Lebanon has a long history of sheltering displaced and persecuted people from various areas. Displaced Palestinians of 1948 Nakba or Catastrophe, fleeing the violence made Shatila, a neighbourhood of Sabra in Southwest Beirut their refugee camp. However, the suburb of Beirut is known for its brutal massacre of 1982. The camp was attacked by IDF and its Lebanese Militia, killing between 2000-3500 people. Global outrage was caused after testimonies from the mass killings described the horror as acts of slaughter, mutilation, rape and mass graves.
Under the pretext of the invasion, Lebanese Political force was divided between Lebanese Front of a coalition of right-wing Christian Maronite parties backed by Israel and the United States. On the other side was Lebanese National Movement. A coalition of secular leftists, Pan-Arab Sunni and Shia Muslims, and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation. The division was not limited to this, confessional identities have legitimate recognition according to the Lebanese National Pact of 1943. The political spectrum encouraged patronage networks and thus has a weakened central authority that also resulted in failing Lebanon as a modern state.
The impoverishing establishment has its roots in the country being forced into a nation-state, secondly its strong confessional identities and foreign involvement. In this way the country’s poor basic life facilities forced population into poverty and left to the mercy of the confessional elites. A big chunk of Lebanese left Lebanon for better future. Consequently, many groups started erupting to fulfil the gap left by the government in providing basic amenities to the people. Militia too mushroomed to protect their groups from the onslaught by Israel or other armed groups present in the country.
The paradox combined with geopolitical forces have led the operation of parallel non-state military actors retain national security legitimacy that is hybridization of security governance. The unique style of military dualism that the Lebanese Armed Forces and Hezbollah enjoy is very intricate. Questioning the status quo can cause one more civil war and internal instability and also have ramifications for the security and sovereignty of Lebanon.
Hezbollah was not such a first organisation but it became one of the significant movements in the middle of the Civil War of 1975-1990. The party is usually referred as an armed group fighting Palestinian war of liberation. However, the party has played much bigger role in the fragile political system of Lebanon. Hezbollah rehabilitated victims of the civil war and Israeli invasion in the most neglected and poor areas of Southern Lebanon. It opened schools, ran hospitals and even built shelters and provided welfare services to the people. Hezbollah is responsible for making mostly South Lebanon liveable and preventing displacement.
Hezbollah in its manifesto stated that the objective of the party is expulsion of the western colonialism and neo-colonialism and resistance to Israel. ‘Taif Agreement’ ended the Lebanese civil war and called for a political process as a future course. Hezbollah later on softened its stand on Islamic revolution in Lebanon and became a political participant by winning 12 out of 128 parliamentarian seats and having representation in the council of ministers. The peace process, however, allowed Hezbollah to retain its armed wing as a resistance force, fighting Israeli occupation in South Lebanon.
Hezbollah defended the Lebanese territorial integrity when ten per cent of Lebanon was under the occupation of Israel. Israel withdrew its forces from Southern Lebanon in 2000 after 22 years of occupation. The withdrawal left Hezbollah in a stronger position in the Lebanese security rhetoric and regional stability. This was also the period of change in Lebanon’s Pax-Syriana. The brotherly relations were hit after Rafiq Hariri, an influential Sunni politician was assassinated. This also intensified tensions over Israel-Lebanon border and huge number of the Lebanese were in Israeli jails. Consequently, the escalation resulted into 2006 war between Israel and Lebanon, mainly fought by Hezbollah on the Lebanese side.
Hezbollah’s support for HAMAS is fundamentally rooted in the shared objective of resistance to Israel, Zionist project of expansion and Pan-Islamist origin of the two parties.
The US war on terror after the 9/11 attacks surfaced sectarianism as an element in the West Asian conflicts. Emergence of ISIS and Syrian civil war derailed the conventional Palestinian resistance as a question of Arab-Israel conflict or Zionist-Muslim question. The securitization of Muslim organisations and Islamophobic policies of the West gave a free hand to Israel to further expand its occupation of Palestinian territories.
In post 9/11, the escalation in Israel-Palestine conflict offered a key role to Hezbollah in the conflict. Iran’s commitment to Palestine ensured that Hezbollah come in a complete alignment with HAMAS. The West’s offensive against Iran in the shape of the international sanctions, attacks on the Regime, failed dialogue and cornering Iranian people is too reflected in the operation of ‘Axis of Resistance’. Increasing intimacy with Israel and efforts to legitimise Israel’s offensive on Palestinians is a common ground to these forces.
Syed Hassan Nasrallah’s, General Secretary of the party, assassination just after the HAMAS chief Ismail Haniyeh has a huge potential to only further escalate the conflict. It will further destabilise the region causing more displacements, killings, humanitarian crisis and destruction. The kind of warfare that has been introduced in the ongoing conflict will push the world into a cyber war.
However, after the Iranian Missiles landed in Tel Aviv, and the possible Western involvement, are indicative of a full-fledged war along the lines of two rival blocks. Security of the Israeli state as a prerogative of the Western powers, presence of military bases of the US and NATO in the region is like a time bomb. The polarisation of the world powers is a main element of world war. In Russia-Ukraine conflict, NATO is already engaged against Russia. Though, the domestic politics like the elections in the USA, economic obstacle after COVID-19 are some deterrents.
Peace process still has a chance in the West Asia and dialogue is an option. Ending siege of Gaza has to be achieved and the powers like India, Turkey, China can mediate and neutralise the situation. The era of disproportionate accords like that of Oslo is over and non-western powers have to play the role of leadership for a lasting peace and peace-building.
By: Dr Khairunnisa Aga,
Lecturer Political Science
