Sheikh Qassem’s Full Speech on the Commemoration of Sayyeda Fatima’s Birth Anniv.

Translated by Al-Ahed News, Hezbollah Media Relations

The full speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem at the Sayyeda Fatima Gathering on the occasion of Sayyeda Fatima Zahraa’s [AS] birth anniversary on December 13, 2025.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.

All praise is due to God, Lord of the worlds, and peace and blessings be upon the noblest of creation—our master, beloved, and leader, Abu al-Qasim Muhammad—and upon his pure and immaculate household, his righteous and chosen companions, and all prophets and the pious until the Day of Judgment.

Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you all.

Sheikh Nabil Qaouq: A towering figure

Before we begin today’s ceremony, I will consider that I am still speaking at the previous gathering—the ceremony honoring the martyred scholars—because the great martyred jihadist leader, His Eminence Sheikh Nabil Qaouq, may God be pleased with him, was not mentioned among the names of the martyrs we mentioned. The number should have been sixteen scholars, not fifteen. This was due to an error in a document sent to me by the brothers. I assumed the names listed were the approved ones; I had not read them beforehand nor prepared them properly, so I read them as they were—only to discover afterward that the name of His Eminence Sheikh Nabil had been omitted.

Sheikh Nabil was truly a towering figure. He was always by the side of His Eminence, the Sayyed of the Nation’s Martyrs, Sayyed Hassan, may God be pleased with him—responding, giving, offering. He was a model of caring for the mujahideen, attending to their affairs, and tending to the needs of the people. We regard him as one of the great pillars of action within Hezbollah and the resistance.

May God have mercy on our martyred Sheikh Nabil Qaouq. To his soul and to the souls of all the martyrs, we dedicate the reward of reciting the blessed Surah al-Fatiha, along with prayers upon Muhammad and the family of Muhammad.

The Fatemi Gathering under the Slogan “We Remain Loyal to the Pledge”

Today, we come together at the Sayyeda Fatima Gathering under the slogan “We Remain Loyal to the Pledge.” This is a major gathering linked to the Women’s Action Unit within Hezbollah. The Women’s Action Unit brings together women’s committees and all female workers across various institutions—professional, educational, cultural, and social. In this sense, there is a light organizational framework that connects those working across different fields through their affiliation with the Women’s Action Unit in Hezbollah.

Accordingly, today’s invitation comes from the Women’s Action Unit. They named this gathering the “Lady Fatima Gathering” in reference to Lady al-Zahra, peace be upon her—Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad and Khadija; Fatima, the Lady of the Women of the Worlds—seeking blessings through her memory and following her example, path, and approach.

Today, this gathering is holding its celebration in five locations: at the Sayyed Al-Shuhada Complex in Beirut’s southern suburbs; at the Imam al-Mahdi Schools Hall in Tyre; at the Nabatieh Husseiniya; at the Sayyeda Khawla Husseiniya in Baalbek; and at the Husseiniya of the Imam Ali Cultural Complex in Al-Maaysarah.

Affiliates of the Women’s Action Unit Number in the Tens of Thousands

Of course, this gathering does not include all those affiliated with the Women’s Action Unit. The brothers sent me figures for attendance at the various locations—there are roughly nine branches that make up the Women’s Action Unit—but I chose not to cite specific numbers. Suffice it to say that those affiliated with the Women’s Action Unit are in the tens of thousands. At the same time, it is not limited only to those with formal organizational ties; the wider arena, the community—all women in our milieu who actively engage with Hezbollah—we consider them an inseparable part of this broad and significant women’s movement.

Here, it is only fitting to extend our thanks to the Women’s Action Unit for this major gathering, which reflects this community, this path, and this conviction associated with Hezbollah and the resistance across the fields of jihad and active service.

Sayyeda Zahraa: The Highest Human Ideal

The occasion is the birth of Lady al-Zahra, peace be upon her, who was born on the twentieth of Jumada al-Thani.

Who is Sayyeda Zahraa, peace be upon her? She is the daughter of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his family. She is the role model for women worldwide. The Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, said: “As for my daughter Fatima, she is the Lady of the Women of the Worlds, from the first to the last.” He also said of her: “Indeed, God is pleased by her pleasure and angered by her anger”—in reality because she is pleased only for God and angered only for God, the Exalted. She is a living model of the authentic Muhammadan Islam.

Our Imam Khomeini, may God sanctify his noble soul, designated the day of Lady al-Zahra’s birth, peace be upon her, as International Women’s Day—a day linked to her example as a model for women. He said: “She’s a woman who was an example to all men; a woman who was the exemplar of humanity; a woman who embodied the complete human identity.” Hence this International Women’s Day proclaimed by Imam Khomeini, may God sanctify his noble soul.

This noble lady is the highest human ideal. She is a role model for both women and men—though above all for women. She held a foremost position as a daughter, to the point that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, called her “Fatima, the mother of her father.” As a wife, she was the model of a profound, generous marital relationship, such that the Commander of the Faithful—her husband Ali, peace be upon him—said: “By God, I never angered her nor compelled her in any matter until God, Mighty and Exalted, took her soul; and she never angered me nor disobeyed me. Whenever I looked at her, my worries and sorrows would lift.”

She was the mother who raised the two Imams, Hasan and Hussein, peace be upon them, as well as Zaynab, peace be upon her, and Umm Kulthum. She was a scholar who was able to offer the women of her time so very much. Imam Khamenei, may his shadow endure, said of her: “She is the woman who, in her short lifetime, attained spiritual and intellectual ranks equal to those of the prophets and the saints.”

She was also a woman of principle and position: she stood in the mosque before the Muslims after the passing of the Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, to correct the course and to declare the true stance regarding the caliphate. She was the great lady who expressed the vision of the human being that Islam sought to cultivate.

We gather at the Lady Fatima Gathering under the banner of the example set by Sayyed Zahraa [AS] through the Islamic approach that engages with women as human beings: women in certain domains, and fully human in all others. This stands in contrast to the materialistic view that treats women merely as females—emphasizing appearance, beauty, and the body as the core. That outlook runs counter to the Islamic perspective, which regards women as human beings.

Today, we gather true to the pledge: the pledge of the resistance, the pledge of Hezbollah, and the pledge of His Eminence, the Sayyed of the Nation’s Martyrs, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, may God be pleased with him—the founder of this path and the one who illuminated its many dimensions on the basis of authentic Islamic principles.

At this gathering, dear sisters and honored mothers come together. I say to you with complete sincerity: I am proud of the woman of the resistance—the daughter, the mother, the wife, the grandmother, and all the women who live within our society. You are the banners of dignity, ethics, resistance, and patriotism. You are the pioneers in raising future generations upon integrity and a sound, upright path.

I thank God Almighty that I live in a time shared with this pure group of great women—those who stood firm in confronting the “Israeli” enemy, who confronted moral deviation, and who expressed, in effective, influential, and creative ways, the raising of the banner of truth and uprightness.

Salutations to you, women of the resistance; women of Fatima; women of the great Islam. Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you.

In this context, I would like to offer five pieces of advice:

First: A woman should excel across all arenas—especially in nurturing the family and supporting the resistance.

Second: You are a partner in shaping the future of our homeland, Lebanon, and of the rising generations. Contribute to this mission with the capacities God Almighty has granted you, and be active in cooperation with the women of Lebanon.

Third: Your hijab is a banner of piety. It empowers you to lead in modesty, sincerity, ethics, and human purpose—so preserve it. Today, your place is in the forefront with this hijab; it is the fruit of your faith and commitment.

Fourth: Your role in the resistance—whether as a daughter, a mother, or a wife—has helped achieve these accomplishments. Persevere in this role to ensure the continuity of the fruits borne by the blood of the martyrs, men and women alike, and by the great sacrifices of the wounded—both men and women—and the imprisoned mujahideen.

Fifth: Women’s action is a broad framework for investing talents and does not require a membership card. Wherever you are working along the path of jihad and resistance, you are of us and with us.

These counsels are offered within the framework of Hezbollah’s path: the path of resistance, the path of the Sayyed of the Nation’s Martyrs, the path of guardianship, the path of Islam. Let us remain together, true to the pledge, God willing—and you are worthy of that trust. You are the forge of men, the forge of resistance, and the forge of giving.

Praise be to God, who has enabled women in Lebanon to fulfill this noble role, and for their immense contributions—too many to count.

I will speak about the political situation:

Implementation of the Agreement by the Lebanese Side Is Complete

First: Since the ceasefire agreement was reached on 27 November 2024, we have entered a new phase. This phase supersedes everything that came before it, regardless of opinions or convictions—whether one believes in support or does not, believes in the resistance or does not, or considers the initiative to have been right or wrong. Once the agreement was concluded, it meant that the previous phase had ended and that we were facing a new reality.

This new phase requires a different mode of conduct. The state has become responsible for sovereignty—protecting Lebanon, ending the occupation, and deploying the army. The state is now responsible for working to entrench Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence. The resistance has fully carried out all that was required of it in implementing this agreement and in assisting the Lebanese state.

Therefore, any debate that seeks to bring us back to the pre-agreement period, or that relies on arguments drawn from before the agreement, is of no value, because we are now in a new phase. Accordingly, this phase must be judged on its own terms: who is implementing the agreement and who is not—and what our position and responsibilities should be.

The commander of the UNIFIL forces, General Abaniara, told “Israel’s” Channel 2: “We have no evidence that Hezbollah is reconstituting itself south of the Litani River, and ‘Israel’ is flagrantly violating the ceasefire.” This is a neutral testimony. In any case, UNIFIL itself is not spared by “Israel”—nor the Lebanese army, nor citizens, nor civilians, nor homes—no one is spared.

Accordingly, implementation of the agreement on the Lebanese side is complete, while on “Israel’s” side there has not been a single step toward compliance. We view everything “Israel” has done since the agreement as a continuation of the aggression. This aggression is a danger to Lebanon and a danger to us. I do not say it is a danger to Lebanon alone so that one might argue it does not concern us; no—this “Israeli” aggression is a danger to Lebanon and a danger to us, and I will explain the reason for this later.

They say there is no longer any use for the resistance to own weapons, because they no longer provide protection. It appears there are serious misconceptions at work. Those who make this claim do not understand what resistance means—let alone whether they believe in its existence or necessity.

What is resistance? There is no resistance anywhere in the world whose weapons are stronger than those of the enemy. All resistance movements have modest, light weapons that are not balanced against the overwhelming power of the adversary. Therefore, an imbalance in weaponry is normal and entirely natural.

Deterrence means preventing aggression

Second: The achievements of a resistance are measured by liberation—by what land it has freed. Did it liberate a tract of land, a village, a town, a city? That is considered an achievement of resistance. Deterrence of the enemy, however, is an exception.

In truth, why did Hezbollah attain such a prominent standing regionally and internationally? Because there is no resistance movement anywhere in the world that succeeded in deterring “Israel” from taking action—deterring the enemy from acting—for seventeen years, from 2006 to 2023. Deterrence at this level by any resistance is exceptional. Praise be to God, we were granted this exceptional deterrence.

But the core mission of resistance is liberation. By its very belief—if it holds convictions—resistance is called upon to be ready for sacrifice and to persist, but it is not tasked with preventing aggression. They ask, “How can there be resistance when there is aggression?” My brother, resistance exists to confront aggression. The question put to resistance is: are you prepared to confront aggression or not? When resistance says yes, I am prepared to confront aggression, that is its role. Its role is not to prevent aggression. Aggression will occur, and therefore it must be confronted.

Accordingly, deterrence in the sense of preventing aggression—and thus placing a limit that stops the enemy from undertaking certain actions—is not the function of the resistance. It is the function of the state and the army; they are the ones who must achieve deterrence. The role of the resistance is to support the state and the army. The role of the resistance is liberation. The role of the resistance is to step in when the state does not, and when the army does not.

In other words, the resistance has several roles, all within the framework of defense, liberation, and support for the army and the state. When these are not present, the resistance assumes responsibility, as has happened.

Thus, the role of the resistance is to support, to prevent the enemy from settling in, and to assist in liberation. The protection of Lebanon is the responsibility of the political authority in the first instance, not the responsibility of the resistance.

If the army is unable to provide protection, do we call for disarming it? No. If it is unable to protect, we call for strengthening its arsenal.

If the resistance has not achieved protection and “Israel” is rampaging, do we call for stripping it of its strength? Or do we make use of that strength to support the army and the Lebanese state in confronting the “Israeli” occupier, and to capitalize on that strength to achieve gains?

Our way of thinking must be reconsidered. The Resistance is ready for the fullest cooperation with the Lebanese army; it has helped the state extend its authority smoothly, and it agrees to a defensive strategy that harnesses Lebanon’s strength and its resistance. But it is not prepared to accept any framework that leads to surrender to the “Israeli” entity or to American tyranny. This is the first point.

The Exclusivity of Weapons Is an American–“Israeli” Demand

Second: The state’s problem is not the exclusivity of weapons as a prerequisite for rebuilding this country. The exclusivity of weapons, as it is being advanced today, is an American–“Israeli” demand. Enough with the denial. They say, “The Lebanese want exclusivity of weapons. We raised this demand. It has nothing to do with foreign agendas—it just happens to overlap.” Who are they trying to fool? We all know that this demand—in the form being promoted as “disarming the resistance”—is openly declared and discussed by the Americans and the “Israelis”; the entire world speaks about it. Its meaning is clear: stripping the resistance of its power.

So let us be frank: this is an American–“Israeli” demand. It is not a Lebanese demand—no. If it were truly a Lebanese demand, then this is not its time; its time would come after liberation. But if it is an American–“Israeli” demand, why insist on pressing it? Exclusivity of weapons according to the American–“Israeli” logic amounts to the execution of Lebanon’s strength.

The state’s real problem lies in the sanctions imposed upon it and in rampant corruption. All of this has been driven by the United States since 2019—working to sabotage the country and sow chaos within it, so that it is no longer able to act independently.

Some of those championing the American–“Israeli” demand for exclusivity of weapons—by the American–“Israeli” definition—are themselves agents of discord and pioneers of corruption. They have no right to speak. Let them first put their own houses in order—their ethics, their direction, their political stances, and their sense of national responsibility.

Surrender Will Lead to the Disappearance of Lebanon

The “Israeli” entity issues threats, and for it there is only one path: surrender—so that Lebanon comes under direct “Israeli” control. With surrender, Lebanon would no longer exist. Syria is right before our eyes. Do you really think Syria will recover and set its affairs in order? No, no, no—this is all an illusion. When “Israel” can enter whenever it wants, impose its conditions, keep the Syrians under constant surveillance and bombardment, and subject them to harsh and complex demands, that means there can be no internal stability in Syria.

Surrender will lead to the disappearance of Lebanon. Some say, “If they threaten us, what are we supposed to do?” We do not submit to their threats. If they threaten us, do we immediately panic, step aside, and say, “We won’t respond to your threats”? They reply, “But what if they carry them out—destroy and kill?” We say in response: we defend ourselves, we stand firm, we hold our ground. If they threaten us, do we say, “Please, go ahead”? No—absolutely not.

If they want to fight us, we stand and remain steadfast. And who said they will achieve their goals? They argue, “But if we do that, the cost will be high.” We answer: yes, the cost may be high—but it is far less than the cost of surrender, where nothing remains. With surrender, nothing is left. With defense, horizons open to many possibilities.

There Is an “Israeli” Beast

An analogy comes to mind: if there is a criminal beast lurking in the forest and wanting to attack a village, what do we do? Do we tell the villagers, “Leave your village because this criminal beast wants to enter and we cannot stop it”? No. The entire village gathers—young and old, men and women, everyone, with all available means, with edged weapons and otherwise—to confront the beast, to kill it, to drive it out, to expel it—rather than flee. Our situation is similar. There is an “Israeli” beast. They say, “Give it what it wants.” My brother, that is impossible. It is an aggressor, and it must be driven out.

You know this well. The “Israeli” enemy’s plan after the assassination of His Eminence Sayyed Nasrallah, may God be pleased with him, and all the righteous martyrs—and after striking our capabilities to a certain extent—was clear: to eliminate Hezbollah from existence, to annihilate the resistance altogether. The plan was explicit. But, praise be to God, we fought the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle] and were able to prevent the enemy from achieving that objective—namely, erasing the resistance and Hezbollah.

Today, the “Israeli” enemy itself says that the results of its war on Lebanon are eroding a year after the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle]. Why are they eroding? Naturally, they would—because it did not achieve victory by realizing its goals. Moreover, the very existence of the resistance means the existence of life, of a people standing tall, of blood that bestows dignity. That is the meaning of resistance. It is therefore entirely natural that the results it boasted of are now eroding.

With our unity and steadfastness, war may not occur at all. “Israel’s” servants in Lebanon encourage it against their own country and their own people. In any case, if war does occur, it will not achieve its objectives—and this is clear to us.

We Will Defend Ourselves Even at all costs

Third: If the United States is acting in pursuit of its own interests in Lebanon, be assured it will look for a solution. But if the United States does not care about Lebanon’s existence and prioritizes “Israel’s” interests, then there will be no life for Lebanon. The choice then is surrender—or confrontation and resistance.

You must understand what the United States wants. The “Israelis” did not go to war without an American decision. So let America know—since it is the one managing this file—that we will defend ourselves at all costs. Weapons will not be stripped to fulfill “Israel’s” objectives, even if the entire world were to unite in waging war on Lebanon.

Understand this well: our land, weapons, and spirit form one cohesive whole. Touch one of them—attempt to remove it—and you are touching all three, seeking to strip them all away. That would amount to the eradication of our very existence. We will not allow that, and it will not happen.

We are the sons of Hussein [AS]: “Behold, the son of an illegitimate lineage has placed us between the sword and humiliation—and far be it from us to accept humiliation.”

The Resistance Liberated, Endured, Deterred, and Stopped the Invasion of Lebanon

Fourth and finally: This is the narrative we have presented, and this is our position—one from which we will not retreat. It is the most honorable national stance, one that does not need endorsement from those with a criminal past, a history of sedition, or a record of corruption.

The Resistance has achieved four great accomplishments:

• It liberated the land in 2000.

• It endured in the face of challenges, most notably during the 2006 war.

• It deterred the “Israeli” enemy from 2006 to 2023.

• It prevented the invasion and full subjugation of Lebanon, through the legendary steadfastness of the mujahideen fighters, the honorable families of the resistance, and all those who stood firm against the “Israeli” enemy in the Battle of the Mighty [Uli Al-Baas Battle] and beyond.

Thus, the Resistance has achieved four major accomplishments: it liberated, it endured, it deterred, and it prevented the invasion and subjugation of Lebanon.

Listen to what Barrack, the American strategist for the region, said to Bloomberg: “Israel will not be able to achieve its objectives by trying to crush Hezbollah militarily.” He added: “Killing one fighter will produce ten others; therefore, this cannot be the solution.”

This is the conclusion he ultimately reached. At the outset, he was saying: “Let the army fight, let sectarian strife erupt… we’ll be finished quickly. Why isn’t the state acting?” But he reached a dead end and came to understand the outcome: if they kill us, our blood gives rise to more of us; and if Lebanon surrenders altogether, Lebanon’s role ends, its history is erased, and it is left without a future.

With “Israel”—listen to me carefully—there is no place for Muslims in Lebanon, and no place for Christians in Lebanon. These are the killers of the prophets, repeating the same pattern with the followers of Muhammad and Issa [Jesus].

This is not the first time Barrack has said that he wants to annex Lebanon to Syria. From the beginning, he spoke of a so called “Greater Syrian homeland.” Now he has repeated it again. Pay attention: this is not idle talk. This is discourse meant to lay foundations for the future.

Barrack wants to fold Lebanon into Syria, so that minorities are lost in that vast sea—or forced to emigrate. Know well who would remain and who would not. This is an extremely dangerous project.

Have you not heard that Netanyahu wants a Greater “Israel”? Have you not heard that he wants to redraw the map? Have you not heard that Trump considers “Israel” too small and wants to annex something to it?

If Trump wants to annex Canada, wants to annex the Panama Canal, is today bullying Venezuela, and sees Europe as a collection of weak states of no value, is it difficult for him to give up Lebanon, which is just a small dot on the map, in favor of Syria?

Pay attention, everyone! This project is extremely dangerous. Lebanon might not even remain as a country. These are all preliminary moves. What are they doing? They are trying to weaken or eliminate the resistance as they wish. They leave the Lebanese army with minimal armaments. Notice how they always say, “The Lebanese army has needs.” Why does it have “needs”? Isn’t America supplying it? America provides just enough so that the army can only disarm, not gain real strength. Anything more could empower the army—and they do not want a strong army. Is the army’s role just to disarm and entangle itself in domestic problems? Its role is not to fight or protect! That is how they operate. Why? So Lebanon remains powerless, making it easier for them to impose their solutions and carry out what they want.

The state must stop making concessions. Have you not heard what the American ambassador said? He said: “Negotiations are one thing, and ‘Israel’ continuing its aggression is another.” Who are they trying to fool? Didn’t you understand? Don’t you get what this man is saying? There is a clear logic here: negotiations are an independent track, meaning aggression will continue. What is the point of negotiating without stopping the aggression? It means the goal is to leave Lebanon stripped of power.

I call on the state to reconsider and reassess. Implement the agreement first, and then discuss defensive strategy.

Our position is clear: implement the agreement first, then we can discuss defensive strategy. Do not ask us not to defend ourselves while the state is incapable of protecting its citizens. Let the state provide protection and uphold sovereignty, and then we can lay everything on the table for a strategic defense dialogue and reach the right outcome, God willing.

Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you.