The leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, asserted that his organization does not link the presidential election to the war in Gaza.

For Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah, any occasion is good to try to convince the Lebanese people of the “opportunity” of the unnecessary and destructive war he has led in southern Lebanon.

On Friday, it was the commemoration of the death of an Islamic scholar, Sheikh Ali Mohammad Kourani, that provided Hassan Nasrallah with the pretext for yet another speech. In it, he once again attempted, with pompous slogans and, of course, half-truths, to outline all the supposed benefits that Lebanon will gain, according to him, from a new “divine victory” against Israel.

Needless to say, he once again completely ignored the price that Lebanon and its population, especially in the South, pay for his military adventures that benefit only his sole Iranian sponsor. While he brags about hypothetical future “victories,” southern Lebanon is in turmoil, its population displaced and distressed, its property destroyed, and the Lebanese economy increasingly weakened. But for Hassan Nasrallah, all these are mere details not worth mentioning.

What enrages him, however, is that some Lebanese dare to openly question the validity of his “strategy-that-will-lead-to-a-new-divine-victory-and-inflict-a-crushing-defeat-on-the-Zionist-enemy,” even if it means fighting Israel to the last Lebanese. Hassan Nasrallah knows very well that their criticisms are valid, contrary to his reasoning, which he tries — in his increasingly frequent speeches — to solidify with slogans and threats that ultimately only highlight the weakness of his argument.

Mastering the art of manipulation and populism and starting from the principle that attack is the best defense, the Hezbollah leader addressed two audiences on Friday: his supporters and his critics, whom he barely mentioned in his previous speeches.

The fact that he dedicated a significant part of his remarks to responding to all those who firmly believe that Lebanon has nothing to do with the war between Israel and Hamas and who refuse to see its southern part destroyed due to the calculations of a group that has arrogated the power of war and peace shows how much these criticisms disturb him.

What Majority?

To his supporters, he “explained” once again why “the front supporting Hamas,” which southern Lebanon has become, is important. “The war we are waging will shape the strategic fate of Palestine and Lebanon, which will be able to regain its sovereignty and benefit from its water and oil resources that it cannot currently enjoy. It will have positive repercussions for the entire region,” he claimed. It is tempting to respond, “That’s great, but could you be a bit more specific?” Hassan Nasrallah obviously did not elaborate on his thoughts, perhaps judging that the Lebanese will not grasp all the subtleties of the long-term effects of the war they care little about and which is taking place on their soil.

He merely called on his audience to “not listen to those who preach out of ignorance and engage in analyses that do not correspond to reality,” which is, however, as clear as can be for those willing to see.

Hassan Nasrallah then castigated “the Lebanese who believe that Israel has done nothing to Lebanon since 1948,” recalling the Israeli attacks and occupation of the country, but of course failing to mention the Palestinian and Hezbollah factors, which have been decisive at this level, as they have given Tel Aviv the pretext to carry out all kinds of military operations against the country.

Still in a failed attempt at defense, he mocked those who think that “a majority of Lebanese are opposed to reopening the southern front and consider that Lebanon has nothing to do with the war between Israel and Hamas,” challenging them to prove that they form a majority.

“Those who died in the south, are they not Lebanese? Are their families not Lebanese? I feel compelled, in light of what is being said, to also talk about a majority. We are the ones with the largest party and the most preferential votes. Let those who claim to represent the majority conduct a census. They will know their weight and see what the majority of Lebanese think,” he said.

Nasrallah harshly criticized the United States, which he believes is “responsible for the suffering of the Lebanese, as evidenced by the leaks about a deal according to which offshore gas exploration can begin if the clashes in southern Lebanon cease.” Following his logic, “it is the United States that is the cause of Lebanon’s electricity problems” and not the disastrous management of this sector by his more or less allied Christian party, the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM).

Hassan Nasrallah also reacted to statements made by the American envoy, Amos Hochstein, on Thursday about a possible Lebanese-Israeli agreement, one aspect of which would involve resolving the border conflict. “The southern border is delineated, but there are disputed points from which Israel must withdraw,” he said.

Presidential Election and Vetoes

Addressing the presidential issue, the Hezbollah leader rejected accusations that his camp is blocking the election of a new head of state because it ties Lebanon’s issue to the war in Gaza.

Recalling that the deadlock has persisted since the end of former President Michel Aoun’s term in October 2022, he emphasized that he has repeatedly stated since the beginning of the war in Gaza and the opening of the southern front that “the two issues are not linked.” He also rejected accusations that his party is seeking to gain political leverage, particularly regarding the presidency, through the war in the south of the country. “What prevents the election of a president are internal and international vetoes,” he accused, alluding especially to the United States and Saudi Arabia, which oppose the accession to the presidency of a candidate close to the pro-Iranian block. “Without these vetoes, many deputies would have voted for certain candidates,” Hassan Nasrallah added, referring to his candidate, the head of the Marada Movement, Sleiman Frangieh.

He emphasized his commitment to resolving the deadlock and insisted that it would not be possible without dialogue. “If there is a solution other than through dialogue, tell us,” he said.