Features
Nasrallah dares Israel to invade Lebanon in speech, calls it ‘historic opportunity’

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah called Israel’s Northern Command leader “foolish” and addressed the displaced Israelis in the North.

Hezbollah is ready and waiting for the IDF to invade its territory, leader Hassan Nasrallah dared Israel in a speech broadcast on Thursday.

“Israel’s foolish Northern Command leader talks about a security zone inside Lebanese territory – we are waiting for you to enter Lebanese territory,” he said. “We are waiting for your tanks, and we will see this as a historic opportunity.”
His speech was originally planned to go live on Wednesday but the live-stream was cut off by a second string of exploding devices in 24 hours.
Nasrallah said he was in touch with Israel about the attacks that took place on Tuesday and Wednesday. He noted that he knew there would be another round of explosions on Wednesday after the first round.
“On Tuesday, I received messages from Israel to stop the attacks. Otherwise, there would be another strike on Wednesday.”
Multiple sources indicated that despite the operational success of the attacks, there is no imminent plan for the IDF to undertake a new major operation against Hezbollah, let alone a large ground invasion.
Various sources said the original plan was to only employ the mass device sabotage in the event of a simultaneous larger operation.
But now that the sabotage happened (and was possibly forced to be used prematurely as Hezbollah started to discover the potential sabotage), sources indicated that the IDF is under instructions from the cabinet to wait and see what Hezbollah will do next before making a major move.If Hezbollah starts to move pieces for a significant strike of its own, as it did on August 25, there are indications that the military would preempt such a threat as it did then, possibly on a larger scale.
Despite this, sources implied that the IDF and government are still concerned about the vast inventory of Hezbollah rockets (150,000 pre-war) and the possibility of a wider regional war with Iran and its other proxies.
This also seems to be the reason that Israel still has yet to respond to the ballistic missile that Yemen’s Houthis fired on Israel on Sunday. Despite the fact that when Yemen struck Tel Aviv in July, the IDF responded by destroying parts of Yemen’s crucial port of Hodeidah within 48 hours to deter the Houthis from further adventurism.
With the IDF’s attention officially primarily having shifted to the North and Hezbollah, sources noted that the military’s activities in Gaza are now limited to occasionally targeted killings of medium-level commanders, destroying Hamas infrastructure, and trying to set traps for Hamas terrorists who might come out of hiding.
The IDF was unable to provide any cogent answer to the question of how these activities will in any way advance the goal of compelling Hamas to release the 101 remaining living hostages, given that greater force already used throughout Gaza has not done so.
On October 7, around 120,000 Israelis were evacuated from the North. One of the messages that Israeli leaders have emphasized over the last few days has been that the goal of returning them was a top priority. Nasrallah addressed these civilians in his speech: “Can you return the displaced to the North? We accept this challenge, and you will not be able to return them and do whatever you want. The only way to return the displaced to the North is to stop the aggression on the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.”
Expressing gratitude
Nasrallah opened his speech by thanking Lebanese authorities for their resourcefulness in light of the attacks.
“What has happened over the past two days deserves recognition and a firm response. There are many eye injuries, and hospitals are under pressure as they work tirelessly,” he said.
Nasrallah also expressed gratitude to Iran, Iraq, and Syria for their medical support. He went on to accuse Israel, stating, “The Israeli enemy has violated all laws, regulations, and redlines. Numerous bombings targeted hospitals, markets, public roads, homes, and other areas heavily populated by civilians.”
The World Health Organization said on Thursday that the explosions in Lebanon seriously disrupted the country’s fragile health sector.
The UN health agency cited Lebanese health authorities’ toll that 37 people had been killed and more than 3,000 wounded in the pager blasts that detonated in areas considered strongholds of Hezbollah.
“These events have seriously disrupted Lebanon’s already fragile health system,” WHO Director-General Tedros
Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a press conference, adding that the global body had distributed blood supplies and trauma kits in the country.
“The whole health system came under immense pressure very, very quickly,” said WHO emergencies chief Mike Ryan at the same briefing.
WHO’s representative in Lebanon Dr. Abdinasir Abubakar said 100 hospitals were involved in the response. A series of drills ahead of the attacks and the stockpiling of emergency supplies helped prepare doctors and nurses in advance and limited the casualties, he said.
He added that the casualty toll is expected to rise.
“Israel showed no regard for the fact that these beeper holders were in civilian areas or using civilian means,” he said.
‘The attacks were massacres’
He called the attacks a “major terrorist operation,” adding, “We will define the events of Tuesday and Wednesday as massacres.” He said that Hezbollah has initiated “several internal investigation committees, explored all scenarios and possibilities, and have reached an almost final conclusion: these massacres amount to war crimes or a declaration of war.”
Nasrallah also vowed to punish Israel for the attacks, stating that the country would face “a crushing response from the axis of resistance. Tuesday and Wednesday were bloody days, but we will be able to overcome this ordeal, and this blow won’t bring us down,” he added.
Turkey said on Thursday that it is reviewing its measures to secure the communication devices used by its armed forces after the blasts in Lebanon.
The Turkish Defense Ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Turkey’s military exclusively used domestically produced equipment but Ankara had additional control mechanisms in place if a third party is involved in procurement or production of devices.
“Whether in the operations we carry out, the ongoing war in Ukraine, and as with the Lebanon example, measures are reviewed and new measures are being developed as part of the lessons learned following each development,” the official said.
“In the context of this incident, we as the Defense Ministry are carrying out the necessary examinations,” the person added, without providing further detail.
The unprecedented attacks have prompted concerns over cybersecurity around the region.
Iraq’s national security council said on Wednesday it would take preventive measures against any possible breach from electronic imports, adding that intensive security checks will be implemented on imports along with stronger border checks.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan on Thursday told the state-owned Anadolu news agency that establishing an independent agency for cybersecurity specifically was on the government’s agenda after President Recep Tayyip Erdogan voiced a necessity for it, and added it would be formed “very soon.”
Hadi Al Bahra, president of the National Coalition of Syrian Revolution and Opposition Forces, told Reuters in an interview in Istanbul on Thursday that the blasts in Lebanon had prompted some opposition forces in northern Syria to rethink the security of communication devices and supply chains.
“It’s a point of concern for them and they are reviewing their gear,” he said of the Syrian National Army, an opposition faction backed by Turkey which controls swathes of territory in northern Syria.
Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said on Thursday evening that Israel will keep up military action against Hezbollah, though the new phase of fighting does include significant risks.
“In the new phase of the war, there are significant opportunities but also significant risks. Hezbollah feels that it is being persecuted and the sequence of military actions will continue,” Gallant said.
“Our goal is to ensure the safe return of Israel’s northern communities to their homes. As time goes by, Hezbollah will pay an increasing price.”

Features
Bruno Fernandes: Mikel Arteta credits ‘smart’ Man Utd captain for free-kick as Gary Neville says wall ‘too far back’

Mikel Arteta says Bruno Fernandes was “smarter” than referee Anthony Taylor over his free-kick that gave Manchester United the lead against Arsenal in 1-1 draw on Sunday; referee moved defensive wall 11.2 yards back; Gary Neville criticised Arsenal over incident

Mikel Arteta refused to criticise Anthony Taylor for sending Arsenal’s defensive wall too far back for Bruno Fernandes’ free-kick in their 1-1 draw but said the Manchester United captain had been “smarter” than the referee in taking advantage to net his fine strike.

Broadcast technology found Taylor marched the Arsenal defensive line 11.2 yards back, further than the minimum 10 yards required in the Laws of the Game, before Fernandes curled a dead ball inside the near post shortly before half-time.
“At the end of the day the referee is pushing them back too far, which is a mistake, but ordinarily you would sense you’re too far away and creep forward,” said Gary Neville on the Gary Neville Podcast.
“They didn’t do that and it ends up that Bruno Fernandes has the ability to play it over the wall.”
The United captain’s technique was superb but, like Neville, the Super Sunday pundits questioned whether his goal would have been possible had Arsenal’s five-player wall been closer.
Arteta refused to be drawn over the incident, only to congratulate Fernandes for making the most of the advantage he had been given.
“He’s been smart and he took advantage, that is football,” he told Sky Sports. “He’s been smarter than the ref. That’s OK, they allowed him to do it.”
Player of the match Declan Rice, who netted Arsenal’s equaliser after half-time, took the blame for the goal on himself and the other members of the Gunners wall, though he also felt it had been pushed too far back.
“It felt like a couple of us jumped and some of us didn’t, but I’ve not seen it back,” he told Sky Sports. “It felt like the ball flew over us at quite a low height so, from the wall’s perspective, we could have done a lot better.
“The wall did feel far back. Even on our free-kick, when Martin [Odegaard] took it, they felt far back as well, more than usual. But the referee makes that decision.”
After half-time, another free-kick from Martin Odegaard was being lined up when Taylor again appeared to exceed 10 yards when marking out where Man Utd’s defensive wall could stand.
As Neville had suggested Arsenal should do, Noussair Mazraoui questioned Taylor over the distance, while the wall itself crept forward before Odegaard’s strike – and did its job when his effort rebounded away to safety.
Manchester United head coach Ruben Amorim told Sky Sports he had noticed the issues with both free-kicks but had no intention of helping Arsenal out ahead of Fernandes’ opener.
He said: “It was clear, both free-kicks. So when it’s your free kick, you don’t say anything. When it’s the opponent, you try to push because it’s a big difference.
“It was fair, one for us, one for them. We had Bruno and he solved the problem.”
Man Utd midfielder Christian Eriksen, who has scored eight Premier League free-kicks, explained after the game the sizeable difference even 1.2 yards extra would make for a dead-ball specialist.
“It makes a very big difference,” he told Sky Sports. “When the ball is over the wall you don’t need to hit it as high – going down to statistics and how far they are back and how many metres and how they jump. So it’s easier and it gives Bruno a bit more space to put it over the wall.
“It was very good. It helped that the wall was about 15 metres away, so it was perfect for him to put it over.
“I saw it early [that the wall was a fair way back]. Even before the kick you could see how far back they were, and it was the same when they had it in the second half – obviously we were a bit angry with the ref [at that point] for putting us so far back after we saw that Bruno scored.
“But I think it was just beneficial to us.”

Features
Sule Lamido: Statesman, bridge builder

Alhaji Sule Lamido was born August 30, 1948. He is a native of Bamaina village, Jigawa State, and is known for his wide-level exposure in leadership. He attended Birnin Kudu school, for his primary education in 1955 and proceeded for his secondary education at the prestigious Barewa College, Zaria, Kaduna State.

Lamido embarked on a course in Railway engineering at the Permanent way training school, Zaria, Kaduna where he gained knowledge on the rail transport operations. Upon graduation from the Permanent Way Training School, Lamido started his career as a Quality Control officer at the Nigeria Tobacco Company in Zaria. He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country.

He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country. In 1992, Lamido ventured into politics, first in the second republic as a member of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) where he was an active member. Lamido was also active in the third republic, as a member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and played a key role as the National Secretary in the party. The seasoned politician was also a delegate of the 1995 National Constitutional Conference in Abuja the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
During the military regime of the late Gen Sani Abacha, Lamido was a member of the G-34 political movement which was a notable and powerful opposition group that shaped Nigeria’s fourth republic. After several years of the Military junta in Nigeria, Sule Lamido returned back to active politics in the fourth republic under the platform of the People’s Democratic Party.
He was appointed the Foreign Affairs Minister in the first four years of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2003) at a time Nigeria had to reposition and redeem its image in the international community. As Foreign Minister he travelled with Former President Obasanjo across the globe, restoring broken relationships with the western bloc nations and opening new frontiers with countries like Japan, Russia, Brazil, China and Australia.
Other roles he played as foreign minister was representing Nigeria in the United Nations, G77 bloc of nations, Commonwealth of nations, Organization of African Unity and Economic Community of West Africa States. In November 2001, at the United Nations , Lamido described the corrosive impact of corruption on new democracies such as Nigeria, and called for “an international instrument” against transfer of looted funds abroad.
As Governor of Jigawa, Sule Lamido put the State on national scale with significant investments in infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, housing & urban development, empowerment programmes, education, rural development and industrial projects. The elder statesman is also known for his capacity to build consensus across the nation.

Features
Remembering Anthony Enahoro

By Abiodun Komolafe

It is a settled fact that Anthony Eromosele Enahoro (July 22, 1923 – December 15, 2010) was an outstanding product of Nigeria’s pre-independence era. Enahoro moved one of the motions for independence and there’s a lot for us to look at in the context of the life he lived and the political firmament that brought him up. Therefore, remembering this Father of Nigerian Nationalism is to reminisce about an era where courage and conviction were the
currencies of change.

As a pioneering journalist, politician and champion of independence, Enahoro’s unwavering commitment to Nigeria’s self-rule has left an enduring legacy that continues to inspire generations. His remarkable story is a testament to the transformative power of leadership, perseverance and the unrelenting pursuit of freedom.
Building on his legacy as a champion of independence, Enahoro went on to serve in various capacities, including as Minister of Information and Labour. He was later tried alongside Obafemi Awolowo and others for treasonable felony, a trial that became infamous in Nigerian history. Although convicted, Enahoro was later released and continued to play a significant role in shaping Nigeria’s political landscape.
Enahoro was an outstanding nationalist and a principled person, and this was evident in his involvement with the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Of course, there was no need for him and Alfred Rewane to have been involved in the struggle for the enthronement of democracy, particularly in the aftermath of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election won by MKO Abiola as they had too much to lose!. But they risked everything to fight for popular democracy, Although Rewane ultimately lost his life in the struggle, Enahoro was fortunate to have escaped the same fate.
Despite the risks and challenges, Enahoro remained unbending in his convictions, refusing to waver even in the face of adversity. As a gifted individual, he recognized that the issue at hand was not just about the violation of an individual's rights, but an affront to democracy and national sovereignty. He, along with Alfred Rewane and others fought for principles, not personalities. This commitment to principle was evident in their diverse backgrounds: Enahoro was a Christian from Uromi in Edo State, with Esan extraction; Rewane was a Christian of Urhobo descent from Delta State; and Abiola, whose rights they fought for, was a Muslim Yorubaman, from Ogun State. Unlike some NADECO members who howled with the wolves and bleated with the sheep for convenience, Enahoro was not
duplicitous. Unlike the crop of Janjaweeds who now populate our political landscape, he remained steadfast, refusing to compromise his values.
Olajumoke Ogunkeyede, a close ally of Enahoro, described him as “a man with a seriously fantastic sense of humour; Ogunkeyede, fondly called JMK, shared several instances of Enahoro’s ability to bring joy to those around him. His humorous takes on serious issues, such as the demons in Abuja, showcased his wit. Moreover, his clever commentaries, including his defence of now-President Bola Tinubu’s aspirations, and his ingenious use of allegories and analogies, like; Ogbuefi; and; Ogbueniyan’, collectively attested to the capacity of his wit and charm.
When writing about individuals like Enahoro, Rewane, Herbert Macaulay, Awolowo, Aminu Kano, Maitama Sule, and others, it’s essential to consider the context in which they lived. This context is bittersweet, as they represented an era where political activism was rooted in philosophical positions and guided by principles.
People during this time held strong convictions and were willing to make sacrifices for their beliefs. That’s why society was more orderly in their time, and it achieved proper sustainable development, unlike today where what we have is largely ‘growth without development’, to be polite, or, if we want to be impolite, ‘the development of underdevelopment’. Amidst this, our leaders continue to sing the same old, worn-out refrain while satiating a vacuous idolatry that elevates an ego bereft of substance, a hollow monolith that stands on feet of clay.
If we look at people like Enahoro and Adegoke Adelabu, their lives exemplified a paradox that underscored the tenuous relationship between knowledge and credentials. This was because, despite lacking university degrees, they possessed a profound intellectual depth that eluded many of their contemporaries who boasted an array of impressive certifications, forgetting that it is not the parchment that confers wisdom, but the depth of one's inquiry, the rigour of one's thought and the breadth of one’s understanding.
Enahoro became the youngest editor of Nnamdi Azikiwe's newspaper, the Southern Nigerian Defender, in 1944 at the age of 21 while Peter, his younger brother, became the editor of The Morning Star at the age of 23. The older Enahoro also worked with other publications, including Daily Comet and West African Pilot before parting ways with Azikiwe, whom he always referred to as his chairman, while Awolowo was his political leader. The reasons behind this preference are intriguing, but that’s a story for another time.
These early experiences laid the foundation for Enahoro’s later involvement with the Action Group (AG), a political party that shared his vision of ‘making life more abundant.’ Enahoro and the AG represented an understanding that the process of economic development must be structured and based on a philosophical thrust. In contrast, what is absurdly described as ‘politics’ today is terribly bad and basically transactional; and it’s driven by a cash-and-
carry mentality, where individuals seek to outdo one another in a chop-and-quench; political economy! No unity! No discipline! No structure! For them, any goose can cackle and any fly can find a sore place!
Looking at the plane, Enahoro’s life and career epitomized the complexities of Nigeria’s struggle for
independence and democracy. His life and work embodied the intersection of individual agency and structural forces that steered the trajectory of nations. As a prominent anti-colonial and pro- democracy activist, he played a pivotal role in the country’s transition from colonial rule to independence. The Adolor of Uromi and the Adolor of Onewa was a vocal critic of authoritarianism and a strong advocate for human rights. His perseverance in the face of resistance, setbacks and imprisonment demonstrates the dedication required to bring about
transformative change.
In moments of emotions and situations, we often discover our true strength and resilience. Enahoro has gone to the ages but his legacy continues to inspire, much like Abraham Lincolns. In simpler terms, he was a brave soul who dared to challenge the colonial powers. So, his legacy should serve as inspiration and role model for future generations, demonstrating the potential for excellence that exists within individuals and communities. In fairness to fate, Enahoro and his contemporaries were well-prepared for the liberation movement, thanks to their involvement in the West African Students Union (WASU) and their time at King’s College, Lagos. This institution, attended by Enahoro and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, was a hotbed for political activism and discourse. To truly reboot, Nigerians must remember the personal histories of pioneers like Enahoro.
Today, we remember Enahoro, a pioneering figure who dared to dream of independence for Nigeria. We honour not only his significant contributions to Nigeria’s history but also his untiring commitment to democracy, self-determination and human rights. As we remember him and his dogged commitment to federalism and the quest for social justice, it is in our best interest to recreate the ethos and the spirit which created him and people like him.
May Anthony Enahoro’s spirit soar on the wings of eternal peace!
May his memory continue to serve as a testament to the enduring impact of individual agency
on the course of national history!
May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
*KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk)

-
News1 week ago
Bill to establish National Cashew Production and Research Institute in Kogi passes first reading in Senate
-
News1 week ago
Shehu Sani debunks Governor Uba Sani’s alleged diversion of LG funds, challenges El-Rufai to publicly tender evidence
-
News1 week ago
Report of attack on Wike’s Port Harcourt residence false, misleading – Police
-
News6 days ago
Plateau gov’t expresses concern over violence in Shendam LGA, calls for calm
-
Sports1 week ago
Merino gives Arsenal win over Chelsea
-
Politics4 days ago
Opposition leaders announce coalition to challenge Tinubu in 2027
-
Interview1 week ago
Senators Natasha-Akpabio saga should have been resolved privately – Rev. Mrs Emeribe
-
News1 week ago
Natasha uncovers arrest plot after reported Akpabio to IPU in New York