The Lebanese opposition, led by Hizballah and its Christian allies, turned what was supposed to be a general strike into a city-wide riot , with opposition followers blocking roadways with burning cars and tires, and exchanging volleys of stones with pro-government hecklers (Terrorist Incident forthcoming). The opposition organized the performance in an effort to put further pressure on the incumbent Lebanese government to concede to various political demands .
While Hizballah is attempting to portray the drama as a populist outburst, Lebanese media sources are reporting on the meticulous preparations Hizballah has taken for this latest display of intimidation. The organization is accused of busing in Shiite supporters from other parts of Lebanon to throng the streets, positioning cars, gasoline, and other obstacles to block the roads and intimidating a good portion of the city?s pro-government workers to stay home to make the strike seem more popular. As January 23 wore on, the pro-government paper al-Nahar reported that trucks flying Hizballah flags carrying dirt and rocks and ?Hizballah-run bulldozers? worked to erect more permanent road blocks.
While the army attempted to open some major roadways, it limited the use of force, choosing negotiating with protesters over forcibly driving them away. This may have been a conscious show of restraint by a government determined to portray itself as the latest victim of Hizballah?s terrorism. However, some feared that the troops? soft handling of the protesters was, instead, a sign that Lebanon?s sectarian, fractious army may not be united enough to come out strongly on behalf of the government.
Hizballah?s challenge to the Lebanese government started with political manipulation. In November, it orchestrated the resignation of Shiite ministers from the Lebanese cabinet in an attempt to render the government unconstitutional. The nation?s constitution demands a certain proportion of Shiite representation in the cabinet. When the Lebanese government refused to buckle under such a maneuver, it escalated to organizing a sit-in in downtown Beirut that began on December 1 and is still in place. Still, the Lebanese government refused to give in to what it termed Hizballah?s ?blackmail.? Now, Hizballah is demonstrating that has the ability to shut down Beirut.
The timing coincides with the Paris III conference scheduled for January 25, where the Lebanese government will ask international donors and lenders to relieve Lebanon of some of its debt burden and provide funds for reconstruction. Shutting down the capital so close to this important conference is designed to make the incumbent government look weak and vulnerable to scare away potential donors and lenders. A positive outcome at Paris III would show the international community?s support for the government and give it some of the money necessary to provide for the reconstruction of Lebanon. Control over rebuilding could do a lot to expand or entrench a ruling power. The government hopes funds from Paris III will give it both the control and the credit for supervising this process.
Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah is attempting to counteract this by demonizing the Paris III conference and claiming that he can fund Lebanon?s reconstruction. He has painted Paris III as sending the already heavily indebted country further into the red and has offered to pay reconstruction costs himself.
The Lebanese government and Hizballah are both expected to come to the negotiating table before any widespread violence breaks out. In preparation for negotiations, they are trying to shore up their power?Hizballah by demonstrating its ability to close down Beirut physically and the Lebanese government by heading to Paris to meet with powerful friends. The conflict can be expected to escalate until both sides have done all they can short of sectarian violence to show their relative strength.
