Hezbollah's Fallacies
Hassan Haydar Al-Hayat - 16/11/06//

Hezbollah says its battle to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora is not related to the establishment of the International Tribunal, and that along with its allies, it is waging a political battle for other reasons supported by a broad spectrum of the people of Lebanon from all sects and ideologies.
However, the Shiite ministers who resigned have failed to elaborate on those hidden reasons in their resignation statements, neither did the leaders of Hezbollah, who are fond of ascribing general and vague attributes to the government that could otherwise be ascribed to anyone since they are not backed by any proof. They also failed to explain whether their resignation was part of the simmering war of willpowers, waged by the pro-Syrian apparatus.

The reason behind this vagueness is that Damascus has been anxiously, but persistently, working to mobilize its advocates and supporters, who have sworn political or ideological allegiance to it, or those loyal to it out of gratitude for benefits, partnerships, or influence. Damascus is anxious about the establishment of an International Tribunal and the possible outcome of the investigations into the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and his fellow companions, as well as previous and following assassinations.

Damascus has been summoning Shiite, Sunni, and Christian leaderships that enjoyed its assistance during its guardianship over Lebanon, to remind them that the time has come for them to pay the bill and entice them with a foothold in the coming stage.
Damascus is the one coordinating the mobilization of the opposition and orchestrating its moves in conjunction with its supreme ally, Iran.
As for the talk about Hezbollah's motives being non-sectarian in nature, it is not very convincing, because, first: by definition, Hezbollah is a sectarian movement that represents a certain sect.

Second: When Hezbollah threatens to take to the streets if the government and its majority do not yield to the party's demands, it is actually threatening to use the Shiite sect and the Shiite residents of the Suburb, the South, and the Beqa Valley; even if its Christian ally, Michel Aoun, contributed by adding some brightness to the predominantly black background.

Third: Hezbollah has been monopolizing the representation of its sect through arms and money. Evidence of this monopoly can be seen in the stance of Parliament Speaker, Nabih Berry, who has grown fearful of falling into sectarian isolation or being boycotted by Syria if he does not back Syria's doctrine and endorse Hezbollah's demands of control over the broken third of the triangle or the resignation of its ministers from the government. This is despite Berry's persistence in stressing his distinction and his honest hopes and aspirations to protect the coexistence, which was a result of the Taif Accords, and spare the country from shocks of any kind.

Finally: No Shiite politician, regardless of the degree of his independence, dares to come forward as a replacement for the representation of the Shiite sect in the government. This is not out of solid, sound convictions, but out of fear of reprisal.

If Hezbollah's actions were sectarian in motive, why then can Hezbollah not accept the possibility of the existence of a political majority and minority, both encompassing the different sects? Why can Hezbollah not accept the verdict issued by the ballot boxes and the results of the stage-bound alliance forged during these elections and wait for the next date of electoral justice to prove, as it claims, that it indeed represents the actual majority?

The head of the Republic is Hezbollah's ally, the advocate of its polices, the defender of its interests, and the architect of its violations, who ruled that the government has lost its legitimacy because a group (meaning sect) has broken away from it. Yet, his statements completely contradict those of Hezbollah's to the effect that the Party cannot be political on the street and sectarian within the government.

Despite all this, the overwhelming majority recognizes Hezbollah's undisputed advocacy among the Shiite ranks, deals with it on such basis, and is willing enter into partnership with it, but according to its actual, rather than made-up, and inflated size.

Only two days back, Hezbollah's Secretary General Spoke to the owners of the devastated homes in the southern Beirut suburb, saying: "We are the people of this country, and we are determined to protect it."

Hezbollah's Secretary General spoke in a similar tone before the last July war, but that did not stop him from baiting Israel to inflict all this destruction on the country and its people. We hope that only the first part of the Secretary General's sentence applies to the reality in this country