Analyses
,
Hezbollah’s Gaza War Stance Deepens Divides in Lebanon
Vanessa Breidy 31 July 2024

Twenty-four hours after Israel’s declaration of war following October 7, 2023 – which has resulted in over 35,000 Palestinian deaths, with 52 percent being children, women, and the elderly, according to the UN – Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Hasan Nasrallah announced a “war of support for Gaza” from South Lebanon. This declaration was made solely by the political armed party Hezbollah, not the Lebanese government, thus constituting a clear violation of Lebanese state sovereignty and the rule of law. This breach has elicited varied reactions from Lebanese parties, with some Christian parties declaring the inevitability of political system reform and emphasizing the necessity of opening up the debate as soon as the war ends. Even though the situation is becoming more complex, especially after the deaths of Hezbollah’s senior military commander Fuad Shukur and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, the political landscape remains deeply divided.

In Lebanon, people from eighteen different religious communities coexist under a consociational political system, officially adopted since the country’s independence in 1943. This crucial social contract allowed Christians and Muslims to live together equally, setting aside their affiliations with the West (particularly the Maronites’ special relations with the French mandate) or the East (especially the Sunni’s aspiration for unity with Syria). The consociational system has undergone various shake-ups over the years. The first notable disruption occurred in 1958, driven by the ideology of a unified Arab Nation promoted by Gamal Abdel Nasser, which captivated the Arab world, including Lebanon. The second major shake-up was the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990), during which the different Lebanese communities could not agree on the protection of the country’s sovereignty from Israeli, Palestinian or Syrian aggressions. This discord led to factions fighting on opposing fronts. This war ended with the Taif Agreement in 1989, which resulted in Christians losing many privileges and roles in the political system. After that, the country remained under Syrian occupation until 2005, except for the South, which was occupied by Israel until 2000, excluding a few disputed lands. The main opposition force to this Southern occupation was Hezbollah.

Lebanese Shia party Hezbollah was established in Lebanon in 1982 as a paramilitary army with the support of Iran and is commanded by the Guide of the Islamic Revolution, as its leaders have declared on several occasions. A crucial turning point in Hezbollah’s capacity and strategy occurred in 2005 after the Syrians were forced to withdraw from Lebanon following the assassination of Prime Minister Rafic Hariri. The Assad regime was accused of being involved in the assassination, prompting the international community to push for the application of Resolution 1559, calling for Syrians to withdraw their forces from Lebanon and cease interference in Lebanese internal politics.

The Syrian military withdrawal compelled Assad to facilitate Hezbollah’s growth, enabling it to enter the political scene, expand its armament, and eventually become stronger than the Lebanese army. This excess of power has allowed Hezbollah to dominate decisions of war and peace in the country. Besides the ongoing conflict, Hezbollah autonomously initiated a war with Israel in 2006. It also engaged in armed confrontations with other Lebanese communities, including the Sunnis in May 2008 and the Christians on October 14, 2021.

In the wake of Hezbollah’s announcement of support for Gaza, the positions of various Lebanese parties and religious communities began to emerge. The Christian parties, despite their contradictions, have announced their opposition to Hezbollah’s declaration of war. This includes the Lebanese Forces, Kataeb and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM). However, Gebran Bassil, the President of the FPM, has not maintained as firm a stance as the other Christian parties due to his fluctuating relationship with Hezbollah.

On the other hand, many Sunni representatives, such as the Future Movement, have declared their opposition to Hezbollah’s declaration of war while also expressing support for the unity of the Lebanese and Palestinian people in the conflict against Israel. Another Sunni group, the “Islamic Group” began fighting alongside Hezbollah ten days after the war front was opened from South Lebanon. The Socialist Party, the largest representative of the Druze, has also declared its opposition but is not actively promoting its position. The ongoing atrocities in Gaza, the high number of civilian casualties, and the destruction of infrastructure – ranging from schools and hospitals to houses and utilities – have made it unpopular in many Lebanese circles to advocate for stopping support to Gaza while witnessing the devastation suffered by the Palestinians.

On the other hand, the parliamentary opposition forces, composed of deputies from different confessions, presented a petition to Speaker Nabih Berri on July 22, 2024. They requested a parliamentary session to address the necessity for the government to take responsibility for the situation in the South. The petition urges the following steps: to end all military actions on Lebanese territory by any party outside the framework of the Lebanese state and its institutions; declare a state of emergency in the South; hand over control to the Lebanese army; authorize the Lebanese army to respond to any attack on Lebanese territory; and engage diplomatically to revert to the 1949 ceasefire agreement and fully implement Resolution 1701.

Speaker Berri, a close ally of Hezbollah, has not welcomed this petition. In fact, it would be difficult to adopt such decisions in either the parliament or the government, where Hezbollah and its allies dominate. Members of the parliamentary opposition have repeatedly stated that their position is not due to a lack of support for the Palestinians’ right to reclaim their lands and secure an independent sovereign state. Rather, it is because Lebanon cannot be the only country in the whole Arab and Islamic world to declare war on its territory, thereby endangering its people, land, and economy.

 

Although the Arab people continue to strongly support the Palestinian cause, military backing from official Arab channels is lacking and comes primarily from Iran and its allies. The first reason is that the major Arab countries either face significant internal struggles and divisions, such as Syria and Iraq, or prioritize their national interests without aspiring to a unified Arab Nation, like Egypt and the Gulf states. The second reason is that Hamas’ military agenda no longer operates under any Arab umbrella except that of Qatar, and no Arab government is willing to intervene and involve its country in a conflict that has not been authorized by its own authorities and over which it has no control.

The Lebanese opposition questions the utility of the current war, especially given that the last ten months have demonstrated Hezbollah’s inability to stop the harm inflicted on the Palestinians or alter Israel’s agenda of demolishing Gaza. For the parliamentary opposition, it is clear that the conflict in South Lebanon serves only to destabilize the country and keep decisions about peace and war beyond the control of Lebanese official institutions. This situation, compounded by a long history of systemic malfunctions and state destabilization – such as the inability to elect a president for over a year and a half – has led some Lebanese Christian parties, like the Lebanese Forces (the largest group in the parliamentary opposition), to call for significant reform of the Lebanese system. Samir Geagea, the Secretary General of the Lebanese Forces, has notably declared that after the end of this war, the party aims to engage with other Lebanese factions to discuss the country’s future and path. He emphasized that Lebanon has not experienced stability for fifty years and that it is time to rethink the current system.

Previously, the Lebanese Forces avoided discussing such reforms, even though it was clear that the Taif reforms were ineffective or not implemented fully. They believed it was better to delay these discussions until Christian influence could significantly impact change. However, the repeated systemic crises and the failure to build a stable sovereign state since the Lebanese Civil War (1975-1990) now make the discussion of reforms an unavoidable step towards establishing a more functional state and rule of law in Lebanon.

 

 

Cover photo: Smoke billows from a site targeted by Israeli shelling in the southern Lebanese border village of Khiam on July 30, 2024, amid ongoing cross-border clashes between Israeli troops and Hezbollah fighters. (Photo by AFP)

 

SUPPORT OUR WORK

 

Please consider giving a tax-free donation to Reset this year

Any amount will help show your support for our activities

In Europe and elsewhere
(Reset DOC)


In the US
(Reset Dialogues)


x