- Home
- War in the Middle East
- 'Al-Aqsa Flood Vanguards' with General Khalil Helou
- 05
- Dec.
- 2023
'Al-Aqsa Flood Vanguards' with General Khalil Helou
modified on 07 Oct. 2024 à 16:46 Read : 4 minute(s) A A A
According to retired Lebanese Army General Khalil Helou, the announcement by Hamas of the creation of a new faction, the "Al-Aqsa Flood Vanguards," provides Israel with a justification to attack Lebanon.
The announcement by Hamas of the establishment of a faction on Lebanese soil with the mission to "liberate Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque" has evoked a disconcerting sense of déjà vu among the Lebanese. It brought them back to 1977, recalling the ominous slogan coined by the former second-in-command of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Salah Khalaf (Abou Ayad): "The path to Palestine passes through Jounieh."
Hamas leaders in Lebanon are currently intertwining the destiny of Palestine with that of Lebanon, posing a dangerous risk of a devastating war for the country. Retired Lebanese Army General Khalil Helou expressed this concern during an interview with This is Beirut.
1. What is your interpretation of the decision by Hamas-Lebanon to create a new military faction, the "Al-Aqsa Flood Vanguards"?
My response encompasses three key aspects. First and foremost, in my perspective, the power dynamics in Lebanon, dominated by Hezbollah for the past decade, have consistently favored Hamas within Lebanese borders, particularly in Palestinian camps. This was evident during the recent confrontations a few months ago at the Ain el-Helweh camp, where the Lebanese authorities aligned themselves with the Islamists against Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president. Or, in this specific case, these Islamist groups were the very ones the Lebanese Army confronted in 2007 at the Nahr el-Bared camp and in 2017 during Operation Fajr el-Jouroud along the border with Syria.
Secondly, Hezbollah extended its support to Hamas right from the outset of the Gaza war, which began on October 7th, through the establishment of a "support front" in southern Lebanon.
Thirdly, through its overt backing of Hamas, Hezbollah sought to assert control over this alliance, bringing the actions of the Palestinian faction in line with its own agenda. Regrettably, this staunch support from Hezbollah has weakened the Sunni leadership in Lebanon, leaving a void that has paved the way for the rise of the Jamaa Islamiya, which has established its own militias. This growing resistance will be beyond control in the future, not by Hezbollah or any other entity.
In this context, Hamas announced today the establishment of a combat unit in Lebanon with the goal of liberating Jerusalem. This development echoes the situation in 1969, when, following the signing of the Cairo Agreement, the PLO used Lebanon as a base to launch attacks against Israel. This led to Israeli retaliation, targeting Lebanon in response. However, the Cairo Agreement was revoked by the Lebanese Parliament in the 1980s, and the PLO insists today on maintaining strong relations with the Lebanese state. It has repeatedly reported its intention not to interfere in Lebanese affairs or use Lebanon as a launching platform to attack Israel.
Therefore, Hamas’ announcement is highly serious and provides a relatively strong pretext for Israel to attack Lebanon. In fact, the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs wasted no time in responding, asserting that Israel is capable of conducting an operation in Lebanon.
2. What impact would such a statement have on the current situation, considering the efforts made for the implementation of Resolution 1701?
Hamas’ declaration throws a spanner in the works. However, the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 primarily falls under the responsibility of the Lebanese government and subsequently, the Lebanese Army. According to Resolution 1701, it is the Lebanese Army that is supposed to assert Lebanon's sovereignty in the south, assisted by UNIFIL. Despite the requirement for 15,000 troops to be deployed at the southern border, there are barely 4,000 to 5,000. Meanwhile, Hezbollah operates freely without government intervention.
What actions are the MPs taking to enforce Resolution 1701? Seeking assistance from the international community by presenting the facts and asserting Lebanese intent could be a viable option.
At the moment, the efforts seem confined to mere media rhetoric, with no tangible developments in foreign or defense policy.
3. What is expected from the Lebanese government at this point?
Firstly, strong diplomatic action is expected from the Lebanese government. In terms of foreign policy, the government can reach out to countries through their ambassadors in Lebanon, exploring the possibility of enforcing Resolution 1701 by force. The Lebanese government should engage with the Hamas-allied states, namely Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, as these parties have the potential to influence the Palestinian group and deter it from pursuing this catastrophic project.
Secondly, on the defense front, the Lebanese Army could initiate the enforcement of Resolution 1701 in areas not under Hezbollah's control, no matter how limited, given that southern Lebanon is not entirely dominated by Hezbollah.
The Minister of Defense and the Army Commander should issue a clear statement, conveying to Hamas that they will be targeted by the Lebanese Army if they interfere in southern Lebanon. As there is no legal authorization for military intervention by non-Lebanese entities in Lebanese territory, this message should be explicitly communicated.
Thirdly, the Lebanese government should convey this decision to the UN, the United States, and the United Kingdom, given their significant involvement in regional dynamics.
Comments