Resistance in Israel remains resilient against assassinations. : Analysis

After conducting a devastating air strike on Beirut’s Dahiyeh neighborhood that resulted in the assassination of Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah, the Israeli army proudly announced on platform X that Nasrallah would no longer be able to instill terror in the world.

Despite Israel’s claim, the fact remains that Nasrallah is not the one responsible for the terrestrial terror that has been ongoing, including the genocide in the Gaza Strip and the recent casualties in Lebanon. Israel has taken credit for these actions, including destroying residential buildings in pursuit of Nasrallah, which ironically can be seen as a form of terrorizing the world.

History shows that assassinations of prominent figures like Nasrallah do not eradicate resistance but rather intensify it. After the assassination of Hezbollah’s co-founder Abbas al-Musawi in 1992, Nasrallah rose to power and strengthened Hezbollah’s presence in Lebanon and beyond, notably expelling Israel from Lebanese territory in 2000 and defeating Israeli forces in 2006.

Similar failed attempts to weaken resistance can be observed in the assassinations of Palestinian leaders by Israel over the years, which did not deter the Palestinian resistance movement but instead spurred mass uprisings like the Intifadas. New groups like Hamas emerged as a result of Israeli actions and were also targeted for assassination but continued to build capacity and carry out attacks.

The recent assassination of Hamas’s political chief Ismail Haniyeh in July 2024 did not diminish Palestinian resistance but rather underscored Israel’s perpetuation of mass killing. Nasrallah’s rise to prominence can be linked back to Israel’s past actions, such as the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which fueled anti-Israeli resistance.

Despite the cycle of violence and assassinations, the underlying goal appears to be perpetuating warfare and conflict in the region. Israel’s actions may continue to incite further retaliation and violence, highlighting the entrenched and destructive nature of the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East.

Analysis:
The article presents a strong opinion against Israel’s actions and highlights the potential unintended consequences of assassinations on resistance movements. The sources and credibility of the information provided are not explicitly stated, which raises questions about the veracity of the claims made. The article appears to be biased against Israel, portraying it as a perpetrator of terrorism and conflict in the region while downplaying the actions of Hezbollah and Hamas.

The article’s analysis of historical events and the impact of past assassinations on resistance movements, such as Nasrallah’s rise to power following Abbas al-Musawi’s assassination, provides a valuable perspective. However, the lack of a balanced presentation of the wider geopolitical context and the roles of various parties involved in the conflicts undermines the overall credibility of the article.

In the current political landscape, where misinformation and fake news are pervasive, articles like this one can influence public perception by shaping a narrative that reinforces existing biases. The one-sided portrayal of Israel as the main aggressor and the resistance movements as justified in their actions could contribute to a limited and skewed understanding of the complexities of the Middle East conflicts.

Overall, while the article offers insights into the potential repercussions of targeted assassinations and the cyclical nature of violence in the region, its presentation lacks objectivity and balance. A more nuanced examination of the various actors, motivations, and historical context would be necessary to provide a comprehensive understanding of the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East.

Source: Aljazeera news: Israel’s assassinations can’t kill resistance