Religion in politics undermining Mideast peace

East Meredith, NY

As religion trumps ideology in the Middle East, it is natural to establish parties affiliated with God.  Side effects: When religion dominates politics, peace across borders becomes elusive. To straighten politics, the Arab Spring must vitalize state building and adopt non-violence.

In Lebanon, Hizbullah identifies itself as the “Party of God”, Arabic for “Hizb Allah”. This Shiite structure of politics, militarism and social service is known as the “Resistance”. Its opponents abhor a paramilitary stronger than the national army. Critics believe when the Israeli army withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, Hizbullah’s military mandate ended.

There is another side to this controversy. The militia-sympathizers remind us that when Israel occupied south Lebanon, it was the Shiites who suffered most, while the leading Christian party sided with Israel. Is the new role of Hizbullah deterrence? I am not convinced: No single ethnic or religious community can safely assume a disproportionate burden of national security.

The mix of religion and politics is as common as the blend of lemon and olive oil.

Hamas is known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, another “Party of God”. In Palestine, Hamas is nearly the counterpart of Hizbullah. While Hizbullah limits Lebanon’s sovereignty, Hamas burdens Palestine’s diplomacy. Many see in Hamas’s conservative ideology an impediment to social change. Does the impulsive policy and action of Hamas offer Israel an easy excuse to perpetuate injustice?

To be fair, after its election in 2007 to lead the Palestinians, Hamas was isolated by Israel and its allies. Still, we wonder why this resistance is a rejectionist.

Are the Arab parties of God reinforcing an Israeli God-mandated movement?

Indeed, Israel has its own militia-plus entity, a land- grab movement. With tacit government support, this grassroots initiative, takes over Palestinian land, construct illegal housing and articulates theological justification. To preserve shady ownership, an elaborate system of security is needed. Settlers live in fortified, privileged and militarized neighborhoods.  The Israeli settlement movement has all the attributes of a “Party of God”.

In Hizbullah, Hamas and the Israeli Settlers, there are striking parallels.

 All three movements exploit religious symbols to organize politically. All three act as private armies and live on defined territory. The settlers dominate a large segment of the West Bank and East Jerusalem; Hizbullah dominates south Lebanon and south Beirut; and Hamas rules over Gaza. Each of these movements acts as a state-within-a-state. They are popular and part of governance. None of these movements believe that peace is negotiable.

To discipline these movements is risky.

President Obama spent a good deal of political capital in 2009 trying to curb the power of the settlers. The US president retreated from confronting this popular movement. Intimidated, he almost abandoned the peace process.

As the White House was shocked in dealing with the settlers, Israel was shocked in its failure to defeat Hizbullah and Hamas in two recent wars. 

Today, the three movements are being challenged again.

In July, the Palestinian Authority has submitted a declaration of a state to the United Nations Security Council’s September meeting.  This is bad news: authorizing a Palestinian state would be a slap in the face of the Settlers. In the West Bank and East Jerusalem, settlers have their “mini-state”.

In Lebanon, there is a different, emerging drama for the Resistance. The International Court of Justice, the UN-mandated Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) probes the role of Hizbullah in the 2005 murder of former Lebanese Prime minister Rafic Hariri. The image of the Lebanese Resistance is at stake since four of its senior members have been recently indicted.

The threat to Hamas is indirect. Hamas observes an uprising in Syria, the only Arab country which consistently supports the Resistance. What happens if the Assad regime falls?

None of these threats are strong enough to destabilize these three militias.

The settlers continue to expand, having established the sad message that, to the privileged, “might is right”. Asking the UN for a right to a state, the Palestinian Authority looks desperate.  Divided, the Palestinians approach the UN for recognition before putting their house in order.

Similarly, the STL will not fatally damage the image of Hizbullah, given the negligence of the international community in dealing with Israel’s myriad violations.

As for Hamas, the Islamic Resistance would, if necessary, be able to shift alliance from Syria to post-Mubarak Egypt. The recent relaxation of Gaza border and the Arab Spring in Egypt may be a boost to Hamas in the near future.

In the long run, however, the Arab Spring, if successful, will have its radical impact on Arab governance, and consequently on limiting the role of religion in politics.

For the Lebanese the strongest national defense is reconciliation; for the Palestinians, unity; and for the Israelis, 1967 borders.