Highlights
– Established in 1982 in response to Israeli occupation of south Lebanon
– Resistance movement that demands the complete withdrawal of Israel from Lebanese territories
– Participation in the Lebanese government has not led to its complete transformation into a political party, as demonstrated by its unwillingness to disarm
– A future military confrontation between the Lebanese Armed Forces and Hizballah is inevitable
Hizballah is a resistance movement founded in response to the 1982 Israeli occupation of south Lebanon during the Lebanese Civil War. Hizballah itself was an offshoot of “The Movement of the Deprived (1974)” and “Amal (1975),” both of which were formed by Shia cleric Musa al-Sadr in response to the oppression and economic deprivation of Lebanese Shia populations. Given the collapsed state of the Lebanese government and its past neglect of the Shia south, Hizballah followed in the footsteps of its predecessors as the sole defense for Lebanon’s Shia population.
Hailing from the Qom school of Shia theology, Musa al-Sadr was a friend and adherent to Ayatollah Ruhallah Khomeini’s version of the Marja Taqlid, the Wilayat al-Faqh. As a result, Musa al-Sadr’s intention when founding the Movement of the Deprived and Hizballah was never simply resistance but the establishment of a foothold for the Wilayat al-Faqh in Lebanon. Even after Musa al-Sadr’s disappearance in Libya in 1978, the movement maintained its connection with Iran and was headed by Qom-trained clerics.
Hizballah was born of the 1982 Israeli Invasion with the help of Iranian supplied weapons and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) training. In 1985, well into its battle against the Israeli occupation, Hizballah issued its manifesto entitled, “An Open Letter: The Hizballah Program.” The manifesto established Hizballah’s three primary objectives as:
• The expulsion of all foreign militaries from Lebanese soil; including: US, France, Israel, and their allies
• To bring to justice the Phalange militia for their crimes against Muslim and Christian communities
• The establishment of an Islamic government in Lebanon
To this end, Hizballah has used both conventional and non-conventional warfare to fight its enemies. In the Second Lebanon War, it demonstrated versatility by striking Israeli targets with Katyusha rockets, Improvised Explosive Devices (IED), long-range mortar shells, and booby-trapping military vehicles.
Political Party or Armed Combatant
Over the years, Hizballah’s development of a large social organ with an estimated 200,000 members and its role in the Lebanese government gave rise to questions of whether Hizballah will one day transform into a legitimate political party. The argument suggests that Hizballah’s participation in the Lebanese government and involvement in the community is the groundwork for a peaceful existence after its military objectives are obtained.
Proponents of this argument propose that after the last remaining Israeli foothold in Lebanon, the Sheba Farms (deemed a Syrian territory by the UN), is relinquished by the Israeli military, Hizballah will have fulfilled its mandate. As the theory goes, the realization of its raison d’être will result in a loss of public support for Hizballah’s arms and a popular call for the movement to disarm.
However, adherents of this theory ignore other motivations for Hizballah’s arms; including its status as the armed representative of Iran in the Levant and its fervent commitment to the liberation of Palestine.
The group maintains arguably the most capable army in Lebanon and was solely responsible for the forced withdrawal of Israel from Lebanese territory in 2000. It is accustomed to writing its own political and military policy and will not relinquish that power without a fight.
Future Relationship to the State
Hizballah proved in recent history its unwillingness to go “softly into the night.” Its determination to remain an armed representative of Iran and Syria was demonstrated in its July 12, 2006 attack on a mobile Israeli guard unit , subsequent war with Israel and rearmament, and unwillingness to elect a compromise candidate in the Lebanese Presidential election. Through the Second Lebanon War, Hizballah sought to demonstrate that it is the only military operating in Lebanon capable of defending against an Israeli attack. Therefore, Hizballah would argue, its disarmament under UN Resolution 1559, which calls for the “disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias,” would be detrimental to Lebanese National Security (Previous Report).
Likewise, the primary driver behind Hizballah’s uncompromising approach to the Lebanese Presidential election is its refusal to disarm. Hizballah and its allies are no longer the majority in the Lebanese parliament and, therefore, lack the power to defeat bills calling for the implementation of UN Resolution 1559. Consequently, Hizballah will not agree to the election of a compromise president without veto power in the Parliamentary Cabinet (Previous Report).
Through its readiness to promote instability and policies that have led to extensive economic deterioration in Lebanon, Hizballah demonstrated its survival, as a military power, is more important than the Lebanese state or the welfare of its people (Previous Report). In this context, it seems that a future confrontation between the Lebanese Armed Forces and Hizballah is inevitable. However, in the near-term, Hizballah will continue to engage Israel to prove its necessity while postponing the certain battle to extend the sovereignty of the Lebanese government to all of its territories.
