Analysts see continued instability in Iran eventually rattling Hizbullah
Resistance Group likely “uncomfortable” with events unfolding
The ongoing unrest engulfing Tehran shows no sign of immediate resolution. Iranian opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi”s campaign office has said that it will soon release a report on "fraud" in the June 12 presidential election, despite the supreme leader”s assertion that the vote was fair.
Hizbullah, the armed Iranian-backed resistance group, fresh from a Lebanese election defeat in which they won significant popular support, will be watching events in Tehran with interest. What effect, if any, will the instability in Iran have on Hizbullah and its supporters?
Amal Saad Ghorayeb has written a book on Hizbullah and is an expert on Iranian regional ties. She said that the group”s reticence to publicly comment on the situation in Iran did not mean it wasn”t monitoring events closely.
"Although Hizbullah has commented very little on [the Iranian unrest] for fear of taking sides, I would imagine it is very uncomfortable with it," she said.
Irrespective of who ends up ruling Iran, Hizbullah”s links with the Islamic Republic will remain strong, according to Ghorayeb. "The Iran-Hizbullah relationship transcends any political administration. It”s tied with the clerical establishment and, to a lesser degree, to the national Security Council," she said.
Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese Army Forces (LAF) general, said that Iranian foreign policy was unlikely to change significantly, irrespective of its leader. "First of all we have to wait and see what is going to happen in Iran: will it end up conservative, liberal or somewhere in between?
"The foreign policy is not the issue for anyone in Iran. Neither [candidate] differs much in that sense. Iran is more concerned in internal affairs," he said.
However, regime change in Iran would have an effect on its ties with some foreign groups, he added.
"Everything will be affected. [The outcome] will affect the regional protocol of Iran, whether that [is] to do with Hamas or Hizbullah. If the main stance is changing what about the proxy?"
What was true of the Iranian administration was not necessarily true of Hizbullah, according to Ghorayeb. Although Hizbullah is supported by Iran, it operates independently within Lebanese internal affairs.
"If you want to say “If the Iranian regime looks repressive, then Hizbullah is too,” I don”t think one necessarily follows the other," said Ghorayeb.
Hanna said Hizbullah as a military group was particularly vulnerable to any power shift in Tehran.
"The most difficult thing will be for Hizbullah. It is the most successful aspect of the Islamic Republic outside Iran," he said.
Simon Haddad, a professor of politics at Notre Dame University, argued that it was Syria, not Iran, which held most influence over Hizbullah.
He said Syria was "the main influencing factor on Hizbullah. When the relationship [between Syria and Lebanon] deteriorates, the position of Hizbullah follows.
"Syria is the one who uses Hizbullah to maintain its interest in Lebanon. The political balance in Iran could be a factor but it affects Hizbullah as much as the British government affects the US, for example," he added.
Iran”s economy is in dire straits, with inflation still running at 15 percent and an unemployment rate this year rising to more than 12 percent. Financial constraints will have to be taken into account when the Iranian administration considers its support for Hizbullah, according to Hanna.
"Hizbullah is a costly project for Iran, and since theirs is a country with economic problems, we will have to wait and see if [Hizbullah] will keep getting money."
He added that Hizbullah was "looking for other [forms of income] in order to become self-sustaining," a sign that the group is readying itself for a cut in financial support from Tehran.
Haddad agreed. "The issue of money has already been resolved for Hizbullah. They have enough income from the Lebanese diaspora to survive without Iran," he said.
With the Lebanese electorate handing Hizbullah a parliamentary defeat, and Mousavi”s support appearing to grow daily, have voters in the two countries indicated a popular disapproval of hard-line policy?
Ghorayeb thought not. "Whether we believe that Mousavi won 34 percent of the popular vote [as official results show], or we accept Mousavi”s claims that the vote was rigged, that still doesn”t [prove] that the Iranians are backing a reformist candidate," she said.
Hanna however hinted that the moderate-leaning support for March 14 in Lebanon coupled with the reformist agenda of Iranian protesters, could demonstrate an advancement of liberalism in both countries.
He said that the situation "will open up the liberal Shiites, the supporters of [Nabhi Berri”s] Amal [Movement] for instance."
Last week, rumors circulating online claimed Hizbullah was sending personnel to Iran in order to assist the Iranian Revolutionary Guards effort to subdue protesters. Hanna dismissed the allegations that Hizbullah was helping the current regime keep order in Tehran. "It would be like the LAF training the American Army," he said.