President Bush, Israel and its lobby claim that Hezbollah is
the same as al Qaeda. Our friend Bob Finch explores the
profound differences between Osama bin Laden and Hasan
Nasrullah, leader of Hezbollah and comes to an opposite
conclusion: Hezbollah’s tactics and strategy are just about
as different from those promoted by Osama bin Laden as it is
possible to get. Finch’s essay is of extreme importance for
Hezbollah unites Muslims and Christians, and heals the
Sunni-Shi’a strife, strife encouraged by Zionists and
nourished by al Qaeda. This also explains why just now the
British MI5 ‘discovered’ The Heathrow Gunpowder Plot.
I
wrote about it: Al Qaeda, a
murky Afghan-based group, founded by the US to fight the
Soviets in 1980s was in mothballs by 2001, when the US
policy makers resurrected it by crediting them with the 9/11
attack, athough
even today, five years later, their involvement is not
proven. Whoever attacked the Twin Towers and Pentagon (and
we do not know who did it) attracted a wave of sympathy
mixed with adoration among the passionate disenchanted of
the New World Order from Paris to Teheran, from Moscow to
Oklahoma. The Masters of Discourse were concerned that this
great harvest might be appropriated by an able and dangerous
(for them) group and preferred to credit it to their tame al
Qaeda. Since then, Al Qaeda has proved to be a valuable
American tool: they did nothing worth mentioning, but
beheaded tourists on video and dutifully instigated strife
between Sunni and Shi’a in Iraq, bombing mosques and killing
pilgrims. They could attract some good and daring young men
on the basis of their 9/11 credit – and bring them to
perdition. The rise of Hezbollah upset this arrangement.
Instead of fighting fellow Muslims, Hezbollah fights the
Judeo-American Empire. As opposed to al Qaeda’s fakery,
Hezbollah is the real thing, and they fight a real war,
never stopping to pose for a TV crew. The young and inspired
men keen on a good fight for a good cause turned to
Nasrallah. The deserted stooges of al Qaeda called their
followers to fight (Hezbollah), but in vain. The strife
between Sunnis and Shi’as is fading, and the Sunni majority
of the Arab world preferred Sayed Nasrallah, the Defender of
the Underprivileged, to the Shari’a enforcers of bin Laden
and Zarkawi. The Heathrow Gunpowder Plot is apparently a
desperate attempt by Al Qaeda’s patrons to refurbish the
faded glory of their creatures by showing that they are not
a completely spent force. This good showing by Hezbollah
will have serious consequences outside Lebanon – it will
reunite the Orient against the Empire.
Nasrullah versus bin Laden
By Bob Finch
Politically, Hasan Nasrullah’s tactics and strategy are at
the opposite end of the political spectrum from those
pursued by Osama bin Laden.
Firstly, Nasrullah condemned bin Laden’s Pentagon and New
York bombings.
Secondly, whilst bin Laden has encouraged a civil war in
Iraq between the two branches of Islam (to the great benefit
of the Jews and Americans), Nasrullah has pursued a strategy
uniting Shiites and Sunnis in Lebanon. The
leader of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia,
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi used to condemn Nasrullah for
trying to bring about such religious co-operation. The
benefit of Nasrullah’s strategy has become apparent during
the Israel’s attack on Lebanon,. “On July 21, nine days
after his forces captured the two Israeli soldiers,
Nasrallah answered Zarqawi and Tartusi. Looking relaxed and
reasonable, in a carefully staged interview with Al Jazeera,
he mentioned Zarqawi's statement. "Today, we are Shia
fighting Israel," he pointed out, in a peroration not unlike
the one he made the day his son died. "Our fighting and
steadfastness is a victory to our brothers in Palestine, who
are Sunnis, not Shia. So, we, Shia and Sunnis, are fighting
together against Israel, which is supported, backed, and
made powerful by America."” (Annia Ciezadlo ‘Sheik
Up’ July 28, 2006). (1)
Thirdly, Nasrullah is a religious pluralist who has sought a
political rapprochement
with Lebanese Christians. “Like Sadr, however, he
(Nasrullah) fully understood the multitude of Lebanon's
confessional system, never once calling for an Islamic state
in Lebanon, and always proclaiming to be a firm believer in
the right of all Lebanese, regardless of religion, to live
in harmony.” (Sami Moubayed ‘Lebanon guided by the Nasrullah
factor’ Asia Times February 26, 2005). Earlier this year,
Nasrullah reached a rapprochement
with the former exiled leader of the Lebanese Christians,
General Aoun. “Last week Ya Libnan reported that general
Aoun declared that Hezbollah is his closest ally. Yesterday
he made it official. Aoun and Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah,
Hezbollah Secretary General met to ink their agreement. Aoun
and Nasrallah were on opposing ends. Aoun was a main
proponent of anti-Syrian protests in the wake of former
Premier Rafik Hariri's assassination last February. His
organization supported the Cedar Revolution of March 14
while Nasrallah organized the pro-Syrian demonstration of
March 8. But Aoun broke with other anti-Syrian groups and
charted his own middle-of-the-road course with Syria and
with its allies in Lebanon. Nasrallah, meanwhile, broke an
old alliance with anti-Syrian politician Walid Jumblatt, and
with other partners in the coalition. The Shiite-Christian
embrace, which Nasrallah and Aoun repeatedly insisted was
"not a political alliance or front against other parties,
but rather a political rapprochement," was held at Mar
Mikhail Church, located a few blocks from Hezbollah's
headquarters in Beirut's southern suburbs. Nasrallah said
the meeting did not cover the issue of the presidency, but
insisted his party will support Aoun's candidacy for
president. "We see in Aoun a serious and competent candidate
who enjoys wide popularity," Nasrallah said.” (It's
official: Aoun and Hezbollah are allies’
February, 7th 2006). In other words, Nasrullah
propped up the Lebanon’s confessional political system by
supporting a Christian candidate for presidency even though
he knew that since the Lebanese Shiites are by far the
largest ethnic group in Lebanon then, democratically, they
should be entitled to contest and win the presidency. (2)
Just how much this rapprochement
paid off for Nasrullah is transparent from the fact that
Lebanon’s Christian community did not turn on Hezbollah
after the Jews started blitzing Lebanon. “When Israeli bombs
start landing in Christian Lebanon, the Christians did not
blame Hezbollah. If this was a war on Hezbollah, they
reasoned, then why were they being attacked? Attacking them
meant that this was a war on Lebanon - all of Lebanon, not
only the Shi'ites and Hezbollah.” (Sami Moubayed ‘Hezbollah
banks on home-ground advantage’
July 26, 2006). Both the Jews and Americans believed
that one of the political benefits of such a comprehensive
blitz would be to trigger off a civil war that would make
Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon that much easier. It
didn’t work because Nasrullah had succeeded in winning
allies across Lebanon’s religious groups. “While
neo-conservatives believed the destruction of Lebanon and
the death of civilians would incite the Lebanese to act
against Hezbollah, Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora,
Speaker Nabih Berri, Saad Hariri (son of assassinated prime
minister Rafik Hariri), General Michel Aoun, President Emile
Lahoud and other major leaders of Lebanon have predictably
rallied against Israeli actions, despite Hezbollah's initial
steps.” (Neda Bolourchi ‘Iran's
changing fortunes’
August 9, 2006). (3)
Fourthly, Nasrullah is a Lebanese nationalist whose prime
political objectives are regaining the freedom of the
innocent Lebanese people being held illegally in Jewish
prisons (including members of the South Lebanon Army who
collaborated with the Israel’s invasion after 1982) and,
secondly, ending the Israel’s occupation of Lebanese
territory. He has sought political co-operation with all
those who support the same objectives. As a consequence,
when he became head of Hezbollah he opened up the
organization to all Lebanese citizens. “Nasrallah
capitalized on this moment of popularity, opening the ranks
of Hezbollah to Lebanese from all sects and forming the
Lebanese Brigades, a unit with several thousand non-Shia
recruits.” (Annia Ciezadlo ‘Sheik
Up’ July 28, 2006). Nasrullah continues to promote
Lebanese nationalism. "God forbid, if the roof collapses, it
collapses on all of us," Nasrallah told at least 100,000
Shi'ite Muslims gathered for Ashura, the most solemn event
in their calendar. "Today we are responsible for a nation
that came out of the civil war ... but we face acute
problems, especially this year and in the past few months,"
the black-turbaned cleric said. "As Lebanese, we have no
choice for remedying our crises and problems except to
discuss and meet, even if we are angry and tense," he said.
"We must not repeat the mistakes of the past."” (Alistair
Lyon ‘Hizbollah Tells Lebanese to Cool Anti-Syria Line - Feb
19 2005).
Nasrullah has sought co-operation even with
his so-called enemies, “Even
Hezbollah's fiercest Lebanese foe, Druze leader Walid
Jumblatt, who during the ''Cedar Revolution'' praised Bush's
transformation strategy as ''the start of a new Arab world''
comparable to the fall of the Berlin Wall, told the
Financial Times this week that he was forced to support the
Shia militia against ''brutal Israeli aggression'' that
would result in the weakening of the central government and
the strengthening of Hezbollah and, through it, Syria and
Iran.” (Jim Lobe ‘U.S.
Watches Dreams of Transformation Dissolve’
August 03, 2006).
Fifthly, Nasrullah supports democracy. Osama bin Laden does
not. Nasrullah turned Hezbollah into a political party to
fight Lebanon’s local and national elections. If the 2005
national elections had been contested on a ‘One Person, One
vote’ system then Hezbollah would have ended up with far
more seats in the Lebanese
parliament and in the Lebanese cabinet. “Hezbollah's
political wing controls 14 of 128 seats in the Lebanese
parliament, two Cabinet ministries .” (Thomas Frank and
Yaakov Katz ‘Hezbollah
Maintains its Rocket Barrage’ July 27, 2006).
Incidentally, the ridiculous apostle of democracy, George
Bush, had tried to deter Lebanon from allowing Hezbollah to
take part in the elections.
“The US under Clinton had
consistently warned Beirut not to admit Hizbullah to the
government, and even the Bush administration had adopted
that position as recently as January of 2004.” (Juan
Cole ‘Is
the Arab Spring turning to Dust under Israeli Bombardment?’
July 14, 2006).
Sixthly, Osama bin Laden’s main priority is attacking
America and Americans. Nasrullah does not regard America as
Lebanon’s main enemy. As far as he, and thus Hezbollah, is
concerned Lebanon’s primary enemy is the racist Jewish
state. “During the recent crisis, Hezbollah has not attacked
U.S. targets. Hezbollah has no interest in attacking the
United States because "our response would be swift and
pretty definitive," says State Department counterterrorism
coordinator Henry Crumpton. "Hezbollah is, no doubt,
Israel's most formidable opponent," says Bob Baer, a former
CIA operative in the Middle East who investigated Hezbollah
in the 1980s. Baer says Hezbollah wants to "signal to
Muslims the war is against Israel. The idea is not to
destroy Western civilization but rather to fight an enemy
who is oppressing the Palestinians." (Thomas Frank and
Yaakov Katz ‘Hezbollah
Maintains its Rocket Barrage’ July 27, 2006).
Finally, Nasrullah has given up on his terrorist past, “The
main question raised by this Arab Spring is whether
Washington will be able to continue to view Hezbollah as
nothing more than a terrorist organization. Whatever else it
is, it clearly is an important Lebanese political party. And
evidence for its having carried off an international
terrorist strike in the past 7 years seems slim.” (Juan Cole
‘Hizbullah
Wins Big in South Lebanon’ June 6th 2005).
As a result of its extensive business, social, educational,
health, and political, activities Hezbollah was increasingly
becoming integrated into Lebanese society and politics
which, over the course of time, would have led to its
complete moderation. “After all, Hezbollah is a part of
Lebanon's coalition government and, per an Israeli media
report, only two months ago an Israeli general stated that
Hezbollah was moderating and integrating in Lebanon's
political process.” (Kaveh L Afrasiabi ‘A
war without borders in the making’
July 29, 2006). “Although many of the Christians,
Druze, and Sunni Muslims I met in Beirut before the bombing
started saw the militancy of Hezbollah as a threat to this
future, they were also optimistic that Hezbollah’s
increasing participation in the country’s political process
would lead to the gradual attenuation of the movement’s
militant stance. Some progress in this direction was already
evident: the number of active Hezbollah fighters had
declined significantly since Israel’s withdrawal from
southern Lebanon in 2000, and the greater part of the
movement’s activities were now focused on social and
political issues, providing welfare services to the poor in
Shiite neighborhoods, building schools, and taking part in
electoral politics. Anxieties about its armed militias
aside, Hezbollah had increasingly shown itself to be a
positive social force in the country. And while most
Lebanese I met had no wish to see their nation again
entangled in a conflict with Israel, they viewed Hezbollah’s
militant posture as an unfortunate but natural outgrowth of
Israeli belligerency - after all, Hezbollah first emerged in
the aftermath of the 1982 Israeli invasion so as to free
southern Lebanon from the Israeli occupiers. While the
disarming of Hezbollah’s military wing - as called for by UN
resolution 1559 - was an imminent goal for most of those I
spoke to in Beirut, they also realized that this could not
be forced on the movement without pushing the country over
the brink of another civil war. The consensus among critics
of Hezbollah was that the only avenue for disarming the
movement’s military wing was through political pressure and
dialogue.” (Charles Hirschkind ‘“Doing
the Lebanese a Favor” August 9, 2006).
Nasrullah is thus at the opposite end of the political
spectrum from Osama bin Laden. It has been concluded,
“Neither Hizbullah nor Hamas are driven by a desire to "wipe
out Jews," as is so often claimed, but by a fundamental
sense of injustice that they will not allow to be
forgotten.” (Anders Strindberg ‘Hizbullah's
attacks stem from Israeli incursions into Lebanon’
August 01, 2006).
Hezbollah’s increasing integration into Lebanese society was
something the Jews could not tolerate. Ironically, the Jews
had invaded Lebanon in 1982 precisely because Arafat was on
the point of capitulating to the racist Jewish state. “In
1982 Israel had a problem. Yasir Arafat, headquartered in
Beirut, was making ready to announce that the PLO was
prepared to sit down with Israel and embark on peaceful,
good faith negotiations towards a two-state solution.” (Alexander
Cockburn ‘Hezbollah,
Hamas and Israel: Everything You Need To Know’
July 21, 2006). What Israel are currently trying to
do is to force Hezbollah into becoming a terrorist
organization again so that it can use this as a pretext to
continue oppressing Lebanon and eventually annex southern
Lebanon up to the Litany river. The Jews are willing to
promote such a tactic even though it could pose a serious
threat to the United States. “Hezbollah, however, is an
anti-Israeli Lebanese Shia group (al-Qaeda is extremist
Sunni Arab). Given that the al-Qaeda threat has not been
eliminated (most notably, Osama bin Laden and Ayman
al-Zawahiri are both still thought to be at large somewhere
in Pakistan), the last thing the United States can afford to
do is needlessly make new terrorist enemies and give groups
such as Hezbollah (considered by some analysts to be the
A-team of terrorist organizations) reasons to attack U.S.
targets.” (Charles Peña ‘The
Lebanon Conundrum’ August 3, 2006). It can only be
concluded that, “They (Hezbollah) also provide a wide range
of welfare services to the Lebanese people, and they are not
terrorists. The largest terrorist organization in the Middle
East is the state of Israel, which kills civilians by the
hundreds.” (Charley Reese ‘Disaster
in the Making’ July 22, 2006).
Nasrullah’s Growing Stature.
Nasrullah has transcended his status as a Shiite cleric and
leader of a Shiite organization to become a political and
religious pluralist, a nationalist, and a democrat. As a
consequence, the Israel’s attacks on Lebanon have united the
country around Hezbollah, and turned Nasrullah into a
national hero. Those fighting against the Jewish empire’s
imperialist adventure in Lebanon include all Lebanese
nationalists not merely Shiites but Sunnis and Christians.
Nasrullah is a nationalist not a religious fundamentalist, “Pragmatism,
nationalism and charity networks, rather than Muslim
ideology, are the secrets of Hezbollah's success. Hezbollah
enjoys authority and commands unwavering loyalty among
Shi'ites because it always appears to be a confident
political party that is doing an honorable job in fighting
Israel. Adding to the nationalist aspect is the social one,
which is that many people in the Shi'ite community, mainly
at the grass-root level, rely on Hezbollah for charity and
welfare. Hezbollah has succeeded in promoting itself through
the media, igniting confidence, safety and security among
the 10 million viewers of al-Manar television, for example.
Many of those viewers are Shi'ites. Not once does al-Manar,
for example, show viewers a member of Hezbollah defeated.
Rather, it shows pictures of dead Israelis, real footage of
Hezbollah operations and programs highlighting Hezbollah's
charity organizations. Hezbollah is a movement inspired by
nationalism rather than religiousness.” (Sami Moubayed ‘It's
war by any other name’
July 15, 2006).
Nasrullah has also become a hero throughout the Middle East.
“A quintessentially Shia leader -a cleric, even -had
transcended his sect to become a national hero. The more
Israel pounds Hezbollah and Lebanon's Shia, the more it
burnishes Nasrallah's image as defender of the umma.” (Annia
Ciezadlo ‘Sheik
Up’ July 28, 2006). But, it
would be misleading to conclude, “Nasrallah has outgrown his
Shi'ite identity and transformed himself into a
pan-Lebanese, pan-Arab and pan-Islamic leader. The fact that
he is a cleric, a Muslim and a Shi'ite is actually of little
importance at this stage of his war with Israel.” (Sami
Moubayed ‘Nasrallah
and the three Lebanons’
August 3, 2006). It is more accurate to suggest that
Nasrullah has become a universalist, “In a televised speech
last Saturday, Sheik Nasrallah tried to assuage fears about
Shiite dominance. “I say to the Lebanese that none of you
should be afraid of the victory of the resistance, but you
should be afraid of its defeat,” he said. “It will be a
victory for every Arab, Muslim, Christian and honorable
person in the world who stood against the aggression and
defended Lebanon.”” (Neil MacFarquhar ‘Hezbollah’s
Prominence Has Many Sunnis Worried’
August 4, 2006).
Just how many more political differences do have to be
between Nasrullah and Osama bin Laden before Raimondo stops
equating the two? It is quite legitimate for Raimondo to
compare Osama bin Laden with Israel. But to use Osama bin
Laden’s words to condemn Hasan Nasrullah is preposterous.
Raimondo is just reinforcing the propaganda tactics of the
Jewish dominated media around the world which is smearing
Nasrullah and Hezbollah as an agent, or offshoot, of Osama
bin Laden. Juan Cole has also bizarrely denounced Nazrullah
and Hezbollah as “the hard line
Shiite fundamentalist party, Hizbullah” (Juan Cole ‘Is
the Arab Spring turning to Dust under Israeli Bombardment?’
July 14, 2006).
Note 1.
To provide another example. Sheikh Bilal, a close aide of
Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah was interviewed by Syed
Saleem Shahzad and the following exchange ensued, “Shahzad:
Hezbollah and the Brotherhood are very close. What is the
secret of their closeness, despite Hezbollah being Shi'ite
and the Brotherhood predominately Sunni? Bilal: Yes, this is
true that we are close and we both work for the Islamic
cause beyond any sectarian differences. But let me tell you
that does not mean that we like takfiris [those militantly
intolerant of "infidels"] like al-Qaeda. We hate them
because they kill innocent people and destroy sacred
places.” (Syed Saleem Shahzad ‘'We
are just hit-and-run guerrillas'
August 10, 2006).
Note 2.
“Religious groups have been the main basis of political
organization in Lebanon. The National Pact of 1943 provided
for a Maronite Christian president, a Sunni Muslim prime
minister, and a Shia Muslim speaker of parliament. It also
determined that the ratio of seats in parliament would be
six Christians for every five Muslims. Muslims sought
greater power when they later surpassed Christians as the
majority population in Lebanon. Tensions erupted in a civil
war, which ended with a peace accord that reduced the
authority of the Maronite president in favor of the Sunni
Muslim prime minister, and gave Muslims and Christians an
equal number of seats in parliament.” (Roxana Saberi ‘Lebanese
Christians Caught in Political Crossfire’ August 9,
2006).
Note 3.
This view is shared by other commentators. “Appearing this
week on al-Jazeera, Aoun reiterated his stance that a united
Lebanon must include Hezbollah members because they are "an
integral part of the people." Now that the Syrian troops are
gone, Aoun believes the country can reunite across religious
backgrounds. As leader of the third largest political party,
the Free Patriotic Movement, Aoun even came to an agreement
of understanding with Hezbollah last winter.” (Israeli
Onslaught May Spark Aounist Resurgence’
http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=9408
July 26, 2006); “By the second day
in August Halutz's bombardment had achieved the
extraordinary feat of prompting the Maronite Catholic
patriarch - the spiritual leader of the most pro-Western
populace - to assemble Lebanon's religious leaders - Shiite
and Sunni Muslims and various Christian confessions. The
group issued a joint statement of solidarity, condemning the
Israeli "aggression" and hailing "the resistance, mainly led
by Hezbollah, which represents one of the sections of
society."” (Alexander Cockburn
‘Halutz's
Bombing War. Hezbollah's Top Ally in Israel’ August 3,
2006).
