Hezbollah Sweeps Southern Lebanon Elections
The Trumpet‘s May 2005 cover story asserted that democracy in the Middle East would actually diminish freedom in the region rather than increase it—and that this would be detrimental to U.S. foreign policy. The massive electoral victory that Hezbollah—an Islamic terrorist organization and enemy of the United States—has recently gained in southern Lebanon confirms the veracity of these assertions. The much-hailed “cedar revolution” that was to bring Lebanon a new era of democracy and freedom from outside national interests, is instead giving more power to a foreign-sponsored terrorist organization.
On June 5—in the second round of the first free elections in Lebanon for three decades, following the withdrawal of the Syrian military from the country in April—the Iranian-backed and Syrian-supported Hezbollah movement and its allies won all parliamentary seats up for grabs in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah itself won five of the 23 seats, with the allied Shiite party Amal winning the remainder (six of them uncontested).
Though still a minority in parliament, Hezbollah will be the voice of the Shiites, the largest religious faction in Lebanon. Shiites make up over 40 percent of the population, and Hezbollah, through the alliances it has formed, already controls two thirds of the Shiite-majority municipalities.
In southern Lebanon, not only did Hezbollah’s Shiite alliance win hands-down (generally by a ratio of 10 to 1 against its nearest rival), but it won primarily on the platform of resistance against America’s demands that Hezbollah disarm. Hezbollah’s commander in southern Lebanon said he hoped its success would send “a clear message to the Americans that they embrace the resistance weapons” ( Associated Press, June 6). The election is seen by many more as a referendum in support of Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm.
This “right” to arms is also supported by the Lebanese government, for Hezbollah is its proxy military in southern Lebanon, in resistance to Israel. Lebanon claims that a portion of land in northern Israel is occupied territory that should be returned to the Lebanese.
Israel expressed alarm over Hezbollah’s strong electoral showing in the region just north of its border. “If Hezbollah was only a political party, we in Israel wouldn’t be as concerned as we are,” said an Israeli official. “Hezbollah is obviously not simply a political party; rather it is a heavily armed terrorist organization” (Associated Press, June 6).
Are free elections in Lebanon really a victory for freedom? What sort of democracy will be created by elections that bring terrorist groups such as Hezbollah to power? In his article “Islamists Are Intrinsically Anti-Democratic,” Michael Rubin made the point that elections alone do not make democracy (www.meforum.org, June 2). What Islamists do once they gain power is another matter altogether. Their modus operandi is not to respond to the will of the people, but rather to enforce the Islamist creed on the populace.
“[I]n truly democratic elections [in most Arab countries], the Islamic forces will win—forces that completely reject the vision of a secular, democratic and liberal state that Bush talks so much about” (Arab Media Internet Network,April 2). For example, the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan through free elections and then promptly imposed an extreme Islamic regime.
“That is the nasty thing about democracy and the weakness of the Bush administration’s democratization initiative—it assumes that democracy doesn’t yield unpleasant results” (Stratfor, June 6). Stratfor continues, “[S]ome people the United States truly hates and fears are very popular [i.e. Islamic terrorists]. … A free election will frequently affirm them.” That is exactly what has happened in southern Lebanon. The election victory for Hezbollah just confirmed the reality: This Shiite terrorist group is the popular controlling force in southern Lebanon.
Iran, however, is the ultimate winner. Hezbollah was created a quarter century ago primarily as a tool for Iran, and at the same time to serve Syria’s interests. For Iran, two of Hezbollah’s primary purposes were to serve as a tool to challenge American interests in the Middle East and to challenge Israel (ibid., March 15). Hezbollah has served these purposes in a multitude of ways, not just through terrorist attacks: It is firmly entrenched not only in Lebanon’s business community, but also now in its politics—just as Syria is. It’s no coincidence that Iran’s foreign minister visited Lebanon late last month—meeting with numerous influential leaders of all political flavors just days before the elections began.
Hezbollah’s political wins, coming at the same time as Hamas success in Palestinian elections, show the fruits of democracy in the Middle East are favoring radical Islam—headed by Iran. “[T]he two terrorist outfits that Israel and America have been trying long and hard to outwit and outgun are winning the battle of the ballots” ( Toronto Star,June 9).
Watch for democracy in the Middle East to yield further unsavory results.
