POLITICS AUGUST 9, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Since the 1980s, the Shia terrorist group Hezbollah has not been given to blunt public moralizing about the need for women to wear the veil. It originally made no secret of its desire to convert Lebanon into a Shia Islamic state—the organization’s 1985 manifesto called for the establishment of “Islamic government” and the conversion of Christians to Islam—but these efforts proved exceedingly unpopular, given Lebanon’s plurality of Christian and Sunni Muslim citizens. So when its leader, Abas Musawi, was assassinated in 1992, his successor Hassan Nasrallah refrained from offering explicit support for theocracy in Lebanon—and largely backed away from efforts to impose conservative religious traditions on Hezbollah's female constituents. But now, suddenly, the organization is again behaving in a way that evinces deep insecurity about the decorum of Shiite women.
Here's one example. Two months after Israel interdicted the Mavi Marmara, another aid flotilla is preparing to set sail toward the Hamas-controlled Palestinian territory of Gaza. This Lebanese fleet, slated to depart in the coming weeks, is led by the Miriam, a vessel manned solely by females. The idea behind this creative and progressive staffing is to raise the negative impact on Israel if it tries to enforce the blockade against a boat full of sympathetic ladies.
Yet it turns out that not all Lebanese women are welcome on the cruise. In June, the Kuwaiti daily As Siyassa reported that the curvaceous Lebanese diva Haifa Wehbe—perhaps the most famous woman in all of Lebanon—tried to sign on, but was rebuffed by Hezbollah. Why? Apparently Hezbollah was concerned that Wehbe’s “immodest” attire would “harm the reputation of all the women participating in the trip.”
The militia's rejection of Wehbe was remarkable. Not only would her presence have raised the profile of the voyage, it would have dramatically increased the public relations cost to Israel if it again mishandled the boarding. Moreover, Wehbe—a Shiite Muslim from Hezbollah’s home turf in south Lebanon—is a strong supporter of the “resistance.” In 2006, she praised the militia for defending Lebanon from Israel; in 2008 she declared that she was “under the command” of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
Even more distinctive is the recent campaign that the militia has launched to convince women to don the veil. Females in Dahiya, a Hezbollah-controlled southern suburb of Beirut, haven’t been covering up in sufficient numbers for the resistance, so Hezbollah, via its youth advertising affiliate, the Islamic Cultural Knowledge Association, has launched a massive poster campaign targeting those who have yet to adopt the hijab. The ubiquitous bright orange posters—on overpasses and roadside billboards—all depict a faceless woman wearing the traditional Muslim headscarf, and a series of slogans urging the attire. One of the more popular placards reads, “Your Hijab my sister is more precious than my blood.” Yet another notes that the veil “[p]rotects the position of women.” Still a third describes hijab as the “[f]ortress of chastity,” an adage the sign attributes to the late Iranian theocrat Ayatollah Khomeini.
The campaign is part of a "restorative propaganda effort praising the moral-religious ideal of the [organization's] elapsed beginnings," explains Lokman Slim, a longtime observer of local Shia politics. "It [is] meant to reassure those women who wear the hijab of the righteousness of their choice as much as to tell the ‘loose’ ones—in a friendly way—that they are wrong."
Why is Hezbollah engaging in these campaigns now? The timing is not coincidental. Politically and militarily, 2009 was a banner year for the militia. But, image-wise, Hezbollah's reputation for probity was tarnished when its chief local financier was arrested for perpetrating a Ponzi scheme a la Bernie Madoff—implicating the militant Islamist organization in odious corruption. Since then, the group has been trying to remake itself, not only by issuing its first new “manifesto” since 1985, but by refocusing the organization on its religious objectives. All this appears to be part of a Hezbollah effort to rehabilitate its diminished ethical and moral standing by returning to its socially conservative roots.
These events suggest something important about the nature of Hezbollah itself. Its leaders are clearly concerned by the fact that, although the organization is exceedingly popular among Lebanese Shiites, it remains unable to convince its constituents to adhere to its conservative social mores. In other words: They are troubled that support for Hezbollah derives from its military exploits and not from its Iranian-inspired religious message.
This also means, more fundamentally, that Hezbollah's motives have not altered nearly as much as it would have us think. The organization's actions belie a wider social agenda, which seems to extend far beyond “resisting” Israeli occupation. While Hezbollah no longer articulates the long-term goal of exporting the Iranian revolution to Lebanon, the hijab campaign and the counterintuitive decision to exclude Haifa Wehbe from the Gaza aid flotilla suggest that the organization’s hopes for an Islamic state in Lebanon remain alive and well.
Yet it looks as if Hezbollah will not be able to realize those goals. No doubt, the organization will continue to press its militant and religiously conservative agenda in Lebanon. It still possesses a preponderance of force in the state. But if the evidently tepid response to the hijab campaign is any indication, sectarian and political considerations will cause the militia’s efforts to fail. Fortunately—for Washington and the majority of Lebanese—the fact that Hezbollah’s constituents refuse to consent to its socio-religious agenda suggests that aside from “resisting” Israel, the organization has limited appeal.
David Schenker is Aufzien Fellow and director of the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
For more TNR, become a fan on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
12 comments
“Fortunately—for Washington and the majority of Lebanese—the fact that Hezbollah’s constituents refuse to consent to its socio-religious agenda suggests that aside from “resisting” Israel, the organization has limited appeal.” I appreciate the quotes around the word “resisting,” but irony is not enough here. There is no reason why Lebanon should “resist” Israel once it withdrew its forces from there. The fact that secular Lebanese support Hezbollah because it opposes Israel’s existence (this is the real meaning of the phrase “resist” Israel) means that thee is little to distinguish their ideology with regards to Jews from that of Hezbollah. I will not shed many tears for Lebanese democracy if Hezbollah manages to take over that sorry State. If you lie down with dogs you will rise with flees. As for the ship “manned” by women, I hope Israel sends out a squad of Israeli women soldiers to intercept it.
- jdyer
August 9, 2010 at 12:37am
When in the minority, use cultural issues as a wedge. What a great strategy. But don't tell the Republicans because they will surely adopt it. As for US policy in the middle east, is its complexity a function of the complexity of the politics in the region or is the compelixty of the politics in the region a function of the complexity of US foreign policy. Here I am referring to the dexterity required to support Shia in one place and Sunni in another, a minority government in one place and a majority government in another. Maybe US policy in the region is like US politics (wedge issues and all), where divided government is the best to be hoped for so the majority don't create even more mischief than they otherwise would.
- rayward
August 9, 2010 at 8:39am
"... a vessel manned solely by females....". An oxymoron if I ever read one. To the best of my knowledge (although I could be wrong) there are no female IDFers with the kind of training and ability to take over a ship. The Shayetet 13 commandos lowered on to the Marmara are the Israeli equivalent of the US Navy Seals and indeed often train with the Seals. Those female combat soldiers that exist can be found in artillery, air force (pilots), MPs (if you want to consider them combat soldiers), and the Karakal light infantry (very light). If the Mariam has to be boarded it will be done once again by Shayetet 13 commandos. This time though they will not be carrying paint ball guns. Hershel Ginsburg Jerusalem / Efrata
- ginzy
August 9, 2010 at 8:59am
A Christian Lebanese journalist living in Beirut, once explained to me that the communal / confessional identification is deeply embedded in Lebanese, including secular Lebanese, much more so than any national identification. Indeed the very idea of a Lebanese "nation" is very much a relatively recent artifact, a product of US Protestant missionaries of the late 19th and early 20th Century. See Michael Oren's magnificent Power, Faith, and Fantasy: American in the Middle East 1776 to the Present. Also see Bernard Lewis' The Multiple Identities of the Middle East. After religion loyalty moves on to one's clan, then village, then maybe region. Hence hard core Shi'ite secularists can still identify strongly with Hezbollah even as they reject its religious precepts of modesty, no booze etc. This does not mean they are more likely to identify as "Lebanese" or swear allegiance to the central government at Hezbollah's expense. Westerners, seem to have trouble grasping this. To the Arab / Muslim world, the central state or national government is an artificial implant, which periodically triggers an immunological rejection. hg
- ginzy
August 9, 2010 at 9:15am
The Lebanese fleet's rejection of Haifa Wehbe is also dumb: I just googled her, and......wow! If she were standing on the prow of the ship, the Israeli sailors might be tempted to switch sides.
- bjones
August 9, 2010 at 2:37pm
"Westerners, seem to have trouble grasping this." That's very true, ginzy. But they seem to have trouble also grasping that states and national governments (or entities like the EU that are built upon states) are the way we do business in the modern world. So the exports of many nations-that-don't-want-to-be in the ME are oil and (verbal or actual) violence, rather than products that earn them money and help develop their society. So, at the end of the day, I'd suggest that our trouble isn't really our trouble at the end of the day, even though it might superficially look that way. It's their trouble.
- ironyroad
August 9, 2010 at 7:27pm
Irony, I don't necessarily disagree with you. and arguably there are a handful of those in the ME that do recognize the problem. Israel, for one is a country that recognizes the way business and relations are conducted in the modern world and is disparaged through much of the ME in part for that reason. But that doesn't change the reality of the overwhelming majority in the ME and the moslem world in general. Read the rants of Osama bin Laden or his deputy & you'll see what I mean. And unfortunately the west is stuck dealing with the ME & the moslem world as it is, as opposed to how they think it should be. hg
- ginzy
August 10, 2010 at 4:18am
A slightly different, but very well informed if depressing take on the Lebanon-Syria-Iran-Saudi Arabia dance by Michael Young, the editor of Beirut's Daily Start. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704388504575418881692455798.html. hg
- ginzy
August 10, 2010 at 8:39am
Whoops... my previous comment was meant for the Spine (since transplanted). hg
- ginzy
August 10, 2010 at 10:25am
". . . is disparaged through much of the ME in part for that reason." ginzy, it's odd you should mention that aspect. I've found it curious that the economic vitality of Israel -- which seemed pretty obvious when I was there -- is so uninfluential in the neighborhood. I mean, you can not like a society but still learn from it (ironically enough, Germany had that role in Europe and still maybe does to some extent). The functional success of Israel, one could say, is a further reason for hatred and rejection.
- ironyroad
August 10, 2010 at 9:32pm
Irony... it's the functional success aggrevated by the military success of a group of people (Jews) who for centuries were disparaged as the lowly, weak dhimmi, and that the military success was demonstrated by the defeat of those who were ostensibly the superior masters. You will note that when dealing with Israel Islamists often invoke Mohammed's defeat and massacre of one of the Jewish tribes (possibly the last one) that stood in his way to controlling the entire Arabian peninsula (I believe at Khaybar?). Indeed many of those on the Turkish Marmara were filmed chanting slogans warning the Jews that Mohammed is returning and that its Khaybar time.... this before the commandos boarded the vessel. food for thought. hg
- ginzy
August 11, 2010 at 8:01am
I have mixed feelings about the flotillas, I support making the Gaza embargo more humane but not abolishing it entirely, but the fact that Hezbullah apparently gets a say in membership is a big black mark on the whole operation.
- WillPastor
August 13, 2010 at 7:40pm