Opponents Of Hizbullah In The Arab World: The Funeral Of Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah Spelled The Death Of The Organization; Lebanon Must Disarm It

On February 23, 2025, Hizbullah held a mass funeral for slain Hizbullah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli airstrike in September2024, and for Hashem Safi Al-Din, who died the same way just days after he was appointed as Nasrallah's successor. Both Hizbullah and its opponents viewed the funeral as a way of gauging the organization's standing and the level of support for it in Lebanon and beyond, and as a kind of informal referendum on its path and its ideology, following its bitter war against Israel. In advance of the funeral, Hizbullah and its supporters made significant efforts to ensure maximum participation in it, of both political leaders and the general public from the country and abroad. Representatives of the organization met personally with senior Lebanese officials and invited them to attend, and Hizbullah leaders, headed by  Secretary-General Na'im Qassem, repeatedly urged the public to participate as well. In a speech he delivered a week before the funeral, Qassem stressed the importance and symbolic significance of the event: "We want this funeral to be a show of support and affirmation of our course and path… I call on as many of our supporters as possible to attend, so people will see that Hizbullah and the Islamic resistance are strong and present on the ground and that whoever thinks of exerting pressure on them or hatching plots against them will not succeed…"[1]

In the speech Qassem delivered at the funeral itself – which  was transmitted by video since he did not attend, apparently for security reasons – he reiterated that the mass participation in the funeral was "an expression of loyalty" for Hizbullah the likes of which has rarely been seen in the history of Lebanon.[2] Hizbullah's Al-Manar television channel called the day of the funeral "The Day of Loyalty," and declared that "the human flood [that attended the funeral] renewed the covenant with the martyred Nasrallah and Safi Al-Din."[3] Two days after the funeral, the pro-Hizbullah Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar wrote that the event had been more than a funeral and that people had voted with their feet, adding that the tremendous participation and the exemplary organization proved that Hizbullah had managed to recover despite the heavy losses it sustained in the war.[4]

Despite the vast attendance, estimated at 700,000 to 900,000 people,[5] it appears that Hizbullah failed in its attempt to imbue the funeral with a national air. Many of the Lebanese leaders who had been personally invited by Hizbullah representatives chose not to attend. These included Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and the country's Prime Minister Nawwaf Salam, both of whom sent representatives in their stead, respectively Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who heads the Amal Movement and is close to Hizbullah, and Labor Minister Mohamad Haider, who is Hizbullah's representative in the government. Even some senior officials who are considered  Hizbullah allies failed to attend, such as former president Michel Aoun; former prime minister Najib Mikati; Faisal Karami, head of the Al-Karama Movement, and Tony Frangieh, an MP for the Marada Movement. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt did not attend either, nor did former prime ministers Sa'ad Hariri and Fouad Siniora, who are considered opponents of Hizbullah but were nevertheless invited.[6]

According to opponents of Hizbullah, the funeral of these two leaders spelled the death of the organization and of the path imposed by its patron, Iran. Seeing the absence of Lebanon's leaders as a sign that the new regime and many others in Lebanon wish to distance themselves from Hizbullah, they expressed hope that this would mark the start of a new era for Lebanon that would "reflect the hopes and aspirations of the Lebanese people."[7] Several of these figures called on Lebanon to take advantage of the weakness of Hizbullah and its Iranian patron to disarm the organization and combat its extremist ideology, so as to prevent it from regaining its strength. Others urged the state to prosecute Hizbullah operatives who have been involved in crimes against Lebanon but who have so far enjoyed immunity due to the organization's ability to impose its will on the country.

The following are some of the responses from Hizbullah's opponents to the funeral held for Nasrallah and Safi Al-Din.

Funeral of Hizbullah secretary-generals Hassan Nasrallah and Hashem Safi Al-Din, who were killed in Israeli airstrikes (Image: Al-Akhbar, Lebanon, February 25, 2025)

Nasrallah's Funeral Was The Burial Of The Entire Resistance Axis And The Birth Of A Sovereign Lebanon

As mentioned, Hizbullah opponents stated, with more than a little schadenfreude, that Nasrallah's burial spelled the death of Hizbullah and of the entire resistance axis, which sustained heavy blows in the war against Israel, and heralded the birth of Lebanon as a sovereign state. On the day of the funeral, Lebanese journalist Tony Boulos posted on his X account: "Today, a black era in the history of the homeland was buried, an era in which the state was overthrown and dozens of brave patriots were assassinated. A new Lebanon has been born and a new east is dawning."[8] Boulos also addressed this issue in the Saudi daily Independent Arabia, writing: "Nasrallah has been buried, along with the slogans of the conflict with Israel and the amassing of weapons, as well as the double-state [concept] that Hizbullah imposed for decades. All the theories Hizbullah used to justify its weapons, such as the theory about deterrence, the balance of terror and the elimination of Israel, have been refuted and have no place in the present stage. This change spells the end of the era of illegal arms and the start of a new age: the age of Lebanese sovereignty based on a single country that is not ruled by a militia…"[9]

An X account called "No to Iranian Occupation" posted: "The era of lies, deceit and insulting people's intelligence is over. Nasrallah is dead and the resistance died with him. Hizbullah is done for. The age of the [Hizbullah] mini-state is over and the age of the [Lebanese] state has begun."[10]  Jean Feghali, news editor at the Lebanese LBCI channel, wrote: "[Nasrallah] is dead, and with him died the Iranian plan, [which has been consigned to] the dustbin of history."[11]

Cartoon in UAE daily: "The Iranian plan" departs with Nasrallah (Al-Arab, UAE, February 26, 2025)

Despite The Mass Attendance, The Funeral Reflects Hizbullah's Weakness

Hizbullah's opponents played down the significance of the vast attendance at the funeral,  estimated at 700,000 to 900,000 people. They argued that the numbers do not reflect the state of the organization or the scope of support for it in Lebanon, because most of the participants were from Hizbullah's support base and many senior leaders were absent, including Hizbullah allies.

Shi'ite Lebanese journalist Nadim Koteich wrote on the Asasmedia.com website that "Hizbullah wanted the sendoff for Nasrallah, its historic leader, to be more than a funeral: it wanted it to be a imposed referendum on its legitimacy and on the entire perception of the resistance, in complete disregard of the war, which ended in a painful military and political defeat." However, Koteich said, Hizbullah itself knows that the mass attendance makes no difference to the essence of the crisis it is experiencing. Citing the examples of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, which collapsed despite their ability to gain the support of the masses, he added: "Hizbullah is naturally entitled to deny the scope of the damage sustained by its political and military infrastructure and to refrain from seeing the funeral on Sunday as a funeral for its plan.  [But] the Lebanese people are entitled to believe that [the funeral] was not a declaration of Hizbullah's rebirth, but [just] a fleeting moment of denial and an attempt to put off dealing with the reality: that the age of wars is over and will never return…"[12]

Journalist Ali Hamada wrote that the vast attendance at the funeral "was natural, given [Nasrallah's] importance and the role he played in the past three decades, in [both] Lebanon and the region," but noted that only one sector of Lebanese society attended the funeral, namely Shi'ite Hizbullah supporters, while the other sectors – Christians, Druze and Sunnis – "boycotted" it. He stated that their absence expressed "the isolation of [Hizbullah's] path and plan" and "a breach between the vast majority of the Lebanese people… and everything Nasrallah and his organization represent in Lebanon."[13]

Some maintained that Hizbullah's weakness is also evident from the circumstances in which the funeral was held: five months after the assassination, during which Israel established its freedom of movement in Lebanon by continuing its attacks in various parts of the country and by making flyovers, even during the funeral itself. Syrian journalist Ibrahim Hamidi, executive editor of the Saudi magazine Al-Majalla, wrote: "Hizbullah and its patron Iran  managed to organize a funeral for the organization's official [Nasrallah] and for the entire axis, and to move [Nasrallah] from 'the secret temporary location' to a permanent and public [burial] place, five months after the assassination, and [only] after brokered negotiations and understandings with Israel [allowed the funeral to take place]. True, tens of thousands came to the Camille Chamoun Sports City Stadium in the Hizbullah stronghold of the southern Dahiyeh carrying pictures of Nasrallah and yellow flags. But [during the ceremony] the Israeli planes did not leave the Beirut skies, reminding [everyone] of the understandings [reached regarding the] funeral and the new Lebanese reality. It is therefore clear why Hizbullah's current secretary-general, Na'im Qassem, did not manage to attend the funeral… but addressed the crowd via video from an unknown location."

Dismissing Qassem's warning that Hizbullah's "restraint" in the face of the continued Israeli attacks must not be viewed as weakness, Hamidi wrote that the organization's weakness is evident from its inability to impose its candidates for president and prime minister, and from the fact that it agreed to the ceasefire. He added, "There is no doubt that the aim of Iran and Hizbullah in organizing a popular funeral for Nasrallah was to demonstrate how much strength they still maintain after Hizbullah emerged weak from last year's war with Israel, in which most of its commanders and thousands of its fighters were killed… But the fact is that the funeral [only] revealed the diseases that afflict the Iranian axis…"[14]

Hizbullah's Weakness Should Be Used To Disarm It And Cement The Rule Of The State

Several of Hizbullah's opponents warned that, despite the heavy losses and damage suffered by the organization and the entire resistance axis, they still refuse to acknowledge their defeat and the failure of their path and are working in various ways to restore their standing. They therefore urged the Lebanese leaders to prevent Hizbullah from recovering and to reestablish the sovereignty of the state, inter alia by disarming the organization, preventing it from  disseminating its extremist ideology, and even by making the reconstruction of South Lebanon contingent upon the surrender of its weapons.

Former Lebanese president Michel Suleiman said after the funeral: "…The time has come to close the book on [Hizbullah's] mini-state within the [Lebanese] state and on the decision to [wage] wars in every direction and in every arena. It's time for the state, and the state alone, to be responsible for sovereignty and for foreign policy, and for weapons to be [only] in the hands of the Lebanese army. It is therefore necessary to disarm the militias that exist outside the legitimate frameworks…"[15]

Fadi Karam, an MP for the Lebanese Forces, a Christian party, said: "The funeral was an Iranian message to Lebanon and [elements] outside the country, and the Iranian regime is now playing for time… Hizbullah still refuses to hand its affairs over to the Lebanese state and is trying to survive this difficult period with minimum damage…" Noting that the state is responsible for extending its sovereignty over all its territory, and is solely entitled to negotiate, hold weapons, defend its borders and liberate land, he warned Hizbullah: "If [Hizbullah Secretary-General] Sheikh Na'im Qassem continues to be stubborn and refuse to disarm [his organization] south of the Litani river, he can forget about rebuilding…"[16]

Lebanese journalist Tony Boulos called on Lebanon to take advantage of Hizbullah's present weakness to combat its extremist ideology and its indoctrination of children. He wrote on X: "…Lebanon is on the cusp of a new era. We must not leave the children in the grip of this monstrous extremist ideology that leads them to perdition and death and fills them with hate for the other, [causing] a rift in society. It's time to liberate minds from extremism and build a homeland dominated by awareness, openness and peace." Boulos added a cartoon showing a hand emerging from Hizbullah's grave and grabbing a child by means of the organization's "program for the young jihad fighter."[17]   

Hizbullah Activists Must Be Prosecuted For Their Crimes

In addition to the demand to disarm Hizbullah, some also called on the organization to apologize for its crimes against the Lebanese people, and called on the authorities to stop overlooking these crimes and put Hizbullah activists on trial. Lebanese journalist Maryam Sayf Al-Din wrote that Hizbullah has kept the state from doing this and that, in every police station in the country there are Hizbullah representatives who prevent its operatives from being investigated. "It's impossible," she added, "to speak about extending the state's sovereignty over all its territory as long as this continues and there is no persistent effort to free the security forces from Hizbullah's control. It is impossible to enact the sovereignty of the state without ending the immunity granted to Hizbullah's operatives… Everybody must be subject to the law, as President Joseph Aoun said. Lifting this immunity will remove a barrier that has been placed between the state and a large sector of Lebanese citizens who refrained from turning to the state for judicial services [because] they were under Hizbullah's control."[18]  

Lebanese journalist Mustafa Al-Awik urged Hizbullah "to announce directly and officially that it accepts the authority of the Lebanese state and its constitution, hand its illegitimate weapons over to the Lebanese army and surrender all its members who were involved in crimes inside Lebanon, so they can be put on trial. Hizbullah," he added, "must reexamine its conduct against Lebanon, understand where it erred and caused damage, and apologize to all the Lebanese for its actions against them, otherwise there will be no coexistence with it and we will  repeat the mistakes made after the civil war… [With Nasrallah's funeral], Hizbullah buried a major part of its history, in which it was master [of Lebanon], and entered a new era, in which it is equal to all [other] Lebanese and engages in party politics without the force of weapons and without [all sorts of] enticing plans, imaginary legends, fictitious programs and cover-ups of corruption…"[19]