Tar Assad med seg Hizbollah i fallet?

Thanassis Cambanis

Just a year ago, Hez­bol­lah was sit­ting pretty. Lebanon’s Party of God had con­so­li­dated its influ­ence across the Arab world with a durable set of alli­an­ces. Its Axis of Resi­stance, for­med with Iran, Syria and Hamas, had emer­ged as the most cre­dible and aut­ho­ri­ta­tive force in Middle Eas­tern poli­tics. Its cen­tral idea—to mobi­lize self-reliant com­mu­nities around a fron­tal con­fron­ta­tion with Israel—seemed to be set­ting the region’s agenda.

But the Arab Spring changed the rules of the game that Hez­bol­lah so mas­ter­fully played for the last two deca­des. Today, the party faces per­haps the big­gest threats to the legi­ti­macy it has wor­ked so hard to cul­ti­vate among cad­res, casual sup­por­ters and even the poli­ti­cal oppo­nents who have come to grud­gingly respect the effec­ti­ve­ness of its lea­der, Has­san Nasrallah.

The first, and more short-term, chal­lenge comes from Syria, where a totte­ring Assad regime could severely cur­tail Hezbollah’s mili­tary room for mane­u­ver. The second, more endu­ring, issue is the Arab poli­ti­cal renais­sance under­way, which could pro­duce move­ments well positio­ned to steal Hezbollah’s anti-Israel thun­der with a resi­stance pro­gram free from the party’s secta­rian, mili­tant baggage.

Hez­bol­lah has a long his­tory of facing adver­sity and somehow—against all odds—recovering. Its gue­rilla war for­ced Israel to wit­hdraw from Leba­non in 2000. Then the mur­der of a popu­lar for­mer Prime Minis­ter, Rafik Hariri, in 2005 put Hez­bol­lah on the defen­sive (seve­ral party offi­ci­als have been indicted in con­nec­tion with the assas­si­na­tion). A popu­lar upri­sing drove Syrian tro­ops from Leba­non, depri­ving Hez­bol­lah of its imme­diate pro­tec­tor. Attacked from many sides, Hez­bol­lah assi­duously wor­ked its con­si­de­rable base and at the same time used every pos­sible means to deter its dome­stic ene­mies, from savvy poli­tics to hard­ball street battles.

It fought Israel to a stands­till in 2006, silen­cing its Arab cri­tics in the process. Two years later, in a short battle, Hez­bol­lah crushed its dome­stic Lebanese rivals and won a deci­sive share of the govern­ment. By last sum­mer, Hez­bol­lah com­man­ded half the Lebanese par­lia­ment and boa­sted a power­ful, recon­fi­gu­red militia fully sup­ported by Iran and Syria.

Many of Hezbollah’s oppo­nents thought, even hoped, it could be undone by the inter­na­tio­nal court pur­su­ing Hariri’s kil­lers. But the court plod­ded its way to indict­ments, expos­ing itself as inept and pos­sibly cor­rupt in its reli­ance on tainted wit­nes­ses. Nas­ral­lah, mean­while, con­vin­ced all of his follow­ers and even many of his ene­mies that the Spec­ial Tri­bu­nal for Leba­non was part of an Israeli and Ame­ri­can plot and that Israel was respon­s­ible for Hariri’s kil­ling. To insu­late itself against any char­ges, the party topp­led the govern­ment of Saad Hariri, the slain leader’s son, in January of this year and installed a Hezbollah-friendly prime minister.

So when four Hez­bol­lah offi­ci­als were indicted in the Hariri mur­der at the end of June, the announ­ce­ment barely registe­red. The Lebanese govern­ment is unlikely to pur­sue the men, and it pro­bably wouldn’t be able to catch them if it tried. In a con­fi­dent speech after the indict­ments, Nas­ral­lah warned that no one should expect Leba­non to coope­rate with the arrest war­rants against Hez­bol­lah. The state would ignore the war­rants, he said, and he orde­red his follow­ers not to be drawn into vio­lent dis­pu­tes with the half of the coun­try that loat­hes Hez­bol­lah. “There will be no civil war in Leba­non,” he said. The court, which has char­ged Hez­bol­lah with kil­ling Hariri, is an Ame­ri­can and Israeli plot, Nas­ral­lah repeated. Case clo­sed, as far as his follow­ers are concerned—and as far as any likeli­hood of Hez­bol­lah mem­bers facing trial.

It turns out that a crum­bling dicta­torship in Syria is bede­vil­ing Hez­bol­lah far more than the Spec­ial Tri­bu­nal for Leba­non. Nas­ral­lah has pub­licly embraced his patrons in Dama­scus at a time when Bashar al-Assad is enga­ged in a war against much of his own pub­lic. Isla­mists and secu­lar nationalists—who nor­mally sym­pat­hize with Hez­bol­lah for its long record of figh­ting Israel—find them­sel­ves in Assad’s cross­hairs, with Hezbollah’s full rhe­to­ri­cal support.

It’s not likely that Hez­bol­lah would try to pro­voke an all-out regio­nal war if Assad were about to fall, as Nicholas Noe recently argued in these spaces. His­to­ri­cally, Hez­bol­lah has shrewdly embar­ked only on wars that will have the full sup­port of its con­sti­tu­ents. Lebanese will sup­port a war against Israel that appears to be a ques­tion of natio­nal sover­eignty or dig­nity; they would chafe at a war per­ce­i­ved to be engi­neered in the inte­rest of a for­eign regime, whether Syria’s or Iran’s.

It’s unclear whether change in Syria is an exis­ten­tial mat­ter for Hez­bol­lah; it’s quite pos­sible that a succes­sor to Assad might sup­port resi­stance against Israel. But if Hez­bol­lah con­ti­nues to ally itself with Assad, rat­her than Syria’s popu­lar will, it begins to look like a move­ment that pre­fers Arab tyrants to the Arab Spring.

This taint on Hezbollah’s hit­herto impeccable cre­den­ti­als as an Isla­mist and natio­nal force speaks to the second, and grea­ter, threat to the move­ment over the long term:

For the first time in recent memory, Hez­bol­lah faces chal­len­ges to its legi­ti­macy from other aut­hen­tic Arab poli­ti­cal for­ces, move­ments that also oppose Israel’s poli­cies but do not sup­port Hezbollah’s ideo­logy and tactics.

In Egypt, for example, new poli­ti­cal move­ments want to con­test Israel by cut­ting off intel­li­gence coope­ra­tion and natu­ral gas sales, ope­ning the bor­der to Gaza and sup­por­ting Pale­sti­nian move­ments like Hamas. Such a policy might cause con­cern in Jeru­sa­lem and Wash­ing­ton, but it also offers the Arab world a path to resist Israel that falls far short of Hezbollah’s recipe of direct and per­pe­tual militancy.

Until now, Hez­bol­lah has remai­ned popu­lar throug­hout the region because of its resi­stance pro­ject, despite an aut­ho­ri­ta­rian and Isla­mist inter­nal cul­ture that many out­side the party’s imme­diate ambit find dis­taste­ful. In a vigorous mar­ket­place of poli­ti­cal ideas, Hezbollah’s share might shrink markedly.

Alt­hough Hez­bol­lah is at a peak in terms of mili­tary and poli­ti­cal power, it is fast coming under scrutiny for siding with repres­sive dicta­torships in Iran and Syria even as the rest of the Arab world is enga­ged in cata­clysmic poli­ti­cal change. It will have a lot of expla­i­ning to do to its core acti­vists and casual sup­por­ters about its choi­ces at this his­to­ri­cal moment. That con­und­rum, more than any other, could prove Hezbollah’s undoing.

Assad Takes Hez­bol­lah Down with Him


Om du ikke følger Document på sosiale media kan du følge oss på e-post.

Donere engangsbeløp?Kan du forplikte deg til fast betaling?

Penger kan også doneres til kontonummer 15030249981.

Leserkommentarer på Document er gjenstand for moderering, som ikke skjer kontinuerlig og under enhver omstendighet ikke om natten. Vi ønsker en respektfull tone uten personangrep, sleivete språk eller flammende retorikk. Vis særlig nøkternhet når temaet er følsomt. Begrenset redigering av skjemmende detaljer kan finne sted. Skriv til debatt@document.no dersom du ikke forstår hvorfor en kommentar uteblir. Se her for nybegynnerhjelp.