Saturday, July 15, 2006

Framing Hizbullah

Lebanon's patriot movement offers legitimate resistance to Israeli Aggression

by Amal Saad-Ghorayeb

July 15, 2006 The Guardian (UK)

BEIRUT-- The capture of three Israeli soldiers by the Lebanese resistance movement, Hizbullah, to bargain for prisoner exchange should come as no surprise - least of all to Israel, which must bear its own responsibility for the abductions and is using this conflict to pursue its wider strategic aims. The prisoners Hizbullah wants released are hostages who were taken on Lebanese soil.

In the successful prisoner exchange in 2004, Israel held on to three Lebanese detainees as bargaining chips and to keep the battle front with Hizbullah open. These detentions have become a cause celebre in Lebanon. In a recent poll, efforts to effect their release attracted majority support, much more even than the liberation of Shebaa Farms, the disputed corridor of land between Syria and Lebanon still occupied by Israel. The domestic significance of these hostages is ignored by those who choose to reduce the abductions to an act of solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza...

The regional significance of the abductions has also been misconstrued. To suggest Hizbullah attacked on the orders of Tehran and Damascus is to grossly oversimplify a strong strategic and ideological relationship. Historically there has been an overlap of interests between Syria, Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas...But the nature of that relationship has changed much over the years. Since Syrian forces left Lebanon, Hizbullah has become the stronger party. It has never allowed any foreign power to dictate its military strategy. It is ironic, given Israel's bombing of civilian targets in Beirut, that Hizbullah is often dismissed in the west as a terrorist organization. In fact its military record is overwhelmingly one of conflict with Israeli troops inside Lebanese territory....

The attempt to frame Hizbullah as a terrorist organization is very far from political reality in Lebanon, from public opinion across the Arab and Islamic world, and from international law. Israel's disproportionate response to the soldiers' capture will have an impact on Lebanese domestic policy. Hizbullah has recently proposed a comprehensive national defence strategy; the Lebanese government has yet to come up with anything similarly convincing. If demands for a prisoner exchange are successful, then it shows that what Hizbullah would term the logic of resistance is the most effective defence strategy.

Israel's escalation has been a poor PR exercise. Even if it succeeds in showing the Lebanese people that Hizbullah can be a liability, this may well be cancelled out by Israel's own aggression, which will only confirm Hizbullah's repeated warnings of the constant threat posed by Israel. (end quote)

(Amal Saad-Ghorayeb is assistant professor of political science at the Lebanese-America University).

"Many Lebanese scoff at criticism that Hezbollah is using Iranian-made weaponry, pointing out bitterly that the United States manufactures much of Israel's arsenal." --Laura King and Megan K. Stack

1 comment:

Anonymous said...


Hizballah was founded as a guerilla unit in 1982 to resist the Israeli invasion of that year. They have targeted the Israeli military. If it were not for their great heroic efforts, Israel would still be occupying southern Lebanon. Hizballah has not acted against any US or Western people; they have stated repeatedly that their fight is exclusively with Israel and not the US, even though they strongly criticise US policy in the Middle-East. They are a pure resistance and patriotic movement born during the Israeli invasion of 1982.

In my opinion, their best strategy would be to immediately declare a unilateral cease-fire and stop launching any rockets into Israel, which only gives an excuse for the zionists to inflict 100 times more terror on Lebanese civilians and infrastructure (the ratio is approx. 300 Lebanese dead, overwhelmingly civilians, to 30 Israelis, more than half of which are soldiers). Hizballah would of course have to resist any land invasions through direct combat, but they must stop the immoral launching of rockets into Israel (which they did only after Israel started its massive bombing of Lebanon on 7/12/06). This would give Hizballah a far greater moral superiority and would improve their image with the biased West, and would make the Israelis look like even greater monsters if the latter continue their bombing of Lebanon. Even at this stage, Hizballah has still far greater moral superiority over Israel. Their demands are legitimate: an exchange of prisoners (which Israel still holds since the 2000 lifting of the occupation), the withdrawal of Israeli occupation from the Shebaa Farms in South Lebanon, and the obtaining of the maps for the land mines that Israel left behing when it withdrew from Lebanon, after a 22 year occupation since 1978.

M. Anderson