In Lebanon, Hizbullah's rise provokes Shiite dissent
They worry that its quest to topple the Western-backed government will hurt
their long-term interests.
By Nicholas Blanford | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
December 15/06
BEIRUT, LEBANON – Hizbullah's ability to draw hundreds of thousands of
Shiites to central Beirut to rally against the Lebanese government is the most
visible evidence that the militants are now the undisputed representative of the
country's Shiite community.
Yet some of the party's coreligionists have started to publicly question
Hizbullah's political monopoly. They worry that its ambitious gambit to topple
the Western-backed government is intended to benefit backers in Iran and Syria
and will be detrimental to the long-term interests of Shiites.
"Hizbullah's actions definitely are not in the interests of Shiites nor of
Lebanon," says Sheikh Ali al-Amine, the Shiite mufti of the Jabal Amel district
of south Lebanon.
Shiite voices of dissent are few, but are gaining more attention at a time when
Lebanon is serving as a battleground in the emerging struggle between Iran and
its regional allies - dubbed by some as a "Shiite crescent" - and the
Sunni-dominated Arab world led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Hizbullah is caught in the vortex of this regional contest, torn between
satisfying the demands of its foreign patrons while serving the needs of its
domestic Shiite constituency.
Demonstrations calling for the resignation of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad
Siniora have been ongoing since Dec. 1. Since then, the numbers of Hizbullah and
opposition supporters filling downtown Beirut seem to ebb and flow at the call
of Hizbullah chief Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
Thursday, in a bid to ease the political crisis, the Lebanese government and
opposition groups agreed on a national unity cabinet in which major decisions
could be taken only by consensus, said Arab League chief Amr Moussa. He told
reporters, however, that more talks were required to conclude the deal.
Mr. Moussa called on all the parties to defuse the tension and expressed hope
that the remaining issues could be resolved in the next two weeks. "Progress is
clear and consensus is rising. Please be patient a bit longer," he said. "We
hope to finish in the next two weeks or at the end of the month."
The anti-Hizbullah voices
Sheikh Amine has become Hizbullah's most visible critic after sparking
controversy four months ago by publicly refuting Hizbullah's claim of a "divine
victory" in its summer war against Israel. Still, he appears an unlikely critic
of Hizbullah.
Wearing a black turban that marks him as a descendent of the prophet Muhammad,
he was once close to Hizbullah and in 1981 taught the youthful Hassan Nasrallah
at a Shiite seminary in the Iranian city of Qom. The sheikh remembers the future
Hizbullah leader as "clever and a quick learner."
"I never wanted to turn myself into a figure of opposition to Hizbullah. But
during the war I saw mistakes," he says. "The aim of Hizbullah is to capture all
the Shiite sect and push it into the unknown."
During the war, Mona Fayyad, a professor at the Lebanese University in Beirut,
penned an acerbic opinion piece titled "To be a Shiite now," railing against the
sect's subservience to Hizbullah.
"To be a Shiite is to keep silent and not to ask what is the purpose of
liberating a country. Is it to destroy it all over again and to make it possible
for it to be occupied once more?" she wrote.
A year ago, Mohammed Mattar, a Shiite lawyer, filed a lawsuit against a
prominent Hizbullah cleric who had issued a fatwa, or religious edict,
forbidding any Shiite from accepting a ministerial post after the pro-Hizbullah
ministers walked out of the government.
"The edict crossed the red line between democracy and a parliamentary system run
by the clergy," Mr. Mattar says, describing the fatwa as the "politics of
intimidation."
The lawsuit, which was signed by five Shiites and three Christians, was, he
says, "bold, but ultimately you have to defend the principles of the republic.
If you want to live in a society ruled by clerics, go to Iran."
Those that have spoken out against Hizbullah say they have been subjected to
subtle intimidation. Amine had to cancel his e-mail address after receiving
anonymous hate mail, while others have been told they are not welcome at social
events.
Lokman Slim, a vocal Hizbullah critic who heads Hayya Bina, a political reform
group, says his name was included on two "lists of dishonor" circulated on the
Web during the war.
"The Hayya Bina website was shut down during the war due to kindly advice,
slash, threats," he says with a wry smile.
Hizbullah's dominance of Shiite politics in Lebanon has its roots in the
Lebanese state's historical neglect of the Shiite community. Traditionally
marginalized by Lebanon's Christian and Sunni elite and ruled by a handful of
feudal clans, the Shiites were mainly confined to the impoverished rural south
and east.
Hizbullah was established with Iranian support in the wake of Israel's 1982
invasion of Lebanon and soon began to challenge the already existing Amal
Movement for dominance of Shiite politics.
Both groups secured loyalty through offering services to their constituents.
Nabih Berri, the leader of Amal and Lebanon's parliamentary speaker, adopted a
typically Lebanese system of patronage, using his influence within the state to
provide his supporters with employment in government institutions.
From shadow militia to Shiite institution
Hizbullah, which initially operated outside the state, used Iranian funds to
build a shadow social welfare network for poor Shiites that included schools and
hospitals. The battlefield successes of Hizbullah's military wing against
Israeli occupation forces further sustained its popularity and earned it a
regional standing.
Today, Hizbullah is a formidable multifaceted organization, arguably the
second-largest employer after the Lebanese state, with some 35,000 Shiite
families directly or indirectly dependent on the party.
Last year, it formed a strategic alliance with rival Amal, effectively absorbing
the movement into its own apparatus. That leaves Hizbullah as the only real
representative of Shiites, making it all but impossible for an alternative
Shiite political entity to emerge.
"According to opinion polls, Hizbullah commands the support of over 90 percent
of the community and it's very difficult for any new group to compete against
that," says Amal Saad-Ghorayeb of the Carnegie Endowment's Middle East Center in
Beirut.
Hizbullah's Shiite opponents argue that the party's popularity is lower than the
polls suggest. But they agree that the state's historical disregard for Shiites
is to blame as it created a social and political vacuum that was subsequently
filled by Hizbullah. Although they say there is a need for a political
alternative, swaying Shiite public opinion away from Hizbullah is a near
hopeless task.
"We are unable to compete against Hizbullah as secular republican Shiites," says
Mr. Slim. "They have God on their side, and it's impossible to compete."