From Pagers and Walkie-Talkies to the Martyrdom of the Leader: Events and Consequence
By Omar Maarabouni
“Injured in the Call of Duty” is the term Hezbollah used to honor those wounded in the pager device explosions and their aftermath. The party frames what outsiders may consider losses as deliberate, justified sacrifices, aligned with the missions entrusted to its fighters. It emphasizes that most of the injured returned to active duty, reflecting two key pillars of the movement’s resistance strategy:
- Faith-driven determination, rooted in religious conviction.
- Experienced leadership, shaped by operational expertise.
It must first be emphasized that the attacks on the pager and walkie-talkie devices fall squarely within the category of terrorist operations, flagrantly violating multiple provisions of international humanitarian law. They constitute war crimes and acts of genocide under international law, based on:
- The failure to distinguish between civilians and combatants
- The disproportionate and excessive use of military force
These acts also contravene numerous other provisions related to human rights and the laws of armed conflict.
For context, we first recall the background before examining the results: On September 17, 2024, Hezbollah faced one of the first unconventional strikes in modern warfare, involving the detonation of thousands of pager devices.
For clarity, a pager is a wireless communication device that receives and displays text or digital voice messages in its most advanced version.
The device emits an alert sound when it receives a signal indicating a call to the person carrying it. Depending on the model’s level of sophistication, it can also retransmit the signal back to the originating caller.
On September 18, one day after the pager device explosions, a detonation targeted specific types of walkie-talkie devices.
The two incidents resulted in the deaths of several Hezbollah members, while the majority of the casualties—numbering in the thousands—were civilians and personnel from various civil units, including civil defense, health authorities, and hospitals.
The two incidents were accompanied by extensive analyses and speculation, and the results of investigations—both technical and intelligence-related—have not been publicly disclosed.
What matters for our discussion is the objective behind the detonation of the pager devices, from both military and administrative perspectives.
In principle, it cannot be denied that what the “Israelis” carried out treacherously was an intelligence achievement with military effects. However, if the attack had been directed against a state and its regular army, the outcome would have been catastrophic. This is because states rely on command-and-control structures that are entirely different from those of liberation movements, which operate through hierarchical sequences and gradual transfer of responsibility from a wounded or a martyred to others who were either unaffected by the strike or were not carrying the pager devices in the first place.
The “Israeli” objective was to strike Hezbollah’s command-and-control system and curb its deterrent capabilities. This was immediately followed by targeting leaders, ultimately aiming at Hezbollah’s Secretary General, His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. The first day alone saw nearly 1,200 airstrikes, indicating the involvement of aerial assets beyond the “Israeli” Air Force, which is capable of executing a maximum of around 400 strikes in 24 hours. This underscores that the battle involved the entire Western military system, and this confrontation remains ongoing.
It is also important to note that, despite the significant imbalance of power and “Israel’s” superiority in the air force and overall technical intelligence, the resistance fighters fought on the front lines for 66 days, preventing five “Israeli” military brigades from taking control of the forward villages. Control was only achieved later, and even then, it extended only a short distance following the ceasefire.
The purpose of mentioning this is to highlight the resistance’s ability to carry out Lebanon’s defense tasks, despite the severe and extensive strikes it endured.
The question now is: Has the resistance restored its readiness and regained the capacity to fulfill its duties once again?
The answer: Nearly 3,500 people were wounded in the pager and walkie-talkie explosions, including around 30 martyrs. Despite this, the resistance managed to conduct a 66-day battle, preventing the “Israeli” army from advancing into southern Lebanon and keeping the fighting confined to the frontlines.
In light of what occurred after the pager and walkie-talkie attacks, and the subsequent martyrdom of leaders—including Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah and, in his stead, the elected Secretary General Sayyed Hashem Safieddine—it can be said that the party restored its capabilities by addressing the gaps created during the battle. Notably, over 90% of those injured in “the Call of Duty” returned to their original duties, a key indicator of recovery.
Moreover, in the months following the ceasefire, the party conducted a thorough review of the events, undoubtedly drawing conclusions on adopting alternative operational patterns across all areas—most importantly, communication systems designed to neutralize or at least mitigate the “Israeli” army’s superiority in air power and intelligence coverage.
