CAIRO — It was May 2000 when I visited Beirut after Israel’s withdrawal from occupied southern Lebanon. At the time, I was in charge of the Arab and international affairs section at Al-Ahram Weekly. I had little hope of getting the opportunity to interview the star of that era, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, who had managed lead his fighters to defeat the enemy and force it to flee in disgrace from the occupied border strip in southern Lebanon.
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
Still I figured I try for the interview, and headed to the southern suburb to meet the party’s media spokesman, based on the recommendation of a Lebanese journalist friend. I told the press attaché that it would be an opportunity for Nasrallah to address the world in English, at a time when the Western media was not prepared to talk to him, as the leader of a terrorist organization confronting Israel and America.
I added that I — like most Egyptian and Arab youth — was a great admirer of this confidant and rising star and the qualitative leap he achieved in Hezbollah’s performance and the building of a fighting force that was able to force the occupation forces to withdraw from Lebanon.
My admiration for the man grew even further after his young son Hadi was killed in 1997, when he was 17 years old, in one of the resistance operations, and Nasrallah stood steadfast and patient in front of the body of his beloved son, without shedding a single tear. He later said that he did not want to give the enemy a chance to gloat even for a moment.
With the most wanted man in the West
Hezbollah’s experience was unique in the sectarian context of Lebanon. Despite its prominence as a representative of the Shiites in Lebanon, with strong Iranian support, Nasrallah had the insight to present the party as a representative of all those who supported the resistance in confronting the occupying enemy in Lebanon and Palestine — and to avoid any sectarian affiliations.
The party’s leaders became more open to cooperating with various Lebanese parties and sects, including Christians, Sunnis, and Druze, and their discourse became less sectarian.
I waited until the next morning and did not have much hope. Therefore, I could not believe myself when the media official informed me by phone that I would get the interview. The agreement was that I would go with my Lebanese journalist friend to Haret Hreik in the southern suburbs, where the party’s media office is located. Because Nasrallah was the Israelis’ No. 1 most wanted man at the time, I knew I was going to go through strict security procedures.
From the media office, we boarded a small bus with the black curtains drawn, accompanied by three of the party’s gunmen, to be sure we didn’t know where we were going. Shortly after, the bus stopped in front of a high-rise building, similar to the rest of the buildings in the densely populated suburb. We headed to what appeared to be the garage, where my friend and I were searched thoroughly, including my pens and recording device.
Then we headed to an elevator that took us down a floor or two.
When the elevator opened its door, I found myself in a small lounge equipped with two chairs with a Hezbollah flag in the middle, and behind them a picture of Nasrallah and another of Ayatollah Khomeini, the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Revolution.
The absence of the Lebanese flag surprised me a little, so I added that remark to the questions I would ask during the interview. He explained the matter by saying that he was not an official in the Lebanese state, and that the picture of Khomeini was due to his spiritual connection to the Supreme Leader as a religious authority.
As he answered all my questions, Nasrallah captivated me with his simplicity, clarity of vision and confidence in his cause and final victory. Whenever the question was embarrassing, he faced it with the defiant smile that he later became famous for, as he fought his battle against an enemy that possessed many times more firepower than him.
Divisions and adventures
I recalled every detail of that day, as news broke last Friday about the successful Israeli assassination of Nasrallah. Many years have passed since my meeting with him — and my personal position on Nasrallah and Hezbollah have changed. I certainly supported his position and steadfastness in the face of the enemy for more than a month in the 2006 war, which was a pivotal moment of Arab division. Saudi Arabia implicitly blamed Hezbollah’s “adventures,” prompting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to respond when he criticized those who sought balanced positions.
With the revolutions of the Arab Spring, the party’s last masks fell.
But it seems that this victory constituted another turning point, which prompted the party to abandon its anti-sectarian vision. Two years later, Hezbollah fighters took control of all government buildings in Lebanon and confirmed their position as a state within a state.
With the revolutions of the Arab Spring, the party’s last masks fell, as it participated with the Syrian regime in the brutal suppression of Syrians demanding democracy. Hezbollah killed thousands of Syrians to keep the rule of the Assad family and its sect. This had nothing to do with the liberation of Jerusalem.
Standing against Israel
But with Israel’s genocidal war against the Palestinians in Gaza following Hamas’s October 7 attack, no one else in the Arab world supported the Palestinians in a practical way except Nasrallah and the rest of the Iranian-backed Axis of Resistance.
The image Hezbollah and the resistance groups conjured up once again drew attention to the official silence and inaction in the rest of the Arab world. Arab governments were unwilling to support Iran-backed groups.
Hezbollah launched what it called a “support war” since the party does not implicate Lebanon into a wider war because of the country’s domestic troubles. Iran also doesn’t want a wider war to avoid a direct clash with the United States, which supports Israel.
In his last speech, shortly after the pager attack in Lebanon, Nasrallah appeared gloomy, with signs of sadness and anger on his face. The usual smile of confidence disappeared. The attack was blatant in its criminality, caused a huge loss, and revealed a stunning security breach.
Beirut to Tehran
Nasrallah certainly knew very well — especially after the assassinations of Fouad Shukr and Ismail Haniyeh and the attacks on Beirut and Tehran on two consecutive days in late July — that he might be the next target.
One of the criteria for future success will be Hezbollah’s ability to confront the Zionist enemy.
But this did not push him to abandon his support for the Palestinians. He continued to emphasize until his last speech that he would not stop his support of Gaza. Hezbollah continued firing rockets at northern Israel, preventing the return of settlers to their homes.
Nasrallah’s death marks the end of an era in which he help determined its features for more than three decades. He paid the price of his positions, some of which we agreed on, others we did not.
Perhaps one of the criteria for future success will be Hezbollah’s ability to confront the Zionist enemy — especially now that the official Iranian sponsor looks ready to continue escalating the confrontation.
