I am from Beirut and had (and still) interaction with Shia’. Last summer when I visited Lebanon, I have noticed that Sunni Lebanese have mixed feeling about HA. They are thankful that HA kicked Israel out of South Lebanon and is “protecting” Lebanon from Israel but at the same time they believe that HA started showing the other side of his coin: “loyalty to outsiders, either Syria or Iran!” That is really their anger against HA!

I hope that HA will realize (and it will) that relying and getting orders from outsiders will work against them! They must review the history of previous groups who were receiving orders from outside: Communists, Iti7ad Al-Ishtiraki (Abdel Raheem Murad) who was getting money from Gaddafi, Iraqi Baath Party, SLA, …

The disagreement between Amal and HA is not political or ideology, it is just who wants to be the boss “the representative of the Shia”?

We have a proverb which says (I will try to be polite): “She goes all over the world selling herself and at the end she comes to Lebanon to deliver the baby.”

I will only say this about Hizbullah, my family had a farm in the former security zone. The balancing act was between dealing with the Israelis obviously and Hizbullah. the israelis would burn the whole forest to stop infiltrators using our land (like we could do something), and Hizbullah, well hizbullah kidnapped several of the workers and planted explosives on our farm, that killed a poor farmer (they wanted us to leave so they could use it as a base). At the end, the farm with my uncle and family was attacked by armed gunmen in a 3 hour battle, It was not the IDF. After that, we got the message and left the farm, eventually sold it etc (land we owned for generations)… Needless to say, this family does not intend to invest capital and expertise in HA land! At the time, pre-liberation, HA did get support from those in the zone of course, but support laced with a healthy dose of fear. No one wanted the israelis, but what they wanted was the lebanese army, not another militia, after all pre israel, pre HA, it was Fatah causing issues down there.

I’ve visited the south many times, and I have only this to say. The south is a security zone created the old fashioned way. Just like the backwater of the Krajina Serbs in Croatia made a formidable border for the Hapsburgs that the Ottomans were rarely willing to test, an undeveloped south filled with militants and ignorant peasants who support them yields a self-sealed border. It does not need a treaty or an armistice to protect it, becaues nobody wants to go there, no Israelis, nor most Lebanese either. It would appear, then, that HA should be afraid of more than just disarmament - they probably fear development as well - something that would cause people who are not from the south to begin rendering their opinions on the region, and on HA as well.

Even though HA is still insisting on defending Syria and criticizing everything from Mehlis to Larsen to international tutelage, things could have been much worse. HA is still showing some willingness to find common grounds with the rest of the Lebanese.

Being a militia with such an addiction to confrontational ideology, we can’t deny that they’re showing some flexibility.

I think it’s all about power. Shias are affraid that with this new Lebanese order, they would loose their power and get back to where they were before the civil war, when they had no role and considered themselves “mahroomin”.

With all the strength it likes to show, HA is still very sensitive and suffers from some kind of complex of inferiority. They are still skeptical about what’s happening in Lebanon. They don’t want to be left alone in a country with people not sharing a cause they are so addicted to. What would HA be without The Zionist Enemy??

Instead of alienating them, the rest of the country should attract them away from this hopeless cause. The economy is the key. Areas where HA is strong should really be looked at by the government. The government should itself build schools and hospitals to reassure the shia that if HA stops to exist, their government would still look after them and protect them from the israelis.

I think that’s the approach taken by Walid Joumblat. A lot of people criticized him when he started talking endlessly about the “3ouroubeh” and protecting the resistance. I think he did the right thing concerning this matter.

MWB

Mustapha,
I always had the questions you posted in mind. Why is it that no Pro-Hizballah are out there to defend their positions. I am sure they must have good reasons but they are not very well at communicating them to the rest. This and most blogs lack pro Hizballah readers. Can someone tell me if there is a pro Hizballah forum or post ? We really should undesrtand their point of view and they should be clear about it.

May I suggest that all the positions of HA may simply be explained in terms of the fact that its beliefs , ideology, mores are those an Islamic religious fundamentalism. Those who are driven by ideas of the “sacred” will never be able to accept or taeven take seriously the “secular”. HA will never be able to integrate in a secular society because the ideas that such {secular} society implieas are totally alien to the way it views the world and as a result if we refuse to see the incompatability of the sacred and the secular then we do so at our peril. Unfortunately it appears that so many in Lebanon expect HA to become what it is not and that is unrealistic.

Ghassan,

It’s obvious that politico-islamic ideology is what drives HA. No one expects them to change. What we should expect, what we should do rather, is change HA’s constituency through economic and social help. We should drive people away from militancy and into joining the rest of the Lebanese (as if the rest of the lebanese are not divided).

I don’t want to draw any comparison here, but France responded to the riots by promising more economic help to the suburbs.

MWB

“This post is only about questions. I wish I had the answers”

For a start, in your glorious quest for “the Truth” or “al-Haqeeqâh” as they say in Saudi-stani parlance, you could go to the highly Ja’afarite city of Shiraz, where even during the holly Islamic month of Ramadhân members of Iran’s tiny Christian/Armenian minority are allowed to eat pork chops and sip red wine freely and in broad daylight for that matter…

Now compare and contrast this to the desolate state of Christian minorities in backward Hambali Saudi-influenced lands such as Riyadh, Mecca, Afghanistan, southern Egypt, and ‘Aqqar in north Lebanon where “dirty Nasâra” are routinely persecuted by local bearded zealots, and you’ll understand why Gen. Michel ‘Aoun and (most) Lebanese Christian bishops be they Maronite/Catholic or Byzantine will always prefer Hizbullalmighty to faux sheikh Sa’âduldînne and his fellow Wahhâbi partners his crime.

Once again: to my knowledge, Gen. Mitch ‘Aoun and aspiring-Ayatollah Nasrallalmighty never attended racist prayer services held in some kind of ‘Alawite Baathist Temple in Qardaha or Damascus…

MP Saad Al-Hariri and PM Fuad Saniura on the other hand were both seen several times (live on Saudi TV for that matter) seated in the front row of Jeddah’s central Wahhabi mosque, next to the Saudi kingdom’s freedom-loving clerical grandees, listening quietly to edifying sermons on “ethical issues” such as the planned extermination of Christian and Shiite dogs, a religious duty also know as “Tasfiyatt Al-Qelab al-Nasarah wal-Mataweelah” in Hambali parlance!!

Ghassan, I agree 100%. Hizbullah will not change, what is needed is to shrink their constituency. Of course, the leb govt does not have a free hand in the south, in fact any socio-economic policy is impeded by the grubby hands of Berri, as well as Hizbullah’s priorities. in any case it is not state handouts that is going to raise up the standard of living of people in lebanon, but rather reducing regulation, getting rid of the archaic “wakeel” system, and reducing corruption by firing half the civil service at least and raising the pay of the remainder. It should not be that you have to take bribes to survive. Oh and of course the easiest way to improve standards of living, avoid military conflict and destabilizing policies, seems obvious to me, but HA does not quite get it, or more likely gets it and does not care.

HA is a local proxy of the Iranian government. Only back room negotiations with the Iranians by the Lebanese governemnt will get the HA to disarm.

If Nasrallah moves against Iranian orders. He will be replaced by the Iranians. I’m afraid it is that simple..

I am not sure that I can agree with those who assume (MWB and hummbumm) that a few measures taken by the government in addition to a successful program of economic development would be sufficient to reduce the appeal of HA. It is only fair to assume that the membership of HA shares the deep convictions of the clergy leadership who have no use for any form of nationalist or secular humanist ideas. It is important to recognize the problem for what it is: a reflection of a deeply divided community where a large portion of the populace (30%-40%) do not believe in a national identity or even the legitimacy of civil government. The problem is about completely held cultural values. The struggle to change “the hearts and minds” of the religious fundamentalist of any ilk is not an easy one because the positions are not anchored in reason but instead are based on faith and beliefs. Reason does not stand a chance in convincing those that believe that god has authored three different books that life has evolved over billions of years when the popular story says that humanity was created on Oct 23 at 9:00 am in the year 4004 BC.The immediate task in a country such as Lebanon is to recognize the unbridgable chasm between those who advocate a modern secular state and those that base their paradigm on a relirious story. HA and any other party that has similar beliefs should not be allowed to participate in civil government because they just simply do not believe in its authority or legitimacy.We will have to wage a war of ideas with HA and other similar organizations but such groups wust never become active participants in shaping the destiny of that that they have set out to destroy in the first place.

It looks like there are 2 Ghassan’s!

Saad Al-Saudistani and any other party that has similar beliefs should not be allowed to participate in civil government because they just simply do not believe in its authority or legitimacy.
We will have to wage a war of ideas with the Wahhabi movement and its heavily subsidized Lebanese collaborators from Qoreytem, the Maqased, the Muftis of Tripoli and Saydah…etc.

:-)

The point made against (by Anonymous) about Saad Al-Saudistani is very well taken. But, an argument against the inclusion of HA in government is not applicable to Al-Saudistani( I like this appealtion) in this case because he at least professes to be a secularist and a believer in civil society. My main point in this regard is that no groupshould ever be given the power to determine the destiny of that which they oppose.

I imagine that one can present a strong case that if Freedom and Liberty are the goal then very few if any ,in the Lebanese case, are elligible to rule lol.

I’m interested in knowing what the UN “stands for”, and how it is actively working to accomplish its manifesto.

Ghassan (the one without the profile) makes a very interesting point. But I am interested in where you obtained the statistic 30-40%. If you are just assuming that all shiites are like this, then Lebanon still has a long way to go. If you are saying this because HA is the representative of the shiite, then we can talk. My question is - what consequences would a war of ideas have?

Lazarus:
The pragmatist in me has only one thing to go by. According to the results of the last parliamentary elections HA did not only win but they were dominant. HA won either because because all shi’ites support their religiosity
or because they are simply the overwhelming representative of the community. ( I bet that elections based on the single district principle will weaken the hold of the tribal and religous lords).
The structure of society at any point in history is nothing else but a reflection of the values, beliefs and vision of reality of its constituents. This is another way of saying that in the final analysis it is ideas that determine who we are and how we see ourselves.
If it is ideas that shape the socisl structure then what group within that structure carries the most weight? The answer for a society such as that in Lebanon is very simple, it is the traditional leaders and the men of the cloth. If these leaders happen to subscribe to secular democratic views then society can still function in the public space as a civil society. The problems become unsurmountable when the views are strictly religious and theocratic.
A modern secular society has no choice but to embark on an effort that would showcase and highlight the attributes of diversity, self actualization and respect for the other. Such a civilized reasoned dialogue is not very likely to achieve any meaningful inroads among the close minded , self interested religious leadres. The target of our obsession would be the general populce. A free exchange of ideas is bound to loosen the hold that HA has on the electorate in the community because it is only fair to assume that freedom, liberty, human dignity and the rights to dissent are universal values with universal appeals.
We are at an impasse. WE cannot allow those who want to destroy civil society to help run it because rationality dictates that they would run it into the ground. Our only way out is to show that we have enough faith in what we stand for as to engage others in a lengthy dialogue. Such an exchange must move us forward otherwise we would have admitted defeat to the indefensible position of a backward looking vision of reality. We must win this fight and we will if we have the courage to explain our position that human dignity demands that we extend moral and ethical worth to the other. Theocracy, based on the superiority of one view over all else,is an affront to all the values that decent people aspire for.Our salvation rests on a separation between the church and the state but for such a separation to be unquestioned it must enjoy popular support. Garnering such support is the fubction of the dialogue.

HA is one of the most successful and popular Islamic movements today. It has considerable support amoung Shites and Sunnis.

If it wasn’t for HA, Israel would still be in occupation of the South with Syria’s continued occupation as a counterforce. The forced evacuation of the Israelis in 2000 by HA set the precedent for Syria’s withdrawal.

HA also has a very charismatic and politically savvy leader in Nasrallah. It also has the support of a very powerful and strategically minded country, Iran.

Their relationship with Syria has not always been close. Amal has a much closer relationship with the Syrian regime and the Alawites since it was the disappeared Imam Mustapha Sadr who was persuaded to say that the Alawites were Shites. Shite theologians do not share this view.

The unprofiled Ghassan argues that religious parties’participation in Lebanese political life must be restricted or outlawed. He forgets that in our sectarian system all the significant partys represent religious groups and often foreign interests.

Let us not demonize HA . They are very clever politically and are undeniably Lebanese. They should be welcomed into our political process not excluded.

Politically, they would be crazy to disarm without a clear politcal gain. UN Resolutions, threats and isolation are not the way to deal with them.

What has the UN done to protect the people of the South. Where were they after Qana ? The Shites and all Muslims have good reason to suspect the UN and its “noble” intentions, not to mention its “even handed” implementation of UNSC resolutions.

Muslim religous movements such as HA and the MB are flexible partys that are committed to the democratic political process. Their participation is critically important if we are to avoid the nihilism of the Jihadis. Those that wish for their exclusion underestimate their popularity and their fervent supporters.

Also, there are some who wish to sit back and watch Sunnis and Shites kill each other. One can easily conclude that events are being engineered to hasten that scenario.

HA is not a Syrian puppet. They are carefully hedging their bets and will maintain as much independence as posssible under the circumstances.

HA must be engaged as Lebanese regardless of their Iranian or Syrian alliances. That is the best way for the gov’t to include them or to win over their supporters.

BTW, I am not a Shite but I understand what HA means to them in the Lebanese and regional context.

Issam

MWB said “HA is still very sensitive and suffers from some kind of complex of inferiority.” IMO this is not true, the above statement could hold true for AMAL, Haraket el mahroomeen.

Sunis do not like Amal (Specially beirutis) due to what they did to us during the war. Even though war was also raged by PSP on Sunnis, many Sunis joined PSP during just to fight against Amal and against their brutal treatment of Sunnis in Beirut.

However, for HA IMO they believe they have a strong hand of cards that they want to use. They want to use it to grasp as much power as they can.

My fear is that the reason behind allowing them to join the governmant is a way to infltrate them with corruption, it brings to me memories when martyr hariri had Hobeika, Amal and PSP in the cabinets and chose to neglect their theft thinking that it was best for the country to keep those parties quite and not cause more wars… Eventhough this strategy allowed Lebanon to re-immerge; however this among other stuff it costed us 35 Billion dollars as debt.

I hope the history does not repet it self

Hello my name is karl Karam from Khiam in South of Lebanon, living in Paris…i just want to say that if there was not a “Hezbollah” or any resistance in the south we would have been living at the moment in a country called “ISRAEL” and not Lebanon.That’s all what i wanted to say. Thank you south lebanese ppl, thank you Hezbollah thank you Nasrallah!!

Karl
Your view of history is very simplistic and that is precisely why historians refuse to play the “What if Games”.
What is clear and noncontrovertible , though, is the great accomplishment of HA in the south of Lebanon when it was under the Israeli occupation. That is an achievment that no one can question and one that desreves all sorts of accolades. The conditions that existed 5-6 years ago are not present anylonger and to persist in arguing that based on previous outcomes then a particular group should immediately be given sanctions to operate where it should notbe is the logical fallacy. HS as a group motivated by religiou ideology can not play a constructive role in the building of a civil society that respects the other. HA has a leadership that has admitted on many occasions that its ultimate goal is not the preservation of the nation state. That is why it would be folly to allow them to shape that which they do not hold to be important. This does not mean that HA does not have the right to exist. If we truly believe ina responsible democratic system then we have an obligation to protect HA right to spread their ideology but we must not allow them to operate as aa government within a government just because of their previous accomplishments. I know of no examples whereby a national liberation movement was allowed post independence to maintain its own militia outside the control of the legitimate governmental institutions. If we choose as a people that we prefer to give HA the power to undermine civil society from within and to maintain its monopoly on illegitimate forces then in effect we have agreed that civil society is not a path that we are interested in and our allegiance is to a group of unelected leadership whose only qualification to rule is their theology. And that is a vision of the future that many will find difficult to participate in.

Very interesting hummbumm.

“It would appear, then, that HA should be afraid of more than just disarmament - they probably fear development as well - something that would cause people who are not from the south to begin rendering their opinions on the region, and on HA as well. “

I believe that this is right. The Hezbollah is afraid of economic growth because it knows that its rethoric is not appealing to the educated people. The Shias are always complaining about their inferior status. But the real responsible were their zuamas (before the war) and the Hezbollah (today).

“It would appear, then, that HA should be afraid of more than just disarmament - they probably fear development as well - something that would cause people who are not from the south to begin rendering their opinions on the region, and on HA as well.
“

I said the same on my French blog a few days ago. Hezbollah will not change. We should work on cutting Hezbollah from its base.

Why isn’t any pro-Hezbollah commenter on this blog? Probably because most Hezbollah followers are not educated and would be incapable of providing you with a well-thought point of view. All they can do is to stick to their official and annonying propagando.

It is time to dismantle HA.
The followers of HA should not pay the price of a “resistance” leadership that does not know how to survive in time of peace.
Here are the steps to follow:
- Cut the finances: we all know that only 10% follow HA by conviction, the rest by convenience ($$$). Iraninan money should be cut permenantly and abruptly.
- Cut the social aides: as suggested by other comments, it is time for the government to play its real role: schools, hospitals, social programs should start in this forogtten part of the country. However, it should be well known that these services are provided by the government not the exclusive agebt of the south aides Mr. Berri.
- Collect the arms or at least confine them in special locations. This will reduce HA influence by 90%.
- Give HA the chance to become real political party, not like now a party with arms.
We can discuss HA’s situation in many comments and in many newspapers articles, but none of these is brave enough to say the truth about HA: Arms possession is not normal and unacceptable, a party cannot replace a government in part of the country (Anyone remembers the LF experience before?). It is time to disarm HA, but not to repeat the mistake done against the LF: it is not the time, and never will be, to eliminate HA politically. Such thing can only be done by free elections and by the people.

CHECK OUT MY BLOGG!!!
http://www.dontbulshit.blogspot.com

Thanks

PS love your stuff mustafa