean that I accept or do not accept this
offer. Eventually, I am committed to a collective leadership and I have to
consult it on this issue. The UN delegation left occupied Palestine, but
did not return to Lebanon to give an answer. They just said that the [Israelis]
did not accept the offer. Practically speaking, the UN offer was foiled.
So, it does not need an answer from me because it was foiled. I discuss or
answer issues that are seriously put to discussion. I do not want to reject
or accept issues that are not put to discussion. When Solana came, he just
came to convey the Israeli conditions. He came to Lebanon and told them [the
Lebanese officials] you should return the two prisoners and implement
Resolution
1559. In fact, the ceiling that Solana offered was higher than what the
Israelis
are talking about now. This is my information about the contacts that have
thus far taken place. 

[Bin-Jiddu] What about the German mediator? 

[Nasrallah] Under all circumstances, what I heard is that the foreign minister
of the enemy asked the German mediator to intervene with us to return the
two prisoners without swapping along with some sweet. This cannot take place.
At any rate, regarding the negotiations issue, even regarding the two
prisoners,
I want to relieve myself and Hezbollah from this issue. Anyone who wants
to talk about this then let him talk with the state, and the state then talks
with us. I will not receive any German, French, English, Russian, Chinese,
or any mediators. Hezbollah is now in a position with which it deals seriously.
Its priority is the battle. So, let them talk to the officials of the state
who will talk to us, and we will then give the required answers. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Do you still insist on the principle of swapping? 

[Nasrallah] Certainly, this is an issue that we cannot tolerate. In fact,
if the civilians who were martyred, the displaced who are suffering now the
effects of displacement, and the steadfast people know that it is possible
for me to extradite or return these two soldiers without closing this file
they will accuse me of treason. I will also accuse myself of treason. This
is completely out of question. In the first day, I said that if the entire
universe comes, it will not be able to take back the two Israeli soldiers
except through indirect negotiation and exchange of prisoners. And Ghassan
[Bin-Jiddu] what is left for us to worry about? We were worried about the
infrastructure, but they [the Israelis] destroyed it; we were worried about
the people, they killed the people; we were worried about displacemen t ,
they displaced the people; we were worried about the houses, they destroyed
our houses and the people's houses. And after this we tell them here are
the two prisoners, pardon us, and then apologize to them. This is out of
the question. 

[Bin-Jiddu] Regarding the exchange [of prisoners], who will you exchange
the two Israeli soldiers with? Are you going to exchange them with Lebanese
prisoners or Palestinian prisoners? 

[Nasrallah] This is an open process, and I will leave it to negotiations.


[Bin-Jiddu] You still believe that Samir al-Qintar will be in Lebanon? 

[Nasrallah] God willing. In this exchange, Samir al-Qintar will be the first
one. What is the use of this exchange if Samir al-Qintar is not included
in the exchange and if all the Lebanese prisoners are not included in this
exchange - of course, I am talking about an open process? 

[Bin-Jiddu] Your Eminence, let's put the other parties aside. You have a
memorandum of understanding with General Awn. Has what is currently taking
place shaken the pillars of the memorandum of understanding and your
cooperation
with the Free Patriotic Movement? 

[Nasrallah] No, not at all. First, the memorandum of understanding talked
clearly about first releasing the prisoners and liberating the rest of the
[occupied] Lebanese territories, and afterward discussing a strategy for
national defence. This is what we began to discuss. Hezbollah has neither
taken advantage of Lebanon to liberate Palestine, nor worked towards restoring
the seven villages, which are Lebanese territories. It carried out an operation
to capture [Israeli soldiers], because the government's policy statement
stipulates the release of prisoners and the liberation of Lebanese territories.
So, what we did is a national Lebanese action, even in the regional sense
of the word. This [operation] was carried out within, not outside, the context
of the memorandum of understanding signed between us and the Free Patriotic
Movement. 

I am following the statements made by Major General Awn and other leaders
in the movement. I believe they took a wise, balanced, national, and honourable
position. Many political forces - I do not want to name them - adopted a
similar position. I hope that you do not ask me to name them. If I name this
or that party, it would then mean that the others did not adopt a similar
position. I mentioned the Free Patriotic Movement because you asked me about
it. Furthermore, the effort made by the Free Patriotic Movement - since your
question is about the Free Patriotic Movement - in various areas is a big
effort. We receive information about the impact of these good efforts on
the displaced people. I do not think that the pillars of this [memorandum
of] understanding were shaken. Things will become clearer in the future.


[Bin-Jiddu] Your Eminence, if you are certain of your military capabilities,
what then do you fear? Do you fear the internal or the external... 

[Nasrallah, interrupting] We only fear God Almighty. Secondly, I want to
assure you that we do not fear the internal front. They are trying to play
on the sectarian divisions. They know that playing on the sectarian divisions
is dangerous. It is true that it threatens the resistance, but it also
threatens
the state project, the Cedar Revolution, and the great democratic model that
George Bush is talking about. It is worth mentioning that democracy is Lebanon
is older than the whole Bush family. It is dangerous to the country. If they
want to play on the differences between Sunnis and Shi'is, Muslims and
Christians,
or Druze and Shi'is, it will be dangerous to the country. However, they will
not succeed in this at this time. Today, the Americans are playing on the
divisions between Sunnis and Shi'is in Iraq - the authority, the presence
in power, the intimidation, and the acts of killing here and there. I hold
America responsible for what is taking place in Iraq. I know what the Americans
tell the Shi'is, the Sunnis, and the Kurds. But today they cannot incite
people. Let's take the Sunnis for example; are they going to incite them
against us, the Shi'is? Why? What wrong did we do? Are the Shi'is in Lebanon
are US agents to tell them to do so? Are the Shi'is in Lebanon Israeli agents?
Have the Shi'is in Lebanon abandoned the Palestinian cause? Have the Shi'is,
who have seen Palestinian people being killed in Gaza, cooperated with the
Israelis? You cannot believe such things. For example, the last statement
made by Abu-Mus'ab al-Zarqawi in which he said Hezbollah members are border
guards, collaborators with Israel, traitors, and conspirators - many people
were sceptical of the victory achieved in 2000 and said that it was a
settlement
between Syria, Iran, Hezbollah on the one side and Israel on the other, in
addition to the talk about a Shi'i crescent. This is part of the results.
We did not want this war, but we are fighting it because it was imposed on
us. One of the most important results of this war is that, with regard to
the Shi'i-Sunni issue, it fortified the Arab and Islamic world against the
attempts to play on this issue. I do not say that it ended the sedition and
calamity, but it greatly fortified [the Arab and Islamic world]. Today, we
are Shi'is fighting Israel. Our fighting and steadfastness is a victory to
our brothers in Palestine, who are Sunnis not Shi'is. So, we, Shi'is and
Sunnis, are fighting together against Israel, which is supported, backed,
and made powerful by America. Perhaps, if Olmert reached a point where he
would say to the Americans that he cannot continue, Bush will tell hem to
continue, and that if he [Olmert] has a problem, he [Bush] will solve it
for him. So, this is what I meant when I said it is the nation's battle