Why the Challenge Promised by Nasrallah to Israel Led to His Death?

"This will be a challenge between you and me; you cannot return the northern residents to their homes." Hassan Nasrallah uttered this sentence just a week before his death when Israel officially announced that the focus of military operations had shifted from Gaza to Lebanon, with the main goal of returning Israeli refugees to their settlements near the border with Lebanon. The leader of Hezbollah—a militia group that is also a political party and has significant influence in southern Lebanon—made these remarks on the occasion of the explosion of pagers and radios of Hezbollah members; statements that demonstrated how much he underestimated the new war and Netanyahu's fragile position and serious determination to change it. The end of the ideological confrontation with technology. After the 33-day war in 2006, Hezbollah claimed victory over Israel. However, many observers did not see a victor in that war. On one side was Israel, which had declared its main and official goal to be the complete destruction of Hezbollah, and on the other side was Hezbollah, which was left with a devastated landscape after the war that took years to rebuild. But since Israel did not achieve its official goal, this was enough for Hezbollah and its leader to declare victory. Hezbollah claimed similar victories wherever it intervened and effectively paralyzed the Lebanese government against its internal opponents for years, managing a diverse country like Lebanon almost single-handedly. Its involvement in the Syrian civil war ultimately led to the preservation of Bashar al-Assad's power. Its presence in Iraq and support for Hashd al-Shaabi made this militia one of the strongest players in the country, and its support for the Houthis in Yemen prevented the victory of the Arab coalition led by Saudi Arabia. One might think that Iran's role in these countries was what brought about the aforementioned results for the so-called "resistance" axis, but it should not be forgotten that Hezbollah, with its physical presence in the field, actually played the main role in all four countries: Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. All these achievements were made under conditions where Hezbollah relied on the ideological mobilization of its supporters, the general mobilization of forces, and the special expertise of its forces in street and hand-to-hand combat. The United States considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization, but the European Union has placed its military wing on the blacklist while not labeling its political wing as terrorist. Hezbollah's political party also has representatives in the Lebanese parliament. The current war with Israel goes beyond all of Hezbollah's traditional battles. If Hezbollah continued to strengthen itself in the same traditional way after the last war with Israel in 2006, increasing its number of rockets and members, Israel relied on technological advancements, the results of which are clearly evident. The Iron Dome effectively prevents any projectile from passing, to the extent that even Iran's direct entry into the war and the firing of dozens of missiles and drones towards Israel did not harm this country. Meanwhile, while Hezbollah claims to have increased its active membership to over one hundred thousand and filled its missile treasury with thousands of missiles of various ranges, Israel has, within weeks, not only killed almost all of Hezbollah's high-ranking commanders, including Hassan Nasrallah himself, but has also cut off Hezbollah's internal communication lines through unique operations targeting pagers and radios. The lethal blows to the "resistance axis" by Israel in recent weeks and months have been so severe that practically nothing remains of the command structure of this axis, and evidence suggests that only a disorganized body remains, which still does not appear capable of responding to the assassination of its most important figure. One of the main questions in this context is how Israel has achieved such successes; victories that have no precedent in any of Israel's previous wars. Lebanon is a diverse country with a multi-thousand-year history based on trade and openness to the world. The dependence of various parties in this country on effective foreign players is no secret, and it has only been through this spirit and the trading instinct of the Lebanese that this has been possible. Hezbollah's extensive interference in the country's political arena and its transformation from an "armed resistance movement" that sought to liberate the occupied lands of Lebanon to a political party that silenced some of its opponents and even assassinated some of its internal critics (as evidenced by the international court's involvement in the assassination of Rafik Hariri and the Lebanese judiciary's findings regarding the massive explosion at the Beirut port, which was dubbed the largest non-nuclear explosion in history, and in neither case was anyone held accountable) has paved the way for Israel to focus, unlike in all past wars, on recruiting informants and spies over the years. So far, this can be considered Israel's main trump card in Lebanon. In a country where the national currency no longer holds its past value and banks are unwilling to return people's deposits due to the severity of the economic crisis, dealing with inherently trading individuals may be easier than ever. The continuous leaking of the locations of Hezbollah commanders and even the exposure of this group's operations in retaliation for the assassination of Fouad Shukr and Israel's preemptive operations ultimately led Hassan Nasrallah to admit in his last speech that Hezbollah had suffered unprecedented and serious blows from Israel. Analysis of Israeli media on Nasrallah's death: consequences for Iran. Forty-eight hours before Hassan Nasrallah's death, Nabih Berri, the Speaker of Parliament and his long-time ally, emphasized that negotiations for a ceasefire were underway, which had only 24 hours left to reach a conclusion, but who among those knowledgeable about Lebanese affairs does not know that the weak Lebanese government, under years of pressure from Hezbollah, has neither the bargaining power nor is anyone counting on it anymore. What does the future hold? The killing of Hassan Nasrallah is a direct and painful blow to the backbone of the so-called resistance axis. It can be said that Nasrallah's absence is not comparable to the absence of any other figure, even Khaled Meshaal. Meanwhile, while everyone is waiting for Iran's reaction, especially from the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ali Khamenei issued a statement that was deemed "very weak"; a statement that did not mention any potential action by Iran. In this statement, a Shia leader in a region with an absolute Sunni majority seems to have issued a fatwa for jihad, but it is unclear how this demand is to be executed. The Islamic Republic has been threatening to destroy Israel for years. Given Iran's years-long focus on strengthening its missile capabilities, many in the world may have been seriously confronted with the question of what this massive investment and the continuous unveiling of underground missile bases would ultimately yield for Iran and how serious and effective this missile capability is. According to military experts, Iran's air and naval forces are practically ineffective, and the Islamic Republic relies solely on mobilizing its supporters in various countries and its missile capabilities. However, the firing of dozens of missiles and drones towards Israel last April at least partially revealed Iran's hand in this regard. Of course, the Islamic Republic was under severe pressure from the international community (and this pressure continues) not to take any action that would plunge the region into a widespread war, but the unsuccessful missile operations against Israel showed that Tehran likely has little more than what it has revealed. In this situation, the Islamic Republic officials find themselves in a very complex position. Any direct involvement in the war with Israel for revenge could provoke a coordinated response from Israel and the United States; a situation that Iran seems unable to cope with and could even threaten the existence of the entire regime. At the same time, the groups of the so-called resistance axis have become so weakened, and Israel has achieved so much military success against them that it is unclear what all these groups can do together. On the other hand, Iranian officials know well that silence or a strategic retreat at this stage of the war could completely undermine the Islamic Republic's credibility among its proxy forces. The coming days are ones where the region stands at a crossroads of a widespread war or a potentially permanent retreat of Iran and its allies from any direct confrontation with Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu emphasized after the October 7 attack on Israel that he would change the political map of the region. For someone whose political life and legacy are said to depend on the outcome of this war, there seems to be no way to retreat or concede; just as he has not yielded to the pressures of the U.S. government, his largest ally and supporter, so far. Given these circumstances, this war could be a war that changes the region and has so far brought nothing but defeat for the so-called resistance axis.