On the 20th of October, the Israeli Air Force launched a series of airstrikes targeting the branches of Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association across Lebanon. The attacks were carried out on the pretext that the association is used to fund Hezbollah by arming them and paying the salaries of its fighters.  

Targeting Al-Qard Al-Hassan before US-envoy Hochstein’s visit to Lebanon

According to Al-Akhbar newspaper, the US presidential envoy Amos Hochstein held extensive contacts with the Israeli side before his arrival in Beirut and meeting with Head of Parliament Nabih Berri and Prime Minister of caretaker government Najib Mikati. He was informed by officials in Tel Aviv that they were not willing to go through with any agreement that did not meet their conditions, and that there would be no ceasefire before a full agreement.

The sources also said that Hochstein, before his visit to Beirut, began creating ground through diplomatic circles and the US embassy team in Beirut led by Lisa Johnson. He informed several Lebanese parties that Lebanon “is not in a position to discuss much, and that its failure to accept the proposal means that the war will continue and will be more severe.” Israel had helped the US envoy with a night of brutal raids that targeted residential buildings in the Southern Suburb of Beirut, the Beqaa, and the South under the pretext of destroying the branches of the Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association.

The Al-Akhbar sources said that Hochstein had come with a new vision for Resolution 1701 that is based on different principles from the ones it was created upon, and that the proposed modifications are not limited to the implementation mechanism but rather to the basis of the mission. According to the sources, the American-Israeli envoy’s paper calls for amending the text of the introduction to the resolution to make it a resolution “aimed at establishing peace on the borders between Lebanon and Israel and preventing any armed presence in the Lebanese areas near these borders.” In a second point, “it is requested that the geographical scope of the international decision-making authority be expanded to a distance of several kilometers north of the Litani River, at least two kilometers,” on the condition that there be “a significant increase in the number of international forces operating within the peacekeeping forces, and an increase in the number of Lebanese army forces that are supposed to be deployed in that region.”

Hochstein’s paper also included “expanding the mandate of the international forces to include the right to inspect any point, vehicle, site or house suspected of containing weapons, and the right to conduct surprise patrols to any area within the scope of the resolution without the need for permission from the Lebanese authorities, and that the international forces be able to launch a continuous survey operation using drones over all areas covered by the geographical scope of the resolution, and if they decide to enter private property, they have the right to do so, but in cooperation with the Lebanese army.” As well as “expanding the scope of the work of the international emergency forces to include the Lebanese coasts from south to north, including Lebanese ports, and the right to check the identity of ships heading to them, especially to the area where the international forces are deployed. As well as deploying monitoring teams in civilian airports, whether operating or closed, and deploying observation towers and inspection points along Lebanon’s land border with Syria from Akkar in the north to Western Bekaa and Rashaya in the south.” 

The US envoy’s presentation does not end without talking about “the need for supervision (without explanations) over the implementation of Resolution 1701.”

Hochstein had made clear in his visit that the United States and Israel refuse to return to Resolution 1701 in its current form. He said explicitly that this formula is a thing of the past.

The meeting did not reach a conclusive conclusion, and no visit is expected from Hochstein before the US presidential elections.

What is Al-Qard Al-Hassan?

In January of 2021, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah explained the nature of the Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association.

Between 1983 and 1984, a group of young men took the initiative to establish an organization to help and aid the people. One of the major reasons that inspired the foundation of this organization was the people’s need for financial aid and their inability to pay the interests of bank loans. This came in addition to the religious issue in regards to loan interests and its impermissibility. An amount of money was collected from donors for  what is called “Khums,” with which they began offering small loans.

The organization grew with grassroots efforts of the people’s money and attained its legal license in 1987. The loans given out were used to help people get married,  renovate their homes, open offices and other humanitarian work.

According to the late Resistance leader Sayyed Nasrallah, there are several factors that contributed to the organization’s growth and sustainability.

First, Al-Qard Al-Hassan does not depend on any investments or trade deals. Thus, there is no risk of any loss. It is a non-profit organization, unlike banks. 

Second, the mortgages and sponsors act as financial guarantors. Additionally, the association only grants loans of small to medium amounts of no more than $5,000-$6,000; the average loan being $2,000. Large loans are only offered in very rare cases.

Moreover, for 36 years, from 1984 to 2020, money or property was never lost, even in the 2006 war when one of the depositories and several branches were bombed and a lot of money was burned. 

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had said that the Al-Qard Al-Hassan Association does not fund Hezbollah since the money from the organization only belongs to the people, and therefore would be forbidden to be used for any other cause. If the association of Al-Qard Al-Hassan ever fell short in its expenses, Hezbollah would back it up not the other way around. 

Human Rights Watch on the Israeli attacks on Al-Qard Al-Hassan

A report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that Israel’s deliberate attacks on civilian structures amount to war crimes.

According to HRW, “an armed group’s use of a financial institution, association, or bank does not amount to an effective contribution to military action, and therefore it is not a lawful military target under the laws of war.”

That night, the Israeli airstrikes killed at least 16 people and injured 59 others.