Lebanon and Israel Normalization: The Hezbollah Factor and Historical Context
The question of whether Lebanon would normalize relations with Israel if Hezbollah were not an active force is complex and rooted in a deep historical context. Prior to the Palestinian refugee influx in the 1940s, Lebanon was predominantly Christian. However, the 1940s marked a significant shift, as Palestinian refugee populations began to settle in Lebanon, leading to a shift in demographics and adding a new layer of complexity to the region’s political landscape.
Role of Hezbollah in Lebanon’s Political Landscape
While many are hopeful about normalization, the presence of Hezbollah plays a crucial role. My stance, as well as that of many others, is that under any circumstances involving Hezbollah, normalization with Israel is a non-starter. Hezbollah emerged as a response to the brutal Israeli occupation of South Lebanon from 1982 to 2000. Support for normalization among certain groups of Lebanese people is often driven by personal or sectarian reasons rather than reasonable political considerations.
Hezbollah’s existence is deeply rooted in this historical context of Israeli aggression and resistance. The group was formed to counteract the Israeli invasion and occupation that ravaged South Lebanon, a predominantly Shia area. Here, we examine the socio-economic and political context that shaped the region during this period.
Pre-Occupation Conditions and Neglect
Before the Israeli occupation, Lebanon, often romanticized as the "Paris of the Middle East" and the "Switzerland of the Middle East," was characterized by large government neglect in the peripheral regions outside of Beirut. Government services, such as schools and hospitals, were virtually absent in many areas, including South Lebanon. Roads were dirt paths, and infrastructure development was minimal. Therefore, South Lebanon, where the majority was Shia, faced significant socio-economic challenges, with widespread poverty and illiteracy.
The Shia in Lebanon had historically been treated as the lowest social class, with their political rights often marginalized. The Lebanese constitution intended for a Shia to be the Speaker of Parliament, but non-Shia filled this position, reflecting a broader societal injustice faced by the Shia community.
The Israeli Occupation and its Impact
The Israeli occupation from 1982 to 2000 was particularly brutal. Terrorist groups, often working in tandem with the Israeli military, inflicted immense harm on the people of South Lebanon. For example, Palestinian militiamen launched attacks on towns like Hula, leading to mass killings. Villages were often destroyed, and those who refused to flee faced mass slaughter. The occupiers forcibly annexed seven villages, causing irreparable damage to both the infrastructure and the communities.
In 1982, the Lebanese government, in their guise of support, inadvertently bolstered the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when a faction of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) was seen as a potential threat by some Lebanese factions. The bloody infighting within the PLO was exacerbated by rival Arab states, leading to significant loss of life among the Shias of South Lebanon.
The occupation extended beyond 1982, with Israel establishing permanent bases and collaborating with Lebanese militias. The Israeli-backed South Lebanon Army (SLA) declared the establishment of the "Free Lebanon State," perpetrating atrocities against the indigenous South Lebanese population. Despite their defeat in 2000, Israeli proxy entities continued to engage in espionage and bombings in Lebanon, persisting until 2011. Their cluster munitions and other prohibited weapons claim lives even today, long after their official withdrawal.
The 2006 War and Palestinian Refugee Children
The 2006 war between Lebanon and Israel further entrenched anti-Israel feeling. Although Israel initially targeted the PLO, the Lebanese Shia were caught in the crossfire. Philosophically, the Lebanese perspective remains one of resistance and defiance. Despite initial peace gestures, Israel’s bombing campaign extended into the civilian population. Hezbollah’s kidnapping of Israeli agents in response to the ongoing threat of Israeli aggression continues to fuel tensions.
It is important to recognize the deep-seated reasons why Lebanon, with its rich history and potential, has not sought normalization with Israel. The impact of the Israeli occupation, particularly on the Shia community, has left a lasting impression of resistance and resilience. Lebanon is undeniably rich and powerful, with substantial expatriates and influential figures in other countries. However, the prevailing political climate in Lebanon, marked by weak and often counterproductive leadership, remains a significant barrier to improvement.
In conclusion, the notion of Lebanon normalizing relations with Israel is heavily influenced by the actions and existence of Hezbollah. The historical trauma and the ongoing effects of the Israeli occupation are why many Lebanese, including myself, find such a notion unacceptable. Lebanon must continue to prioritize its sovereignty and the well-being of its citizens by addressing the root causes of its contemporary challenges.