Khaled Mashal, head of Hamas abroad, has received an invitation from several Palestinian figures living in Lebanon to visit Lebanon. It went without saying that the matter would be discussed in the movement’s Politburo, which decided that the visit would take place in mid-December, coinciding with the anniversary of the movement’s founding and the celebration of the Palestinians in the Lebanese camps.
The movement was warmly welcomed by Lebanon’s official bodies, namely the Presidency, the Presidency of the Council of Ministers and the Presidency of Parliament. However, an extraordinary event occurred – that is, Hezbollah informed the Hamas leadership that it would not attend to this visit and would not receive Khaled Mashal. Then Hezbollah urged its supporters, allies and allies of Iran and Syria, such as Wiam Wahhab, Faisal Abdelsater, Nasser Kandil, Asad AbuKhalil and others, to attack Khaled Mashal and defame his reputation and patriotism. They tried to create a rift within the movement by cementing the idea of ââa fundamental disagreement within the Hamas leadership over Mashal’s visit. However, the Hamas leadership is credited for having insisted on continuing the visit despite Hezbollah’s demands. It was a clear message to Hezbollah, Iran and the Syrian regime that Hamas will not accept pressure or dictates from Tehran, Damascus or Hezbollah.
It is worth noting that Hezbollah’s rejection of the visit is a rejection of Khaled Mashal himself, who stood by the Syrian people and their revolution against the murderous autocrat Bashar Al-Assad. This was the position of Hamas as a whole, decided unanimously by its leadership, and not by Mashal alone.
READ: On Relations between the Palestinian Resistance and Iran
When the Hamas embassy reached Hezbollah, it found that the visit was still planned and the movement had not canceled it. A few days before the visit, there was an explosion in the Borj El Chmali camp, in which one of Hamas’ most prominent youth leaders, the martyr Hamza Shaheen, was killed. On the day of the funeral, members of the national security forces of the “Fatah” movement shot fire at the funeral, killing three Hamas youths in Lebanon. The situation became more tense; the warning was understood that the visit must be canceled and abandoned. However, after discussing the matter and assessing the situation, the Hamas leadership insisted on continuing the visit, as there is real leadership among their people in these difficult circumstances.
We have to note here that the decision to visit Khaled Mashal is not a single decision that Mashal made alone without consultation with the party leadership, as the party’s media tried to portray from the moment the visit was announced. Rather, the visit was started by a decision by the Hamas leadership.
When Hezbollah attempts to completely prevent the visit were unsuccessful after Hamas insisted on closing the visit, Hezbollah worked to thwart it by all possible means permitted and prohibited. When Khaled Mashal arrived at Beirut Airport, the media and journalists were surprised that they were prevented from entering the airport and meeting Mashal. Hezbollah not only refused the visit, but announced through its authors that Nasrallah refused to receive Mashal even though Hamas did not ask for a meeting between its secretary general and Khaled Mashal!
Not only did Hezbollah do so, it practiced to thwart the visit by pressuring Parliament President Nabih Berri to cancel the meeting he had previously agreed to and which was on the program of the visit. Hezbollah put the same pressure on Prime Minister Najib Mikati to cancel the meeting; However, Mashal met him at his home, away from the government palace, to avoid embarrassment and to make the meeting a face-to-face visit off the official form.
Likewise, the Mufti of Lebanon was pressured by Syria and Hezbollah to cancel its meeting with Mashal, but the Mufti did not give in to pressure and the meeting took place.
The culmination of Hezbollah’s attempts to thwart Mashal’s visit is the revocation and revocation of the license for the festival commemorating the founding of the Hamas movement. The celebration was planned as a mass rally at which Khaled Mashal would give a speech by Hamas on the occasion.
READ: Why is Khaled Meshaal in Beirut?
Hezbollah also put pressure on the Lebanese media to refuse a meeting with Khaled Mashaal, thinking that it would ruin the visit, but failed to realize that it was firing its slogans and policies, which it was adamant about Tried to embellish on behalf of the alliance with the Palestinian resistance.
Despite all of these obstacles and nasty methods Hezbollah used prior to Khaled Mashaal’s visit, the visit did not fail. Rather, Hezbollah has failed and lost a lot since it was exposed and presented with its ugly racist face; all of her allegations of resistance and her strategic relationship with Hamas against the Zionist enemy have disappeared.
Hezbollah not only wanted to besiege Mashal and let his visit fail, but also wanted to spark internal unrest in Hamas; Hezbollah believed it had succeeded in luring some of Hamas’ leaders into the Iranian camp, removing Mashal from his position as leader of the movement abroad, so that Iranian support for them could continue. This means fueling controversy, but Hamas immediately took notice and rushed to end it by leading the movement’s vice-president, Saleh Al-Aruri, one of the most prominent figures in love with Iran, into that of Khaled Mashal Delegation sent to visit Lebanon.
In summary, Hezbollah besieged not only Mashal, but also itself and Iran. It is not confirmed that Hamas will reassess its hasty positions on Iran after what happened to Hezbollah. These positions have angered many of their proponents in the Arab and Islamic world. Hamas and Khalid Mashal won. While Hezbollah lost, Hassan Nasrallah lost a battle he sparked without his adversary showing hostility towards him or acting against him. Hezbollah lost and Hassan Nasrallah lost politically and morally.
The views expressed in this article are the property of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policies of Middle East Monitor.