Sheikh Naim Qassem, the Secretary-General of “Hezbollah”, was the subject of a legal complaint filed by a group of Lebanese MPs and politicians with the public prosecutor yesterday. The complaint was in response to his recent strong speech, in which he rejected the surrender of the resistance’s weapons and accused the Lebanese government of handing the country over to “Israel.”

This action is not only a judicial and political precedent but also a prelude to civil war, providing legal and legitimate justification for it. It also facilitates the state’s decision, as represented by the President and the Prime Minister, to assign the army the task of forcibly disarming Hezbollah to implement the American-Israeli agenda by the end of the year.

Following a meeting held in the office of the current deputy and former minister in the Ashrafieh neighbourhood of the Lebanese capital yesterday evening, a decision was made to pursue the Secretary-General of the Resistance Party in the country through the judiciary. The purpose of the meeting was to analyse Sheikh Naim’s speech and publish a statement that accused the party of instigating sectarian strife and exposing the country to civil war. The judiciary was contacted, and communication was maintained with other deputies and party leaders in the same trench to form an anti-resistance front.

The resistance weapon is a legitimate weapon, and its existence and continuation are among the most prominent clauses of the Taif Agreement. The agreement explicitly stated its purpose was to confront the repeated Israeli aggression against Lebanon, and it exempted Lebanon from certain obligations. In contrast, the weapons of other militias were ordered to be dismantled. He considered them a threat to Lebanon’s security and stability.

Following the American paper presented by the American envoy Thomas Barak to the three Lebanese presidencies—the state, the government, and the parliament—we are currently confronted with a plan to expedite the Lebanese civil war and mobilise political, parliamentary, and judicial forces to support the government’s decision to ignite the war’s fuse to disarm the resistance.

The resistance’s weapons are being criminalised, and its funding sources are being drained domestically and internationally. A strict border blockade is being implemented to prevent any military supplies from reaching Lebanon, particularly through Syrian territory. This marks the beginning of a very dangerous strategic transformation in Lebanon. The Syrian authorities announced today that they intercepted an Iranian missile cargo en route to “Hezbollah” in Lebanon, and this was not an accident.

Ashrafieh, the same region where the initial spark of the civil war was ignited, was the source of the new political and territorial division and the initial spark of the new civil war. This was not a coincidence. Regrettably, history repeats itself, with a fundamental distinction: the initial conflict was an attempt to disarm the Palestinian resistance, which was backed by the Lebanese national forces. The subsequent conflict will be fought against a purely Lebanese resistance that has defeated the occupation state twice—the first victory being the complete liberation of southern Lebanon, and the second being the successful repulsion of the Israeli invasion in the July 2006 war.

These two most prominent and honourable victories in the history of Lebanon and the region have been overlooked by those who wish to disarm Hezbollah and plunge the country into a civil war. Additionally, they ignore the fact that this resistance weapon was never intended for the Lebanese people, but rather for the liberation of the land and the enemy’s chest. Additionally, they neglect the fact that the MPs of the Amal Movement and Hezbollah were responsible for transporting Lebanese President Joseph Aoun to the Baabda Palace, which had been vacant for nearly two years. This event instilled confidence in the government of the current Prime Minister, Nawaf Salam, who is widely regarded as one of the most enthusiastic about disarming the resistance.

The voices that are currently ascended to prosecute Sheikh Naim Qassem and provide the “legitimate” and “political” cover for disarming Hezbollah did not prevail in the first civil war, and they will not prevail in the second one, which is being facilitated by American-Zionist cover. This is because the conflict will resemble “Karbala,” as Sheikh Naim warned in his historic speech, which means either victory or martyrdom. The resistance’s weapon is “sacred”, designed to prevent the discharge of a projectile except for sacred objectives, the most important of which are the protection of Lebanon and its sovereignty, as well as the confrontation of any Israeli occupation. And the days are between us.