Despite the particularly critical situation, the secretary general of Hezbollah, who has two televised appearances this week -shows great calm.

Scarlett Haddad, L'Orient-Le-Jour

Despite the particularly critical situation, the secretary general of Hezbollah, who has two televised appearances this week -shows great calm.

According to his rare visitors - because Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah receives little these days in order to devote his time to the multiple political, media and military issues which he tackles in person - the head of Hezbollah believes that the party he leads is currently fighting on three fronts: on the internal scene, in Syria and against Israel.

These three fronts are of equal importance to him, although he prefers the stage where he confronts the Israeli enemy. The last incident that occurred in Labbouneh (which lies between Naqoura and Aita ash-Shaab) - the secrets of which have not yet been unfolded all - also confirmed elsewhere what "the Sayyed" has been saying in his speeches:

"Those who believe that by creating problems with resistance on the internal scene, they will succeed to divert it from its main objective to fight against Israel, are wrong."

Through this incident, Hezbollah has shown that its willingness to remain on high alert is justified and that the "wing" which is devoted to fight Israel operates independently.

Moreover, according to some versions, the incursion of the Israeli patrol inside the Lebanese territories was a kind of test to exactly determine whether Hezbollah is actually in a state of permanent alert, or whether its participation in the war in Syria and the pressures it suffered domestically have forced the party to release its vigilance. This flagrant violation by Israel of the provisions of Resolution 1701 and of Lebanese sovereignty shows that Hezbollah has the right to keep its priorities.

Always according to his visitors, Nasrallah is convinced that despite the immense international support Israel enjoys, it is afraid of the Resistance more than ever. Since the beginning of Hezbollah participation in Syria fighting, particularly in al-Qussayr, Israel thereby would have changed all its defense plans. The reason behind this change is simple.

So far, in all confrontations with Israel - which are numerous enough - Hezbollah was in defensive state and fought over its own territory in a favorable environment. But in Syria, especially in al-Qussayr, Hezbollah switched to the offensive state, showing new military capabilities that concern the Israelis.

These are immediately related to the hints  made by Nasrallah in his speech on Galileo to conclude that Hezbollah has plans to try to invade this portion of territory in case of a new confrontation. Thus, they have changed their defense plans on this basis, which represents a positive sign to Hezbollah.

Another positive sign is that Hamas is seeking to come closer to Hezbollah again. At a time when tension between Sunnis and Shiites is constantly rising in the region, this recreated the unity of Sunni and Shiite resistance movements.

Certainly, the Secretary General of Hezbollah does not underestimate the campaign launched against his party. Yet he believes that this is the price to pay.

Regarding those who criticize the intervention in Syria, Hezbollah wonder what would have happened if it didn't intervene: The Syrian opposition would have continued to bomb the Hermel and its surroundings, and Baalbeck and its surroundings, expanding each time the scope of its attacks a little, firstly to link Arsal to northern Lebanon providing a wide buffer zone for the Syrian opposition, and then to push the Shiite population to rebel and to embark a response against the Sunni opponents, plunging the country not only in an extended Syrian war, but also in the sectarian discord.

Scarlett Haddad is Lebanese journalist close to March 8 bloc.

Translated into English by Al-Manar Website