For months now, Hezbollah, along with its MPs, senior figures and a broader circle of clerics, journalists and online activists have pushed to firmly plant the idea that the Lebanese State bears responsibility for what’s happening.
They accuse it of failing to stop Israeli attacks and secure the withdrawal of Israeli forces from positions they still hold in southern Lebanon, of delays in rebuilding areas damaged by the war and of showing near total disregard for the fate of the Shiite community in the country.
To say that this campaign is unfair and built on false claims would be an understatement.
That, however, has not stopped Hezbollah from relying heavily on these accusations to preserve its prestige and popularity among its core supporters at all costs and to silence growing questions and even doubts, among those within the community who remain less tightly aligned with the party.
“Fear our wrath,” said Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah a few days ago, taking at jab and the president and the prime minister as well as the wider Lebanese public, whom Hezbollah circles often portray as “Zionist” sympathizers
What would be the right response to this? Should one fault the MP for his arrogance?
Arrogance defines the party. And not even the crushing setback it suffered after the reckless “support front for Gaza” has curbed it, despite the disastrous military, political, diplomatic, economic and human consequences that adventure inflicted on Lebanon.
This came even as a majority of Lebanese shouted themselves hoarse to say they wanted nothing to do with that so-called support front.
The same arrogance resurfaced just yesterday, voiced by the party’s own leader, Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem, in a rambling speech in which he allowed himself to once again put Lebanon at risk. Not to defend Sour or Bint Jbeil, but to come to the aid of what is clearly more sacred in his movement’s eyes: its Iranian patron.
In doing so, he showed little concern for the fact that the fate of Tehran’s waning regime ranks among the lowest priorities not only for most Lebanese, but increasingly for a large share of Shiites as well.
Once again, denouncing arrogance will not be enough. Faced with the burden Hezbollah has become, the state must take the bull by the horns and push back firmly and effectively.
This does not call into question the containment policy adopted by President Joseph Aoun toward Hezbollah, coupled with a conciliatory approach toward the Shiite community at large.
That strategy remains sound as long as the goal stays clear and unchanged: A state monopoly over weapons and the full integration of the Shiite community into the Lebanese dream, a dream that for now looks more like a nightmare.
What is missing, however, is a more assertive, more deliberate and above all more political response to the campaign the party is waging.
Legal action against a handful of journalists accused of defamation, especially when such cases fall outside normal legal procedures, will not provide an adequate response.
Lebanon must under no circumstances sacrifice its status as a haven for freedoms in the region to counter the propaganda of a totalitarian party.
What is needed instead is a counter-campaign grounded in simple, indisputable facts. One such fact is Hezbollah’s responsibility for delaying the reconstruction of southern Lebanon and other affected areas through its stubbornness, clearly driven by Iran.
Every resident of these affected areas who has lost a home should be confronted with the concrete realities that show who is blocking the flow of funds needed to rebuild their house.
Is it too much to ask that the Information Ministry, an institution largely unnecessary in democratic countries, finally play a useful role and carry out work that would allow Lebanese taxpayers, for once, to feel that their money served a purpose?
This article was translated from L'Orient-Le Jour by Sahar Ghoussoub.
