Hezbollah-Israel: An Endless War in Whose Interests? (2)
This series of articles will allow for a better understanding of the current situation in light of the past, moving beyond impassioned, ideological, or romanticized rhetoric that misses the mark, leaving the reader to draw their own conclusions. Furthermore, it is high time to seriously counter the sterile rhetoric of resistance, not with counter-rhetoric, but with serious work by promoting the rule of law, which can only be established through sovereignty.
The first part outlined the international and regional situation that led to the Taif Agreement and the beginning of Hezbollah's rise to power. This second part illustrates how the Hezbollah militia has continued to exist and strengthen itself under the dual sponsorship of Syria and Iran. Damascus's goal is to strengthen its position at the peace negotiation table with Israel, while Tehran's is to undermine any attempt at peace between Israel on the one hand, and Syria and Lebanon on the other.
Part 2: The Implementation of the Taif Agreement
The Taif Agreement, signed on October 22, 1989, was drafted by the Lebanese themselves, particularly its clauses concerning internal constitutional reforms. It was the result of several rounds of dialogue between the Lebanese parties, conducted in stages since 1976.
This agreement shifted or readjusted the balance of power between the communities in the country and granted more prerogatives to the Council of Ministers at the expense of the President of the Republic. Furthermore, it was the only document aimed at ending the wars that were ravaging the country. Indeed, it clearly stipulated the dismantling of armed militias.
However, constitutional law specialists have highlighted, and continue to highlight, numerous constitutional shortcomings that it created. These were not the only ones, as it included another, far more important one, now obsolete: the implicit recognition of the Syrian Ba'athist occupation of Lebanon, with the approval of Arab countries, the international community, and particularly the United States.
Washington was concerned about stability in Lebanon, and in its view, this could only be guaranteed by the Damascus regime, even at the cost of suppressing freedoms. It was, in its eyes, necessary to pave the way for a peace agreement between Israel and Syria, and then to include Lebanon, itself under Syrian occupation. When Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's troops invaded Kuwait in August 1990, a few months after the signing of the Taif Agreement, which General Michel Aoun's government opposed, stability in Lebanon became a top priority not only for the agreement's Arab sponsors but even more so for the Americans, who no longer wanted to be distracted by Lebanon and wanted to focus on the Kuwait crisis.
On October 13, 1990, Damascus obtained Arab and international approval to invade the part of Lebanon it did not control, in exchange for joining the anti-Saddam coalition tasked with liberating Kuwait. Leveraging his near-total control of Lebanon, Hafez al-Assad implemented the Taif Agreement only selectively, according to his needs to consolidate his occupation of the country. Thus, the Syrian regime appointed Elias Hraoui and then Emile Lahoud as presidents of the state, each for a nine-year term, contrary to the provisions of the Constitution.
During their respective terms, Hezbollah enjoyed unprecedented leeway. It intensified its arms buildup from Iran via Syria. The prime ministers and successive ministers under Hraoui and Lahoud had no power over any military and security matters. These were exclusively the responsibility of the Syrians, whose strategy consisted of exerting extreme pressure on Israel from Lebanon, through Hezbollah, which operated freely in the south of the country and in the Bekaa Valley.
Step 1: Dismantling of Militias Except Hezbollah
During 1991, after their invasion, the Syrians took care to dismantle the militias that were outside their control. Hezbollah was not only granted immunity from the Taif Agreement, but it was also encouraged and supported by Damascus to wage a guerrilla war against the Israeli forces occupying part of southern Lebanon. The goal was to pressure Tel Aviv to improve Hafez al-Assad's position in the peace negotiations with Israel, initiated following the Madrid Conference held that same year. Tehran, for its part, sponsored Hezbollah to establish itself on the Lebanese scene, infiltrate the Lebanese state, weaken it, and export the Khomeini revolution, in accordance with the Iranian Constitution. It should be noted that this dual sponsorship enjoyed by Hezbollah lasted until the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon on April 26, 2005. Since then, Hezbollah's tutelage has become primarily Iranian. It has strengthened and continues to this day.
Stage 2: The Seven-Day War Between Hezbollah and Israel
The guerrilla war waged by Hezbollah against the Israeli occupation forces and their ally, the South Lebanon Army (SLA), intensified in 1992 and 1993, under the slogan of "the resistance." On July 25, 1993, Israel responded by launching its first major war against Hezbollah, dubbed "Operation Settling Accounts," also known as the "Seven-Day War." This war ended on July 31, 1993, under pressure from the United States, particularly Secretary of State Warren Christopher. Israeli objectives were to destroy Hezbollah's infrastructure, cut off its supplies, eradicate it from the South Lebanon region, and pressure the Lebanese government by displacing civilians to Beirut.
This seven-day war ended with an unwritten agreement between the two sides, known as the "July Agreement," stipulating that civilians on both sides would not be targeted, while military operations against military targets on both sides would continue. From the outset of hostilities, Washington quickly intervened to broker this agreement, seeking to keep Syria in the Madrid peace process. Excessive use of force by Israel was perceived by President George H.W. Bush's administration as a factor that could force Syria to withdraw from the negotiations. "Operation Settling Accounts" resulted in 120 Lebanese civilian deaths and 500 injuries, 300,000 displaced persons, and thousands of destroyed and damaged buildings. Hezbollah's losses amounted to an undetermined number of dead, and dozens of fighting positions were destroyed. Israel, for its part, lost two soldiers and one civilian. (to be continued)
Read also: