The Hizbullah phenomenon: politics and communication (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of international & global studies, 2015
This book The Hizbullah Phenomenon. Politics and Communication purports to be an analysis of the Lebanese Hizbullah's political and media strategy. Three authors split the writing of its five chapters: Lina Khatib, inheritor of the post formerly held by Paul Salem as head of the Carnegie Middle East Research Center in Beirut, Dina Matar, director of the Center for Media and Film Studies at SOAS, London, and Atef Alshaer, lecturer in Postcolonial Literature at theUniversity of Kent.Admittedly, it is an ambitious project. In under two hundred pages, the book aims to furnish us with a general survey of Hizbullah's communications channels, accompanied by a definition and analysis of the political and media strategies implemented by the party since its creation in pursuit of its political and ideological objectives. It appears that advancing the core theses fell to Khatib, including those that bear on defining Hizbullah, its objectives, and its political strategy. Matar and Alshaer seem rather to act as auxiliaries in a palpable attempt to lend the book depth by including a presentation more focused on communications and the media channels deployed by Hizbullah in pursuit of its policy goals. Unfortunately, the book leaves much to be desired. The quality of the empirical data, the sufficiency of the material used, the methodology of substantiation, rigor in using concepts and relevance of the theses-indeed, every basic principle of professional academic research-gets a terrible mauling (in a work nevertheless published by Oxford University Press!). Let us begin by positioning the book in the ocean of academic works on Hizbullah in existence today. Unsurprisingly, right from the start, on the problem of defining Hizbullah, on its reason for being, on the history of its early years, we find in this work all the ideas inherited from the "hezbollalogy" of the 1980s. As a reminder, the latter relied on Western intelligence agencies' reports that most of the early researchers, stymied by the tenacious strictures the organization, used for years to stiff-arm outside observers, picked up for want of anything better. It was the French-speaking academic world, in the second half of the years 2000, that saw the emergence of several studies, mainly doctoral theses from some of the best universities (Daher, Le Thomas, Chaib, Lefort), that set about thoroughly reworking, verifying, and rounding out the inheritance of these first years, while the English-speaking world (with the exception of Saadé) continued to rely on the original versions in large measure. The Hizbullah Phenomenon therefore needs correcting: No, Hizbullah was not born in 1982 as an "Islamist organization dedicated to establishing an Islamist regime in Lebanon similar to the Iranian one," and that subsequently would "transition to pragmatic institutionalism" after undergoing an "identity revolution," while maintaining its aim to reach "worldwide Islamic leadership." Hizbullah came into being between late 1983 and early 1984 to fulfill the role of a social, media, and, eventually, political buffer between its parent organization, the Islamic Resistance in Lebanon (the one to be born in 1982) and the Lebanese population-especially the Shiites. The analysis by Khatib and Matar is therefore skewed from the start, because defining and understanding Hizbullah's political strategies requires returning to the context of the party's creation, including the debates within the IRL that led to Hizbullah's birth, and the limits that were placed from the beginning on its role and mode of operation. The splitting of roles between the IRL and Hizbullah from day one has always dictated Hizbullah's practices, and, contrary to what fashionable theories assert about the "identity and political mutations" of Hizbullah, the effects of this division of labor have remained constant through the years: The IRL, the original military organization, takes on the armed struggle against the Israeli occupation; Hizbullah, the civilian organization, mobilizes on behalf of the IRL and defends its interests within society and against the constellation of powers. But to understand that this is how it all started-and that everything
Researching Hizbullah in Lebanon
As one of the Middle East's more open countries, Lebanon is fairly congenial to foreign researchers. Classified as “partly free” by Freedom House, it ranks ahead of all the region's countries, except Israel, Tunisia, and Turkey. However, when it comes to researching Hizbullah, this openness and congeniality subsides. While Hizbullah contains political and social branches, it is first and foremost a military and guerilla organization—the self-proclaimed Islamic Resistance in Lebanon (al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya fi Lubnan). Like any military and guerrilla organization—especially one that is subjected to Western terrorist designations and economic sanctions—Hizbullah is innately and justifiably secretive, vigilant, and suspicious of foreigners and outsiders, including academics, scholars, and researchers. Based on my personal experiences researching Hizbullah in Lebanon, these characteristics have ebbed and flowed with its organizational evolution and situational context. At the international, regional, and local levels, the complexities and dynamics of the politics surrounding Hizbullah have shaped my experiences as a researcher in Lebanon and have demonstrated the importance of being aware of these politics and adapting to them. These convoluted and shifting politics have also revealed the inherent merits and challenges of ethnography—a rigorous, informal, and improvisational endeavor and process that necessitates, above all else, flexibility.
The role of non-state actors in state building in Lebanon: The case study of Hizbullah
Due to many factors including a civil conflict and a foreign occupation, along with the Lebanese complex political and social nature, the legitimacy and capability of the state have been undermined, and the state could no longer meet its requirements in providing citizens with their basic human needs. As a result a number of non-state actors have arose into existence in order to fill the socioeconomic and political gap where the state has failed. This research mainly aims at examining the role of non-state actors in state building in Lebanon, by examining the role of a number of the major non-state actors. However, due to the contested and contradicted facts revolving around Hizbullah and its role in Lebanon; the research will therefore focus on this group. Additionally, the ultimate aim of Hizbullah in Lebanon will be analyzed, as well as the effect the group has on the state of Lebanon. This research will be studying the role of non-state actors, particularly Hizbullah under the state building theory and the social movement theory. Moreover, due to the apparent gap in the literature, a qualitative approach will be employed through semi-structured interviews with a number of academics, professionals as well as members of Lebanese political groups. The research has found that the state building process does not exist in Lebanon; however, the role which non-state actors play is based on the interests and aims of their sectarian and political groups, rather thank the state itself. Moreover, Hizbullah's aim of establishing an Islamic state within the state of Lebanon was also concluded, as well as the negative effect of the group on the state of Lebanon, which was also understood. Acknowledgement
From jihad to Muqawamah: The Case of Hizballah in Lebanon
Journal of the Irish Society for the Academic Study of Religions, 2018
The history and politics of the Middle-East are often understood as a battlefield where various religious currents and ethnic factions are constantly struggling for hegemony. In contrast, in this paper I argue that this history and politics is better understood as a struggle between two competing world-views or political theologies: the exclusionary world-view of Jihad on the one hand, and the inclusive world-view of Muqawamah, on the other. Focusing on Hizballah in Lebanon as my case-study, I show how this Islamic movement has traded a discourse that emphasizes Jihad, to one that emphasizes resistance. By so doing, I argue, Hizballah's discourse of resistance provided a common-ground for cooperation with other forces and groups on the local, regional, and global scene.
Islamist Actors from an Anti-system Perspective: The Case of Hizbullah
Politics, Religion & Ideology, 2014
Hizbullah is an important case through which one can examine Islamist actors. Created as a religious-oriented movement during the eighties with a clear Islamic agenda, it gradually shifted towards a more pragmatic position, entering Lebanese political life in 1992. In its early days, Hizbullah strongly criticized the consociatiotional Lebanese system and the international order, adopting a clear anti-system posture. By comparing three key moments of the political evolution of the movement, the article analyses the strategy of Hizbullah from an anti-system perspective. The goal is to demonstrate how playing as a dual anti-system actor (as social movement and Party) on two interrelated levels (domestic and external) is a strategic and informed political choice. Hizbullah has been able to juggle these positions animating or silencing, over the years, its domestic anti-system attitude to the benefit of the external one. To have a differentiated anti-system attitude has allowed to it to maintain a double (but always coherent) position in the different systems it plays, adapting its anti-system posture to the political circumstances, to its goals and to the international context.