Live:
Untold facts: General Qasem Soleimani on 33-day War with Israel
Part one
Part
2 is HERE
For
the first time since being appointed as the Chief Commander of Quds
brigade 20 years ago, General Soleimani has been interviewed
by Khamenei.ir. The
following is the second part of the interview:
General
Soleimani: In
the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. All praise is due to
Allah, the Lord of the Worlds; I am going to link this debate
with the
previous one.
We mentioned and emphasized two points in the previous talk. One was
the reasons why the Israeli regime wanted to stage an ambush to get
the most out of it. The second point we discussed was that the war
was designed in a manner different from all the other previous wars.
The process it wanted to adopt was not the process of a war against
an organization like Hezbollah. Rather, the goal and the process of
the war was to uproot a community in Lebanon and to move this
community to dispersed areas. The victory of the enemy was aimed at
achieving this.
[The
goal was to] get rid of Hezbollah forever, and the prerequisite was
to get rid of a big part of the Lebanese people who lived in a
significant part of the country—not only in the south but also in
Beqaa Valley and the north of Lebanon. Indeed, the regime wanted to
remove this community, which stemmed from the regime’s past
experience in confronting and uprooting the Palestinians from
southern Lebanon, forcing them to live in confined camps. So the
regime displaced the commandment [headquarters] of the Palestinians
from Lebanon. This was the second issue we raised.
The
third point was the reasons for Hezbollah’s action. With this
regard, we said that firstly for returning the Lebanese prisoners
there was no other hope apart from Hezbollah. Secondly, Hezbollah had
no other option but to realize this swap for a swap. Bearing in mind
that the Israeli regime doesn’t understand the language of
diplomacy at all. The language the regime uses in communication with
all the neighbouring countries is the language of coercion. And
except for the language of force, it doesn’t understand any other
languages. Just as it has been the case of dealing with the Arabs.
Another
matter in the first part of our debate that I don’t want to miss
and which is very important is the Arab countries’ support of the
Zionist Regime in this war. This was unprecedented in the history of
the Arab world and the Zionist Regime to openly support the Zionist
regime, as this was previously done discreetly. The Zionist
regime announced it at the highest level, Ehud Olmert, the head of
the Zionist regime. He said that for the first time the Arab
countries supported the Zionist Regime in a war against an Arab
organization. By Arab countries, he didn’t mean all the Arab
countries, but mainly the countries of the Persian Gulf, with Al Saud
regime leading them.
So
here we concluded that Hezbollah had no other way for realizing its
promise and giving a positive response to the Lebanese people’s
expectations, rather than engaging in an operation to make the regime
do this prisoners swap. This was the only possible way, and there
were no other alternatives.
Then
comes the question that the operation was a big operation. It was
more than one single operation. Even regardless of the prerequisites,
it was not a one-day operation, but an operation that needed several
months of hard work. The regime was monitored. Based on the decision
made by Sayyid of the Resistance, Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, as the
chief-commander of the Resistance in Lebanon, the commandment of the
operation was undertaken by the jihadi official of Hezbollah, Imad
Mughniyeh (r.a.), who performed the background measures needed for
the operation, and they were very important. Because it is not the
topic of our discussion, we don’t need to focus on it.
Thus,
the way the operation was performed is important because firstly,
this was an operation consisting of 3 or 4 different steps or
operations. One point I forgot to mention is the time designated for
the operation. The operation needed to be carefully outlined as they
needed to accelerate the pace of reaching the target area.
Tactically, the chance of action should be slim for the enemy while
there should be a bigger opportunity for Hezbollah to take action.
Moreover, fast reversing should be possible.
Therefore,
these nuances were carefully considered prior to the operation. One
of the characteristics of Imad Mughniyeh was his careful attention to
details. Because he usually managed everything himself, the designing
and the executing were all done by himself. So he had done all the
different steps consisting of entering the occupied lands, taking
hostages, taking them out of the carrier, and transferring them
rapidly to a safe place, out of reach of the enemy.
Here
the first part of the talk ends. Now either you can ask questions, or
I can continue my debate. But I think I am invited here so you can
ask questions.
The
Interviewer: The war was launched on that pretext and an intense rage
was conducted on Hezbollah’s bases. How did Lebanon’s Hezbollah
react in the first hours and days of the war? Particularly given that
Israel declared the reason for this barbaric attack as Hezbollah’s
taking captives— and this had normally created a psychological
pressure.
General
Soleimani: Two
points are important to note. Hezbollah was facing a constant
animosity on the side of an enemy that is impossible to compromise
with. That is, in Hezbollah’s view, from religious and political
perspectives, the enemy was impossible to compromise with. For the
enemy, too, it was unacceptable to acknowledge Hezbollah. Therefore,
this hostility is a perpetual hostility. So Hezbollah was always
ready to defend. This was for point one. Hezbollah wasn’t
unprepared and caught surprised; Hezbollah was prepared.
Hezbollah’s
readiness was not only because of this operation as it was always
prepared, however, the operation increased the readiness and
vigilance in other dimensions, but readiness in terms of the
combatants, facilities and equipment was already there. Today it is
the same; that is, Hezbollah is always a hundred percent ready.
Hezbollah’s readiness is not like that of others where there might
be different levels of readiness, announced by yellow or red alert;
or by 30 percent, then 70 percent, and finally 100 percent. No,
Hezbollah was constantly prepared 100 percent. Hezbollah was a
hundred percent ready on that day too, and so is it a hundred percent
ready today. However, the quality of the readiness varies at
different times due to their facilities.
The
second point is that before taking any measures, Hezbollah adopts
security stratagems. So when Hezbollah decided to perform the
operation of capturing the two Zionist soldiers, to attain the
determining and important prisoners swap, first it developed the
necessary preparedness. The preparedness was in two levels: for
confrontation, and for reducing damage.
All
during the time when the Israeli regime took military actions during
the 33-day war, especially during the first hours and days, it
attacked all the targets it had designated on a data bank it had
prepared in advance. So the Zionist regime provided its air force
with the list of all targets prepared in advance and the air force
took action based on the precise geographic coordinates of the
designated Hezbollah bases listed on the data bank. But because of
the stratagems devised by Hezbollah, it suffered the least damage in
terms of human resources and also important facilities; we can even
say it didn't suffer any damage during the beginning hours.
Ten
days after the war began, the enemy announced the data bank was over,
that is, all the determined targets related to Hezbollah were hit.
But it was later revealed that thanks to the measures and innovation
taken by Hezbollah before commencing its operation, as well as
regarding the prediction of the enemy’s response, whatever Israel
had done contradicted their own assumptions.
This
was the first point. The second point is that, regarding the
prediction of the war and given the previous cases of reactions,
usually, such events would never a lead to war. Normally there was a
one-day reaction with some intensity, targeting a few points or areas
of the Zionist regime and then stopping. But this time, from the very
early minutes, all the operation that was designed in advance was put
to action completely. That is, they started to perform the secret
plan they wanted to execute all at once.
Of
course, now, we say it was a secret plan. I will explain later, we
concluded this about two weeks after the war began, guided by our
faith rather than by information-- I will explain how. It was almost
the final days of the war that we knew by information that the enemy
had a plan in advance and had wanted to catch us by absolute
surprise, and we understood this mainly because the enemy itself
announced it. So, very fast, the war became a complete war, like a
huge warehouse of explosives and gunpowder that explodes all at once
by one spark. And this major explosion which was
named the 33-day war unfolded.
Interviewer:
What was the opinion inside Iran? For such an important event, it was
expected that the Leader would hold a meeting, inviting senior
officials, where discussions are raised and a decision is made. Were
there any opposing views among the officials? Or they all unanimously
agreed that [Iran] should support Hezbollah at that time taking the
same approach?
[Where
were you when the war unfolded?]
General
Soleimani: Before
answering this question, I should say that on the first day the event
happened, I returned to Lebanon. I was in Syria, but all the roads
were under attack, especially the only official road which was the
Lebanon-Syria cross border road. It was constantly bombarded by
planes and the jets wouldn’t leave it a second. So we contacted a
friend through a safe line and Imad came to pick me up to move me
Syria to Lebanon through a rad where we walked a part of it and drove
through the rest. At that time, the main spectrum of the war included
a focus on the administrative buildings of Hezbollah, the majority of
the areas in the south, and some points, in the north and center.
Toward the end of the first week, I was asked to go to Tehran to
report on the war. I returned via a secondary road. At that time the
Supreme Leader was in Mashhad. I went there to meet him at a meeting
held between the heads and the senior officials of the three branches
of power which were also members of the National Security Council and
worked mostly in security and intelligence sectors.
The
Interviewer: in Mashhad?
General
Soleimani: Yes,
in Mashhad. I reported on the events. My report was a sad bitter one.
That is, my observations didn’t reflect any hope for victory. The
war was a different one; a technological and precise war. 12-storey
buildings were knocked down by a bomb. The targets were chosen with
precision. In the meantime, when the war’s target had moved from
Hezbollah to the Shia community, in general, the situation was
totally different in Shia-populated village from a village where our
Christians or Sunnis brothers were living. That is, in one place
people were safe and had their normal lives, smoking their hookahs,
whereas, in another place, thousands of bullets were fired. I
reported these in that gathering.
Prayers
time arrived, and everyone left to perform ablutions (wudu). So did
I. The Leader performed wudu; his sleeves were rolled up; on the way
back, he pointed to me, asking me to go closer, and I did. He said,
‘did you want to tell me something about your report?’ I said,
‘no, I just wanted to describe the facts.’ His Eminence held, ‘I
know. But didn’t you want to add anything else?’ I said, ‘no.’
We
performed prayers and returned to the meeting. My report was over.
His Eminence started to speak. He mentioned several points. He said
that, the facts I had reported regarding the war were true, and that
the war was a difficult and very intensive war. He continued: ‘but
I assume this war is like the Battle of the Trench.’ His Eminence
recited the ayahs (Quranic verses) about the Battle of the Trench
[khandaq] –also called the Battle of the Confederates [ahzab]. He
described the status of the Muslims and the companions of the
Prophet, as well as the spirit of combatants. He then stated, ‘I
believe that the victory of this war will be like the victory of the
Battle of the Trench.’
I
was daunted; because I didn’t have such a perspective from the
military point of view. I secretly wished the Leader hadn’t said
that the war would end in a victory--the Battle of the Trench was the
big victory of the prophet (p.b.u.h.). He then mentioned two points
which were very important.
His
Eminence stated, ‘it seems to me that Israel had prepared this
project in advance, and wanted to conduct a raid to destroy Hezbollah
by launching a surprise attack. The action of Hezbollah—capturing
two Zionist soldiers—disturbed the surprise plan. I didn’t have
this information; Sayyid didn’t have this information; Imad didn’t
have this information. None of us had this information.
I
always believe and say to the friends, based on the twenty-year
experience of working with the Leader, I well saw in the Leader how
piety (taqwa) can result in sagacity and deep insight in one’s
words, heart and wisdom. Therefore, now whenever the Leader raises
suspicion about something, I am sure that the matter will finally
fail somehow; and whenever the Leader reassures us about something, I
know that it will have good results.
This
remark was very promising for me—as it helped Sayyid a lot, and
relieved him. The beginning of the war wasn’t so distressing, but
the end was appalling. The number of martyrs and ravages rocketed.
Some of Sayyid’s remarks impressed me. I found this remark (the
Leader’s) very good for him. Because some might mal-intend and say
‘Why did Hezbollah endanger the whole Shia community by capturing
two Zionists?’ But this perspective was promising and important,
because accordingly, by seizing two captives, Hezbollah had saved not
only itself from complete destruction, but also the Lebanese
nation.
He
also mentioned a third point which had a spiritual aspect. He
recommended the Hezbollah members to recite the supplication Jowshan
Saqir. Among the Shias, Joshan Kabir is often
recommended. Jowshan Saqir is not very popular, at least
among the masses-the elites are different. The Leader explained that
we shouldn’t doubt the effectiveness of this supplication. It’s
like when some say, by reciting four Towhid verses or the Fatihah
verse, the problems will be solved. His Eminence said that Jowshan
Saqir is for a person in a desperate situation who wants to
speak with God. On the same day, I returned to Tehran and then to
Syria.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.