October 7, 2026
Alan Sarkis – Call of the Nation
The “reference” paper fell before the last shell. The story that began on October 7, 2023, at the Gaza Gate, ended after Lebanon turned from the “arena of support” on the second day into the arena of paying the price. Three years passed, during which the equations changed, the calculations were revealed, and Hezbollah emerged from the war burdened with what it had not expected: military losses, political retreat, a exhausted environment, and an image that no longer resembled the one it had built over the years.
On October 7, Hamas began its surprise operation inside Israel, killing about 1,200 people and capturing 251 people. Israel responded with the Gaza War. The next day, Hezbollah opened the southern front, announcing that its missiles would remain linked to the Gaza Strip. The decision was not Lebanese, was not issued by the state, and was not based on calculations of Lebanon’s ability to endure.
The front quickly turned into a war of attrition. Southerners were displaced, agricultural seasons were disrupted, villages were damaged, and the Lebanese economy lost what remained of its ability to withstand. Then the pagers went off. Communication networks fell. The leaders of the first row were assassinated. Then Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah fell. Then something fundamental broke in the image of the “party,” the image of the organization that knows everything and sees everything and that no one can reach.
The second war came to reveal what was more dangerous. Hezbollah entered into a confrontation with support for Iran, while Lebanon was still catching its breath. The Lebanese once again paid the price for a decision they did not make. The number of displaced people increased, the area of destruction and occupation expanded, and infrastructure was hit, while the “party” itself retreated to a defensive position. It is no longer a war in which he determines the pace, but rather a battle in which he tries to prevent his losses from expanding.
The decline has reached the ground. The “party” left the south of the Litani by force. Israel advanced to sites and heights of strategic value, and reached Ali al-Tahir, while Jabal al-Rayhan and Iqlim al-Tuffah loom large in the upcoming military calculations. What is more dangerous is that the response no longer resembles a threat. Israel strikes, moves, advances, and imposes its rhythm, while the “party” searches for the limits of the possible.
The decline was also revealed in politics. Hezbollah entered the Council of Ministers, but did not bring with it the influence of the previous stage. Nasrallah, who held the keys to the internal game, was absent. The Assad regime, which provided the party with strategic depth, fell, and Iran received blows that made it preoccupied with its internal and regional calculations. The “axis of resistance” has declined from a project that is said to change the region to an axis that is trying to piece together what remains of it.
The sag has reached the environment. Resources are tight. Needs increased. Losses accumulated. Aid and slogans are no longer able to hide a heavy social and economic reality. On the other hand, the gap between the promise and the result was revealed. The “party” talked about occupying Galilee, reaching Jerusalem, and liberating Palestine. None of that happened. Three years of “assignment” ended in a decline on the ground, an erosion of influence, an exposure of the security and military structure, and a country that paid the bill for two wars in which it had no decision.
The review was supposed to start from here. The party was supposed to ask: Where did we go wrong? What did we lose? Why did Lebanon pay the price? But he didn’t ask.
He chose to continue the same narrative, turning loss into victory, defeat into “steadfastness,” and retreat into “repositioning.”
Here lies the biggest irony. After Nasrallah used to say that Israel is weaker than a spider’s web, the question today has become different: What remains of “the party” after all the threads around which it wove its legend have been shaken? Perhaps the third anniversary of the attribution does not need a new speech. You just need a little truth.
