Lebanon's Hezbollah hails Iran's 'divine victory' over Israel
Supporters of Lebanon's Hezbollah wave flags during a rally outside the Iranian Embassy in Beirut on June 25.
Image: Haitham Moussawi / AFP
Lebanese militant group Hezbollah on Wednesday hailed what it called its ally Iran's victory over Israel after 12 days of war, declaring it the start of a "new historical phase".
In a statement, Hezbollah offered its "most sincere congratulations" to the Islamic republic, praising its "glorious divine victory".
The victory, it said, was "manifested in the precise and painful strikes it launched" against Israel, as well as "the lightning response to the American aggression against its nuclear facilities".
On Sunday, the United States struck Iranian nuclear facilities following days of Israeli strikes, but a classified intelligence report concluded the attacks had only set back Tehran's nuclear programme by a few months.
"This is nothing but the beginning of a new historical phase in confronting American hegemony and Zionist arrogance in the region," Hezbollah said.
Hezbollah, which fought a devastating war against Israel last year, expressed its "firm and unwavering support for the Islamic republic, its leadership and people," emphasising that "any surrender, subservience or concession will only increase our enemies' arrogance and dominance over our region".
Israel launched a major bombardment of Iranian nuclear and military facilities on June 13, as well as targeted attacks on top scientists and commanders.
The Israeli strikes killed at least 627 civilians and wounded more than 4,800, according to the Iranian health ministry.
Iran's retaliatory attacks on Israel have killed 28 people, according to Israeli figures.
Later Wednesday, hundreds of people rallied outside the Iranian embassy in Beirut, responding to a call from Hezbollah to celebrate "the culmination of the struggle and sacrifices" of the Iranian people "who triumphed over the Israeli-American aggression".
Ahmed Mohebbi, 42, who was among the crowd, said: "We are very happy about this victory that Iran achieved, despite the hits it took and attacks by America and Israel to prevent it from continuing its nuclear programme.
"Our steadfastness is a victory," he told AFP.
The head of Hezbollah's parliamentary bloc Mohammed Raad said in a speech that Iran was "a regional deterrent force, like it or not."
"It proved this with its steadfastness" and by standing up against "a tyrannical enemy who sought to impose its hegemony on the whole region," he said.
Iran has backed Hezbollah since the group's founding in the 1980s, providing it with financial and military support.
The group was severely weakened in its latest confrontation with Israel, which killed most of its top leadership and destroyed much of its arsenal.
AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
19 minutes ago
- IOL News
The Truth Behind the US and Israel's Military Strikes on Iran
US military claims victory in strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Image: AFP The United States of America is applauding itself for its strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. This is despite evidence that the Middle Eastern country was not developing nuclear weapons. Even if Iran was developing such armaments, why do the two states want to deter this? Additionally, the US which is the only nation in the world that has used two nuclear bombs, killing hundreds of thousands of people has appointed itself as the arbiter of which countries should or should not have them. Civil nuclear engineer expert Hugo Kruger said that the official position of the intelligence agencies, the CIA, Mossad, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is that Iran does not have a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programme. "Iran however has a civilian nuclear programme and a policy of strategic ambiguity. It does enrich uranium, but there is no serious bomb programme under construction. There is a long history around this going back to the Iran-Iraq war when Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on Iran. "As a consequence, when Ayatollah Khomeini came to power, he put fatwa (religious ruling), against WMDs, that is to say chemical and nuclear weapons," said Kruger. More than a decade ago, Khomeini asserted that Iran would not be building nuclear weapons. "Nuclear weapons neither ensure security, nor do they consolidate political power, rather they are a threat to both security and political power. "The events that took place in the 1990s showed that the possession of such weapons could not even safeguard a regime like the former Soviet Union. And today we see certain countries which are exposed to waves of deadly insecurity despite possessing atomic bombs," Khomeini said. Kruger pointed out that Israel is hypocritical as it is reported to have between 100 and 200 nuclear weapons, and Benjamin Netanyahu is related, for example, to the Uranium Smuggling Mafia (smugglers of uranium and plutonium). This is according to the FBI's declassified Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy files. "As for Israel, I do not believe that they have done anything significant, the real nuclear technology is in the head of Iranians, and they have domesticated it. Meaning even if they bomb the place to ashes, the people will be able to rebuild it, because they have human capital," Kruger said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading For political analyst, Siyabonga Ntombela, Israel and the US don't think Iran should have nuclear weapons because it poses existential threat for both countries. "No country deserves to be bombed especially if they have not used the nuclear weapons at all. The US claims to promote democratic ideals and it is in such times that those beliefs are put to the test. International diplomatic engagements must ensue to ensure minimum casualties and unnecessary loss of lives," Ntombela argued. Ntombela went on to say that the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (an international treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology), must be understood and executed in an open and fearless manner for all countries, both with and without nuclear capability. "Israel has nuclear (weapons), why does it have it and other surrounding states do not have? Is it for self-preservation? Possibly but how do other states who would like to be safe view this double standard." Trump also appears to have undermined his own intelligence intel. In March, the US' Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, reported before Congress that the Middle Eastern country was far from the capability of building a nuclear bomb. "The Intelligence Community (IC) continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khomeinei has not authorised the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003... Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons," Gabbard said.
IOL News
32 minutes ago
- IOL News
Iran, Israel, and the Death of Nuclear Diplomacy
Supporters of Lebanon's Hezbollah hold pictures Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during a rally outside the Iranian Embassy in Beirut's southern suburbs, to celebrate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, on June 25, 2025. Iran's top security body on June 24 said the Islamic republic's forces had "compelled" Israel to "unilaterally" cease fire, adding that they remained "on high alert" to respond to "any act of aggression". For decades, the Middle East has been treated not as a region of sovereign states, but as a chessboard for Western fantasies and Israeli security obsessions. The June 13 Israeli assault on Iran was no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention. It was not a warning shot. It was a culmination. Over 100 Iranian targets were struck, including nuclear facilities and military command centers. Fourteen nuclear scientists, twenty senior officers in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were taken out in one coordinated wave. And yet, the international community offered little more than bored platitudes. No outrage. No consequences. Just the sound of power rearranging the truth. This is not about nuclear weapons. It never was. Every credible intelligence body, from the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA) to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has affirmed that Iran is not building a bomb. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal, signed in 2015, placed Iran under the most rigorous inspections in modern non-proliferation history. What Iran wanted was recognition, respect, and leverage. What it got was betrayal. In 2018, Trump tore up the deal, unleashing his maximum pressure campaign under the delusion that sanctions would spark surrender. Instead, they hardened resistance. By 2025, Iran had over 400 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 percent. Still no bomb. But far more bargaining power. What, then, does Israel want? Officially, to 'neutralise' Iran's nuclear capabilities. In reality, to fracture the Islamic Republic beyond repair. The logic is colonial in form and neocolonial in execution: if you can't dominate a strong Iran, then dismember it. Sabotage its infrastructure. Assassinate its scientists. Seed unrest. Push it to lash out and then use the response as justification for open war. It's regime change by a thousand cuts. And this strategy didn't come out of thin air. It was sketched out decades ago in A Clean Break, a 1996 policy memo crafted for Netanyahu by American neoconservatives. The plan was explicit: destabilise hostile regimes—first Iraq, then Syria, finally Iran. Netanyahu never let go of that script. For over twenty years, he's warned the world that Iran is 'weeks away' from a nuclear bomb. And for twenty years, it's been a lie. But this lie has built policy. It's armed lobbyists. It's shaped wars. It's bled billions. And now, it's landed us here—on the edge of regional implosion. The June 13 strike was timed to kill diplomacy. Just two days before, U.S.-Iran nuclear talks were scheduled to resume. But instead of negotiation, Iran got airstrikes. Instead of dialogue, deception. Trump—back in the Oval Office and flanked by pro-Israel hawks was briefed on the operation beforehand. He let it happen. Then he praised it. What followed was predictable: Iran struck back with precision. Ballistic missiles and drones rained down on Israeli cities—Tel Aviv, Haifa, and strategic installations, overwhelming the famed Iron Dome. The myth of Israeli invincibility cracked. And suddenly, Netanyahu was not the master of the chessboard, but the gambler on the verge of losing everything. His so-called 'once and for all' doctrine, the idea that overwhelming force can permanently solve political complexity, was exposed for what it is: a fantasy soaked in blood. Israel continues to act not as a defender of stability, but as a revolutionary force in the region. A rogue state with nuclear weapons it refuses to declare. A democracy in name, but increasingly an apartheid state in practice. Its endgame? A Middle East where only Israel has nuclear arms. Where neighbours are weak, fragmented, and pliable. Where the U.S. plays enforcer while Tel Aviv dictates the script. This is not about survival. It's about supremacy. The deeper danger lies in what this strategy risks unleashing. Because for all of Israel's obsession with destroying the IRGC, what rises in its place may be far worse: a decentralised web of militant networks, loyal not to states but to ideology. Iran has never been a pushover and when cornered, it becomes more resourceful, not less. Let's be clear, Iran is not isolated. It has survived sanctions, assassinations, cyberattacks, and global smear campaigns. It has cultivated asymmetric alliances, from Hezbollah to the Houthis and has proved that it can retaliate far beyond its borders. The June retaliation made that clear. Iran is not Iraq. It is not Libya, and it is not going away. Netanyahu's gamble is backfiring. The gamble that Iran could be intimidated, that Trump could be manipulated and the U.S. military baited into doing Israel's dirty work, is failing while the world watches as three scenarios loom: a grinding war of attrition; a dangerous U.S. intervention; or full-scale regional escalation with multiple non-state and state actors entering the fray. If Hezbollah, or militias in Iraq and Yemen jump in, it won't just be a war. It'll be a systemic rupture. As for Washington, the question is no longer whether it has influence, but whether it has the will to use it wisely. Trump is boxed in. He knows war will affect the markets. His base wants out of the Middle East. His generals warn against escalation. But his hawks are circling, and Tel Aviv is calling in the favours. There's no clean break here. No silver bullet. No reset button. Just a slow unraveling of order, held together by propaganda and inertia. But sooner or later, the center cannot hold, because this is where it ends: not with a nuclear Iran, but with the nuclear hypocrisy that's allowed Israel to dictate the rules of the game while breaking every one of them. Not with Iranian collapse, but with the collapse of the illusion that violence brings stability. And perhaps that's the greatest tragedy of all. That the region is not dying from too much resistance, but from too little courage to resist the cycle itself. By Chloe Maluleke Associate at the BRICS+ Consulting Group Russian & Middle Eastern Specialist ** MORE ARTICLES ON OUR WEBSITE ** Follow @brics_daily on X/Twitter & @brics_daily on Instagram for daily BRICS+ updates
The Citizen
an hour ago
- The Citizen
Royal runaway: Zuma's daughter flees Eswatini palace after just months of marriage
Jacob Zuma is apparently refusing to meet with King Mswati's royal envoy dispatched to Nkandla to negotiate the return of Nomcebo. King Mswati III's 16th wife and former South African president Jacob Zuma's daughter, Nomcebo Zuma, is said to have abandoned her royal marriage to the Eswatini monarch. The king's 22-year-old junior wife, known as Inkhosikati LaZuma in the tiny kingdom, is said to have left the palace, allegedly complaining that she could no longer bear being in a polygamous marriage where she 'goes for months without seeing her husband'. The ruler of the last remaining absolute monarchy in Africa has already been married 15 times and fathered 36 children. Eswatini ruler King Mswati III, left, and Jacob Zuma with his daughter Nomcebo. Pictures: Mohd Rasfan/ AFP and X/ @DZumaSambudla As Zuma's daughter, Nomcebo is, of course, no stranger to polygamy — with her 82-year-old Zulu father boasting six wives and at least 20 children. Sources close to the palace claim that Nomcebo nevertheless struggled with the high emotional toll of King Mswati's polygamous lifestyle. King Mswati's 'Wife No 12': Nomcebo Zuma Nomcebo became King Mswati's 'Wife No 12' after appearing at the annual uMhlanga Reed Dance ceremony as the new inkhosikati ('queen') of the 56-year-old king in September 2024. Jacob Zuma's daughter, Nomcebo, left, is pictured singing while marching during the 2024 Umhlanga Reed Dance ceremony at the Ludzidzini Royal Residence on Monday, 2 September 2024. Picture: Emmanuel Croset/ AFP Soon thereafter, his young bride accompanied the ruler on a lavish R200-million state trip overseas. The Citizen previously reported that the lobola for Nomcebo amounted to a staggering R2 million and 100 head of cattle. [PHOTOS]: His Majesty King Mswati III and Liphovela LaZuma have arrived safely in Samoa, where His Majesty is expected to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). — Eswatini Government (@EswatiniGovern1) October 24, 2024 ALSO READ: Precious time: Nomcebo Zuma flaunts R3.9m watch on first state trip with King Mswati King Mswati dispatches royal envoy to Nkandla In an attempt to deal with this rare challenge to Eswatini's royal marital customs, a delegation of royal negotiators has been dispatched to Zuma's Nxamalala homestead in Nkandla, northern KwaZulu-Natal. In line with Swazi tradition, when a wife disappears – a practice known as kwemuka – the husband sends a delegation to her family to plead for her return. Why is Zuma 'refusing to meet' with delegation? The Eswatini-based publication Swaziland News, however, cited insiders' claims that the royal delegation has been camped out in Nkandla for days while the former president has allegedly refused to even greet them. According to the sources, the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party leader told the envoy that he had never supported the marriage from the start, but only went along with it because his daughter was insistent. King Mswati III, Nomcebo Zuma and her father, Jacob Zuma. Picture: X Reporting on the lobola negotiations last year, Sunday World stated that Zuma was under the impression that King Mswati wanted his son, who is in his 30s, to marry his young daughter. During the negotiations, however, it came to light that the king himself was eyeing Nomcebo as the latest addition to his own cohort of wives. ALSO READ: The luxury life of King Mswati III: Eswatini monarch arrives in SA in 'flying palace' Eswatini ties with Zulu monarchy and Jacob Zuma There are strong traditional ties between Eswatini and South Africa's Zulu monarchy, with the current Zulu King Misuzulu ka Zwelithini being Mswati III's nephew. Zuma and Mswati are also already relatives through marriage. So far, neither the Zuma family nor Eswatini's royal palace has issued an official statement. READ NOW: Is daughter's marriage to King Mswati a 'strategic political move' by Zuma camp?
