By Abir A Chaaban
Based on my experience working in
South Lebanon for two and a half years, I believe that the issue of Shi'a support
to Hezbollah is there to stay. The Shi'a whether they were secular, rejecting
Hezbollah's religious ideology, or religious
following the marje'iya ( religious reference) of Lebanon and Najaf in Iraq,- the latter also rejects
the Iranian religious marje'iya-, unite on the issue of weapons and security.
In South Lebanon, people do not have a memory of the Lebanese civil war. A war that was mainly carried on in Beirut, and Christian and Druz areas in the mountains. The southerners have a memory of the Palestinian and Israeli threat. A threat that was largely ignored by the Lebanese government and army. They have a memory of detention prisons in Khiem and Ansar. The Shi'a as a group is convinced that Hezbollah provides them with a security that they had never experienced in the history of the State of Lebanon. Secular and followers of Najaf will vehemently disagree with the Iranian marje'iya religiously, but they will surely reject any attempts to disarm the entity that provides them with security. This has become even stronger when Hezbollah and Iran decided that they are not interested in converting mainstream Shi'a in Lebanon from either their secularism or Najafism, prioritizing instead the issue of security and consequently achieving a popular Shi'a support that legitimizes armament.
When it comes to Syria, a large number of Shi’a supports the transition to a liberal state. Nevertheless, the problem of the radical Wahabi-Salaf, and the possible emergence of a new enemy that threatens their freedom of religion and their secularism, then also becomes a problem of security. Even, if the Shi'a do not like the Syrian regime and wish that it collapses, their distaste for Wahabi Salafism is greater than their distaste for the Syrian regime. Unless the game on the ground changes, the Shi’a will continue to support Hezbollah and Iran as entities that provide not only security, but also allow them freedom to be who they wish to be religiously including of being atheists.
In South Lebanon, people do not have a memory of the Lebanese civil war. A war that was mainly carried on in Beirut, and Christian and Druz areas in the mountains. The southerners have a memory of the Palestinian and Israeli threat. A threat that was largely ignored by the Lebanese government and army. They have a memory of detention prisons in Khiem and Ansar. The Shi'a as a group is convinced that Hezbollah provides them with a security that they had never experienced in the history of the State of Lebanon. Secular and followers of Najaf will vehemently disagree with the Iranian marje'iya religiously, but they will surely reject any attempts to disarm the entity that provides them with security. This has become even stronger when Hezbollah and Iran decided that they are not interested in converting mainstream Shi'a in Lebanon from either their secularism or Najafism, prioritizing instead the issue of security and consequently achieving a popular Shi'a support that legitimizes armament.
When it comes to Syria, a large number of Shi’a supports the transition to a liberal state. Nevertheless, the problem of the radical Wahabi-Salaf, and the possible emergence of a new enemy that threatens their freedom of religion and their secularism, then also becomes a problem of security. Even, if the Shi'a do not like the Syrian regime and wish that it collapses, their distaste for Wahabi Salafism is greater than their distaste for the Syrian regime. Unless the game on the ground changes, the Shi’a will continue to support Hezbollah and Iran as entities that provide not only security, but also allow them freedom to be who they wish to be religiously including of being atheists.
No comments:
Post a Comment