The camel
passes, but the desert remains
By Michael J. Totten
The Middle East
taught me pessimism. Much of the region goes in circles instead of progressing,
and I’ve seen one country after another circle the drain.
Optimism is very
American. It’s not exclusively American, and of course we have our own setbacks
and failures, but things have generally trended toward the better in American
life since the nation was founded.
The Middle East,
though, teaches another way of looking at history’s trajectory. My own naïve
optimism was dashed on the rocks in Lebanon and Iraq and hasn’t recovered. I
never even bothered with optimism in Egypt. There’s nothing there to be
optimistic about.
And I rarely
meet anybody who actually lives over there who isn’t a pessimist. Expecting the
best while everyone around you is expecting the worst is a difficult thing to
pull off. It probably isn’t advisable even to try.
But I’m finding
a bit of homegrown optimism in some quarters of Lebanon now, despite the fact
that the economy is on its back and the Syrian war threatens to blow the
country to pieces again, and I’d be remiss if I didn’t report it. The place has
a serious case of the jitters and everyone knows this summer will be the third
bad one in a row, but the medium and long term might be a little bit better, at
least for some.
Though not for
Hezbollah. No, the medium and long term for Hezbollah looks bleaker than ever.
That crowd still refuses to speak to me, but I did sit down and talk to three
dissident members of Lebanon’s Shia community from which Hezbollah draws its
support. They all think the so-called Party of God has begun its long journey
downward.
“I’m
optimistic,” said Nadim Koteich, whose political talk show on Future TV is one
of the top-rated in the country.
“Really?” I
said. “Can you explain that? Because I don’t meet many like you over here.”
“We’re
approaching a turning point,” he said. “The problem for an organization like
Hezbollah is that when it reaches the height of its power, it has no future.
It’s all downhill from the top.”
The height of
Hezbollah’s power—or its support, anyway—came on May 25 in the year 2000 when
Israel withdrew its armed forces from South Lebanon, which it had occupied
since the middle of Lebanon’s civil war in 1982. The Israelis invaded to
demolish Yasser Arafat’s state-within-a-state along the border, which the
Palestine Liberation Organization used to stage terrorist attacks against
Israel, and the Israelis stayed there to ensure another group didn’t rise up in
the PLO’s place.
It didn’t work
out. Drunk on ambition and power, the revolutionary Islamic Republic regime in
Iran, still fresh and new at the time, exported itself to Lebanon’s Bekaa
Valley and the Israeli border area where a historically disenfranchised people
had long been awaiting a savior.
Lebanon’s Shia
population initially hailed the invading Israelis as liberators from
Palestinian (Sunni) perfidy, but the Israelis were no match for the Shia’s co-religionists
in Iran, who exported not only guns, money, and power, but also ideology.
Anti-Sunnism was replaced—or, supplemented—with anti-Zionism. Iran’s new
guerrilla and terrorist proxy Hezbollah used the increasingly hated Israeli
occupation to rally the locals around them, and the Israelis fought Hezbollah
in a slow-motion counterinsurgency for eighteen long years.
“In the late
1990s,” Koteich said, “Hezbollah actually said they were worried about what
would happen if the Israelis left Lebanon. Because then what
would they do?”
The Israelis did
finally leave in 2000. Even Lebanese citizens who were not Shias—indeed, some
of whom were not even Muslims—said Hezbollah’s resistance was justified and
even heroic. But most Lebanese expected and wanted the militia to disarm since
the war was over. It didn’t.
“Let me tell you
a joke about Yemen,” Koteich said. “The country, as you know, is backward and
poor, so the advisor to the president comes up with the idea to declare war on
the United States. The president tells the advisor he’s nuts. The advisor says
Japan declared war on the United States and was rebuilt from scratch. The
president says, okay, so your idea is we declare war on America, we lose,
and then the U.S. rebuilds the country? The advisor says, yes, Mr. President,
that’s it exactly. The president says, okay, but what if we win?”
That’s the
position Hezbollah found itself in after the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon.
What was the Party of God supposed to do now? What’s a “resistance”
for if there’s nothing left to resist?
“Winning is
losing,” Koteich said and smiled. “Hezbollah belongs to the past. They insist
their future is based on their past, which is their resistance and weapons.
They need to reinvent themselves. They aren’t fighting Israel anymore, so
instead they’re going head to head with this Salafist Sheikh Assir in Sidon
over two or three apartments. It’s ridiculous.”
Sheikh Assir is
a championship lunatic in the predominantly Sunni city of Sidon south of
Beirut. He looks like Osama bin Laden and more or less shares the dead
terrorist’s worldview. (Al Qaeda is the terrorist wing of the Salafist
movement.) But the number of Lebanese Sunnis who share Assir’s and bin Laden’s
view of the world is microscopic. Salafists are less relevant in Lebanese
politics than even the communists. I don’t worry about them at all when I go
there. In Egypt, yes, and in Tunisia to a much lesser extent, but not in
Lebanon. I don’t think I’ve even seen three of them in the eight years I’ve
been working there on and off. I certainly didn’t see any when I lived there,
and my apartment was in a Sunni neighborhood. But Hezbollah needs someone to
fight, and now they have this guy. Hezbollah, though, isn’t “resisting” the
Salafists. They’re just making noise.
“Hezbollah can’t
imagine a role for the Shia aside from being the ‘resistance’ of Lebanon,”
Koteich said, “but it’s over. There’s nothing left to resist. They’re like
communist parties in the former Soviet Union. They have their prisons, they
have their bread, they have their hospitals, and that’s it.”
They’re under
extraordinary pressure now and afraid of getting into another internal
conflict. “Their invasion of Beirut in May of 2008 cost them so much,” he said.
“They lost credibility. They’re not fighting Israel anymore. They’re just a
militia that shoves the country around like bullies in high school. Sure, they
can hit people and push them, but nobody likes them. If you’re a bully you can
date the most beautiful girl on the campus, but you’re a sonofabitch and she’s
a bitch, so who cares?”
The Shia have
been in Lebanon for a thousand years, but Hezbollah has only existed since
1982. It wouldn’t exist at all if it weren’t for the Islamic Republic regime in
Iran, for Hezbollah is little more than the overseas branch of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Hezbollah also
wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the Assad regime next door in Syria. Damascus
brokered the Taif Agreement that ended Lebanon’s civil war, and part of that
agreement required the disarmament of all militias in Lebanon, including
Hezbollah. Syria oversaw that disarmament. Hezbollah, however, didn’t hand over
its weapons. The Syrian regime wanted Hezbollah to stick around because it’s
useful against Israel and Beirut. If the Assad family had wanted Hezbollah gone
in 1990, Hezbollah would have been gone.
So if Assad
falls in Syria, how will it affect Hezbollah?
“It will be
huge,” Koteich said. “For decades they’ve had this powerful state behind them,
along with a corridor for weapons coming out of Iran. They’ve had this enormous
machine and all its tools at their back, and it will be a tremendous blow when
they lose it.”
The mood in the
Shia community now is a mixture of fear and righteousness. Hezbollah is better
than anyone in Lebanon at ginning up paranoia and fear, partly because
Hezbollah itself is by far the most paranoid party in Lebanon. “They’re saying
the Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood are going to take over. Extremists
Sunnis in Lebanon are like two or three percent, but the Shia here are afraid.
They’re afraid that when Assad falls, the Nusra front will take over Syria.”
That’s an actual
possibility, even if it’s remote. The only reason the Nusra front (which is the
Syrian branch of Al Qaeda) has any support right now is because it’s fighting
Assad. Everyone knows the secular movements in Syria (not to mention the
Alawites, the Christians, the Druze, and the Kurds) will all resist Nusra once
the regime is toppled. But it’s nevertheless a possibility. The most ruthless
often prevail after regime-change. The Muslim Brotherhood took over Egypt, and
it did so there with the consent of the governed.
But the
Salafists are not going to take over Lebanon. Ninety percent of Lebanon’s
Sunnis support Saad Hariri’s Future Movement party, which is liberal and
capitalist.
“Who do
Lebanon’s Shia fear most?” I asked Koteich. “The Sunnis or the Israelis?”
He ought to
know. He’s a Shia himself. He’s not a Hezbollah supporter—not by a long
shot—but he’s a Shia and he knows what moves them for better or worse.
“The Sunnis, of
course,” he said. “They have always feared Sunnis more than Israelis.”
*
So what does
Hezbollah want in the year 2013, aside from preserving its interests in Syria?
I asked Hanin Ghaddar, managing editor of the online magazine NOW Lebanon. She grew up in
South Lebanon, her family is Shia, but today she lives in Beirut.
“The question,”
she said, “is not what Hezbollah wants. The question is what Iran wants.
Iran wants Hezbollah to stay strong in Lebanon because they can use it for some
regional influence and control. Without Hezbollah, they’ll lose a lot. They’re
losing the Syrian regime. They’re doing everything they can, but they know
Assad is going to fall eventually. So Hezbollah is in Syria to make sure that
when the government falls they will have an enclave in Syria protected by the
Alawites and the Iranians so they can maintain the logistical routes for their
weapons. They need to keep the city of Homs because without it they’ll lose the
link. So they aren’t over there helping Assad survive, they’re over there
preserving their rat line.”
She insists
Hezbollah does not want an Islamic state in Lebanon. “They don’t care about
that,” she said. “They couldn’t get it even if they wanted it.”
I find that hard
to believe, but I should point out a few things. The parts of Lebanon
controlled by Hezbollah aren’t ruled by Islamic law even today. Unlike in Iran,
for instance, women can wear whatever they want. Bloodletting during Ashura is
banned because it’s “barbaric.” Alcohol consumption and pre-marital sex are
rampant. The Hezbollah regions function like a total surveillance security
state in some ways, but they don’t function like a theocracy. The security
regime they’ve installed has nothing to do with the mosque and everything to do
with preserving their own power and weapons.
Deep down I’m
sure they would prefer a Shia theocracy like they have in
Iran. I know they do, actually. This isn’t a guess. But it’s impossible in
Lebanon. The Shia are a minority. So are the Sunnis. So are the Christians.
Everybody in Lebanon is a minority. Theocratic Shias are a minority within
their own community, even among “resistance” supporters.
And it’s
impossible for even the strongest factions to rule over others, which is why
not even Hezbollah attempts it. This is obvious when you’re in Lebanon. Take a
drive from East Beirut up to the southern fringes of Tripoli.
You’ll pass
through an enormous skyscrapering Christian entity that looks a little like
Hong Kong at night. Then drive up into the mountains. That area is also almost
entirely Christian, and thanks to the terrain it’s all but unconquerable.
It has been this
way for two thousand years. Everybody is armed, and everybody will fight to the
death to preserve their freedom to live as they please. These are the reasons
why Lebanon, unlike other Middle East countries, still has so many
Christians—until very recently an outright Christian majority.
Forcing those
people to live in a Shia theocracy would be as difficult, if not more
difficult, than pulling the same job in Texas. Theoretically the Sunnis of
Lebanon would be easier to conquer, but they have the entire rest of the Arab
world at their back.
“What they
want,” Ghaddar said, “is political control over state institutions. And the
reason they want control over state institutions is so they can control
Lebanon’s foreign policy. They can use the state institutions to make sure no
one gets close to their arms. They’d rather do this through elections, but they
had to use their weapons to turn the election results around because they
didn’t win. What they did in 2008 was a coup, basically.”
But what do
the people of South Lebanon want? Most of them support
Hezbollah to an extent, but they didn’t create Hezbollah, nor does it answer to
them. The party takes its orders from Tehran.
“Let me put it
to you this way,” she said. “The highest consumption of alcohol in Lebanon
outside Beirut is in the south. This image that they’re really conservative and
religious is nonsense. The amount of alcohol consumed in the dahiyeh is
unbelievable. They drink huge amounts of whiskey, arak, and wine.”
Young people,
she says, want to leave the country. Pretty much all of them. She didn’t leave
Lebanon, but she did leave the south and moved to Beirut. There’s nothing for
her in the south.
“They want a
better lifestyle,” she said, “and they want security. The better lifestyle is
not there, and neither is security. They think Hezbollah provides them with
security, but recently they’ve started to question that. Because what Hezbollah
is doing now is no longer resistance. They had their ‘divine victory’ in 2006,
but the truth is they didn’t survive that. They won morally insofar as they
were perceived as the heroes, but they suffered terrible losses. It’s finished.
And that’s why they called it a ‘divine victory.’ They can’t have a super divine
victory next, following by a super-duper divine victory. That was
it.”
Now they’re
fighting in Syria. I seriously doubt Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan
Nasrallah ever thought he’d be fighting in Syria, but that’s what he’s doing.
And Ghaddar says many Lebanese Shia are furious at him because of it.
“Hezbollah is
dragging Lebanon into the sectarian war in Syria and dragging the Shia into
another war they don’t want. Resisting Israel is one thing, but fighting the
region’s Sunnis is something else.”
It’s a fight
they can’t win. There are fewer than two million Sunnis in Lebanon, but there
are twenty million people in Syria. And most of those people are Sunnis.
Hezbollah has a fighting force of only five thousand.
“I talked to
someone last week who is close to Hezbollah officials,” she said. “This guy has
been pro-resistance for sure, but he’s not happy with what’s going on now. He
told me that a lot of Hezbollah officers are refusing to follow orders when
they’re told to go to Syria. This never happened before. Ever.
For them, this isn’t resistance. It doesn’t make sense. It’s not what they
signed up for. There’s nothing left for Hezbollah to resist. Israel isn’t here.
Now they’re doing operations in Bulgaria and Cyprus. That’s also not
resistance. So what are they doing? Money laundering. Drug trafficking.
Corruption like crazy everywhere. People in the south see it more than we do.”
Part of
Hezbollah’s support used to come from the fact that they were perceived as not
being corrupt, but that’s over now, too.
“Even my family
members who are big Hezbollah supporters are talking about the corruption,” she
said. “One of my relatives told me she hates them now. And she has always been
a huge resistance supporter.”
A large number
of Lebanon’s Shia may not like Hezbollah so much anymore, but the support is
still there because they feel like they don’t have any choice. They are afraid.
Every sect felt this way during the civil war, when even people who are natural
cosmopolitan pacifists supported one of “their own” sectarian militias because
they were afraid of the others. It would happen to you, too, if you lived in an
environment with a weak and dysfunctional state that can’t provide security
while your neighbors are trying to kill you.
“They don’t
think Hezbollah is the answer anymore,” she said, “but what they see everywhere
in Lebanon outside the south are people who want to eat them alive.”
*
What’s the
United States supposed to do about this? There’s hardly anything the United
States can or should do in Lebanon aside from back our friends diplomatically
and sit back and watch, but Lokman Slim, Lebanon’s most famous liberal Shia
activist, has a suggestion. He’s not at all likely to get his wish any time
soon, but he has a suggestion.
“Washington
needs a Shia policy,” he said.
A Shia policy?
What does that mean?
“You can either
neglect us,” he said, “which promotes the most radical among us, or you can
take us seriously. And you have to realize that within the Arab world, whether
you like it or not, the agents of change are Shias. In Bahrain, they are Shias.
In Lebanon, for better or for worse, they are Shias. In Syria, you have to
realize that the Alawites represent diversity. I hate Bashar al-Assad, but I’ll
defend the Alawites. In Syria, the Alawites are part of what I’m describing as
the Shia.”
The
Alawites—Bashar al-Assad’s minority sect—are not actually Shias, not really.
Washington thinks they are, but that’s because back in the 1970s the Lebanese
cleric Musa Sadr issued a fatwa declaring them Shias. For a thousand years
before that, no one thought of the Alawites as Shias or even Muslims. What they
are is a secretive and closed heterodox minority that fuses Christianity,
Gnosticism, and Twelver Shia Islam together into something else entirely.
Muslims have always considered them infidels.
“I’m expanding
the term Shia to include anyone who isn’t an orthodox Sunni,” Slim said. “What
I’m referring to here are the minorities. And this is a condition for the survival
of a Jewish state. Israel can’t survive on its own if it isn’t integrated into
a big diverse colorful picture. This doesn’t mean I want to see Shia states. I
want to see diversity become the rule of the game. First we are human beings.
Only then do we have these complicated layers of identities. We need to promote
a patchwork of identities.”
For all of the
20th century, and to a lesser extent so far in the 21st,
Washington has thought of and treated the Middle East as a monolithic bloc of
conservative Sunni Arabs. That’s because the U.S. discovered the Middle East in
the Persian Gulf region thanks to the oil, and because Washington formed its
most stable (though dubious) alliances there. It’s also where the American
military is based in the region.
But the Gulf is
the Gulf. The Eastern Mediterranean and North African parts of the Arab world
are radically, drastically, different. The three disparate regions may as well
be on different planets. The Levant—the Eastern Mediterranean—is
mind-bogglingly diverse. It is much more culturally modern. And it’s a lot more
fractious and prone to armed conflict.
The Shia are a
minority in Lebanon, making up only a third or so of the population. They’re an
even smaller minority region-wide, and a smaller minority still in the wider
world of Islam. The overwhelming majority of Muslims on earth are Sunnis. The
Shia have been historically disenfranchised pretty much everywhere in the world
outside Iran. The only people on earth reaching out to the Shia of Lebanon are
the Iranians. That’s what Lokman Slim wants to change. Before, they were
neglected by Lebanon’s Sunnis, Christians, and Druze. They were neglected by
the West and by the Israelis. They were neglected even by the Shah’s regime in
Iran. Nobody paid them the slightest bit of respect or attention until the
Iranian Revolution installed Ayatollah Khomeini.
The Shia of Iraq
have a similar complex. “You discovered Iraq in 2003,” Slim said, “so you don’t
know that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki used to serve tea here at Sayyed
Fadlallah’s mansion. He has had only two ties in his whole life and he used to
serve tea to Fadlallah in Lebanon. Now he’s prime minister, but you should ask
him where he spent his dark years. I don’t like him, but you should understand
where he comes from and what he fears.”
Like all the
world’s Shia, Maliki fears the Sunnis, the ancient oppressor and foe.
“The Saudis,”
Slim said, “are the biggest idiots, but the West never made an effort to get to
know the others, the Shia, the Kurds, the Alawites. Re-read the speech
Condoleezza Rice made in Cairo in 2006. She said that for sixty years the U.S.
relied on allies to provide security in the region, but the region didn’t get
security and didn’t get democracy. John Kerry and Barack Obama need to understand
that this region is fed up, but Obama can do whatever he wants. He’ll only stay
for a couple of years. Our civil wars will remain.”
He mentioned a
hypothetical Shia woman in South Lebanon who runs a shop and would like to
expand her business. She isn’t interested in theocracy or “resistance.” She
wants to expand her business and live something that at least approximates
normal life.
“What does she
think about Bashar al-Assad?” I said. Assad takes Lebanon’s Shia seriously, or
pretends to, at any rate. He provides joint support with Iran for Hezbollah, at
least.
“She hates
Sunnis,” he said. “She doesn’t think anything about Bashar. She hates and fears
the guys of Al Qaeda and Jabhat al-Nusra.”
“As well she
should,” I said.
“As well she
should,” he said. “She sells whiskey and arak. And the guys from
al-Nusra and Al Qaeda are suicide bombers. You can’t do politics with them. You
can’t start a project with suicidal people if it won’t be finished until 2015.
The rest of us don’t want to go to heaven. We want to create heaven on earth.”
I have no idea,
really, how many people he’s speaking for here. The Shia of Lebanon did not
elect him as their spokesman. He’s a dissident within the community, an
ideological minority. But he’s also a part of that community. He shares their
culture and frames of reference if not their politics.
“If you don’t
talk to us,” he said, “we will become more stubborn, but if you open up we can
finally become who we really are.”
“Hezbollah won’t
talk to us,” I said.
It’s actually
against the law for anyone in the United States government to talk to
Hezbollah, but even if that weren’t the case, Hezbollah still wouldn’t talk to
us. I don’t work for the government and never have, but Hezbollah won’t talk to
me either.
“Forget
Hezbollah,” he said. “It is just a component of Iran’s imperial system.
Hezbollah can go to hell.”
“So who in
Lebanon’s Shia community are we supposed to talk to?” I said.
“Washington
knows everybody,” he said, “but there is no policy. When there is a decision to
call a carrot a carrot, Washington will get everything it needs from our
community.”
“That could take
a while,” I said.
“That’s okay,”
he said and comfortably leaned back in his chair. “We will still be sitting
here drinking our arak and will be ready when they are.”
Slim doesn’t
only oppose Hezbollah’s’ ideology of “resistance.” He also opposes its radical
Islam, root and branch, as do most Lebanese and even a sizeable percentage of
“resistance” supporters. But other parts of the Middle East swoon to radical
Islam. An outright majority of Egyptians do to one extent or
another. Even a sizeable minority in Tunisia voted for the allegedly “moderate”
(but not really) Islamist Ennahda. The region may have to pass through a
turbulent era of Islamist ascendancy before crashing and burning and getting it
out of its system. Even Lebanon, where radical Islam enjoys less support, has
suffered greatly because of it.
“We need to live
through this difficult period,” Slim said, “and we need you to help us get
through it as quickly as possible. The camel passes, but the desert remains.
Help Islam fade. Help Islam become just an identity. Help Islam rest in peace
calmly.
No comments:
Post a Comment