Even though the eyes of supporters of the Shiite duo are currently turned towards the South, where the great challenge remains to maintain municipal elections despite Israeli attacks, the bitter pill of Beirut has not yet been digested in these circles. Hezbollah and Amal's popular environment is indeed wondering why the order was given to vote for the so-called party list in the capital, without the role of the duo being recognized and praised.
In fact, the examination of municipal election numbers in Beirut shows that the Shiite duo gave a block of 19,500 votes to the coalition list between various parties, sponsored by MP Fouad Makhzoumi, with the participation of the Ahbash and the approval of the Lebanese Forces (LF). It is these votes that allowed this list to win 23 seats and thus preserve Islamic-Christian parity in the capital as much as possible. Despite this, there has been no recognition of this role from the parties generally hostile to Hezbollah.
In these municipal elections, Beirut's results were not the only surprising ones. Everywhere, there were unexpected alliances, and the Shiites often gave votes to parties considered hostile. This was the case in some regions in the North, the Bekaa and Mount Lebanon. Even in Zahle, where the list supported by the LF won decisively, some believe that the wide vote gap with the rival list suggests it received Shiite votes. Yet the victory slogan launched by the LF goes back to the civil war era, when the fighters of this formation said: "In Zahle, you will not enter!" In the civil war era, this slogan was addressed to the Syrians, but today, Hezbollah supporters feel pointed at. Yet the same policy continues in the South, where in several mixed localities, part of the Shiite votes are benefiting the LF, or a Christian alliance, as in Maghdoucheh. Hezbollah supporters do not understand why the instructions are maintained when they do not change anything about the media campaigns conducted against the formation.
According to Hezbollah sources, a debate is taking place on this subject between the political leadership and different groups within the formation, the latter not being convinced by this position, especially in the current climate of polarization. But the general trend remains to make the fewest waves possible and not open the door to new controversies. This does not prevent some party members from indicating that this policy has not yielded positive results so far. On the contrary, it gives the impression that Hezbollah is too weakened to react and that it has no clear project, its priority seeming to be to content itself with continuing to exist.
On their side, proponents of the conciliatory attitude defend their position by specifying that Hezbollah now wants to integrate into the Lebanese social fabric and invest more in internal political life: something it had not done until now. After the conclusion of the Taif Agreement in the early 1990s, it decided to start participating in legislative elections to establish a parliamentary bloc. Then it took until 2005 and the country's division after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, as well as the departure of Syrian troops from Lebanon, for it to decide to participate in the government. This was then a desire to protect Hezbollah as much as possible from the executive's decisions. But despite this, it never wanted to involve itself too much in internal matters, leaving Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to manage the country's affairs.
Today, in this particularly delicate period, where Hezbollah is under attack on all fronts, military, social, financial and political, it has thus decided to fully engage in Lebanese internal life and show that it can play a positive role, as was the case in Beirut, where its votes helped maintain parity. It thus wants to be a regulatory element that protects Lebanese diversity, wherever it is found. This is why it believes it now deserves, along with the Amal Movement, the title of "national duo." In the optics of proponents of this political line, even if the other components continue their hostile campaign, they know perfectly well that their role is becoming indispensable in this period of general confusion. The party, therefore, calls on its supporters to be patient and ignore criticism because today the formation seeks to be part of the internal landscape.
Is this a preview of its new image, or a way to buy time with minimal problems? The coming months should provide answers to this question and especially show if this new policy convinces its supporters.
This article was translated from L'Orient-Le Jour.
