.jpg)
March 8 votes to protect Hezbollah’s arms
There are only a few days left until the parliamentary elections in Lebanon, which both the opposition and majority have called vital in determining the future of the country.
And while the March 14 coalition’s electoral campaign is not viewed as flawless by a number of Lebanese, one cannot help noticing that the Hezbollah-led March 8 alliance has not yet even presented voters with a unified electoral goal – most rhetoric from the alliance has centered around resistance, which means, of course, protecting Hezbollah’s controversial and ever-growing arsenal.
One of the tools the party wants to use to protect its arms is the obstructing-third veto power in the cabinet, which the opposition gained during the Doha Conference last year and which is set to expire after the elections. President Michel Sleiman brought the issue up in a recent speech during which he stressed that alternation of power is the basic rule of democracy, calling on all parties to protect the Taif Accord and for the loser in the elections to step back and act as an observer.
However, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, in his recent bout of speeches, still insists on “partnership” and veto power, making the not-so-subtle assertion that Hezbollah will rule the country whether it wins or loses, in which case it will claim the obstructing third, despite the president’s appeal, the constitution and the ruling majority.
Whether Hezbollah wins or loses, the message from the party and its allies in the run up to the elections is clear: They will make sure the Resistance’s arms are left alone.
“Resisting” Christians
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a statement last week that the opposition’s victory in the Lebanese elections would lead to important changes in the region and to the “formation of new fronts”. Ahmadinejad, who is also preparing for elections in his country in early June, will ostensibly be taking part in negotiations soon with Iran’s long-time enemy, the US, and could no doubt use its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, as a bargaining chip at the table.
In his speech following Ahmadinejad’s not-so-veiled message, Nasrallah expressed surprise at the criticism of the Iranian president’s statement and confirmed that what he said is indeed true, that a Hezbollah victory would no doubt change regional dynamics.
While for years many in Lebanon have expressed the fear that putting the Resistance in power in Lebanon would lead it to fashion the country into a battlefield for regional players to carry out their wars, what Nasrallah said sent shivers down their spines. For in his speech Nasrallah made apparent that Hezbollah is using the elections to link Lebanon to others in the region and their struggles. Lebanon, for Hezbollah, is a mere battlefield in its Holy War against Israel, and therefore, the Resistance needs to keep its arms in order to fight.
How the Christian community in Lebanon, seen as pivotal to the election’s outcome, will react to Nasrallah’s provocative statement in the ballot boxes next week remains to be seen. There is no doubt, however, that now more than ever Nasrallah needs the cover and influence of his main Christian ally, Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun. That’s why, in his slew of speeches last week, the Hezbollah leader lauded Aoun as a “loyal” and reliable ally.
It is interesting to note that Nasrallah has never before accredited anyone with the qualities he has recently hailed in Aoun, which betrays Hezbollah’s fears of Christian hesitation toward the Party of God.
While Aoun has been busy on the campaign trail calling for reform and a “grand renaissance” with this election, Hezbollah has been building up its arsenal, according to reports, readying itself for a possible Israeli attack on Iran in retaliation for Tehran’s refusal to shut down its nuclear program. Hezbollah’s possible participation in the Israeli-Iranian conflict must raise questions among Lebanese Christians, who have historically had strong ties with the West and western values and who see no value in Lebanon being dragged in to a potentially gruesome war.
Another thing worrying voters is the fact that Hezbollah has not yet presented an economic plan in case it wins, although it has engaged in some hefty criticism of March 14’s financial strategies. On the contrary, fears of potential economic problems brought by an opposition win are on the rise, especially the concern that financial aid and investment from the West and moderate Arab states might dry up with a Hezbollah-led government.
Aoun addressed this issue during a speech on Sunday in Batroun, where he assured Lebanon’s Christian voters that the US will be “the first to negotiate with Lebanon” after a March 8 win.
In as much as his speech actually provided no assurance concerning a March 8 financial plan, it indeed confirmed that Aoun is fully backing Hezbollah and Nasrallah’s firebrand politics, and he will take his Christian supporters with him.
The Shia state
While Nasrallah has tried to reassure Lebanese Christians by praising Aoun and criticizing the majority’s running of the economy, he talks to the Lebanese Shia separately, urging them to head to the polls on June 7 in large numbers to prove that “the South will never give up Resistance”.
For to Hezbollah, voter participation is as important as the results, especially in light of the new batch of independent Shia politicians who were not around during the last elections in 2005 and who have offered the Shia community an alternative to Hezbollah and Amal’s political monopolization.
Hezbollah needs to at least preserve its representation within the Shia community no matter what the outcome of the elections so that any future threat to its monopolization of power, such as an official move against the party’s arsenal, will not be a problem in face of a united Shia front in the South. However, as much as this sounds like no more than a Hezbollah embrace of federalism, it can only lead to further isolation of the Shia from their country.
What’s really at stake here
Everything that Hezbollah has been involved in since the first national dialogue session in 2006 was in the interest of protecting its arsenal. The resignation of the Shia ministers from the cabinet in 2006, the year-and-a-half-long sit-in that paralyzed downtown Beirut along with a host of national institutions, the presidential vacuum and the May 7 events in 2008 were all efforts in defense of Hezbollah’s arms.
The Lebanese Shia are also being used to protect Hezbollah’s arms. By splitting the Lebanese between those who are “honorable” and vote March 8, and those who are “dishonorable” and vote independent, the party is employing concepts of identity, honor and dignity to mobilize the Shia, always in fear of being marginalized like they have historically been in Lebanon, to vote March 8 on June 7, in yet another effort to safeguard Hezbollah’s divisive and dangerous arsenal.