Obama was Not Responsible for the Election Results in Lebanon

By Josh Feit, Wednesday, June 10, 2009 at 11:41 AM
View Comments

ObamaNerd, PubliCola’s corrOspondent, is too busy with other stuff this week to file his “OMG!Obama” column, so I’m gonna use his absence as an excuse to step outside of my regular purview and post about something I’m obsessed with, Middle East politics. 

The Obama-fawning NYT used this week’s election in Lebanon—where to many pundits’ surprise, Hezbollah did not come out on top—to cite Obama as the reason behind the March 14th Movement’s victory. (The March 14 Movement is the moderate coalition that has been holding onto power since its pro-Democracy Cedar revolution in 2005.)

It is ridiculous U.S. myopia to credit Obama with this week’s election results in Lebanon.

Let’s rewind with a little context: Contrary to all conventional wisdom (even conventional wisdom in Israel), Israel’s war on Hezbollah in 2006 was actually successful. It was not, as everyone reported, a sort of mini-Vietnam for the Israeli army. I’ve been arguing this for a while. And anticipating Hezbollah’s troubles. 

Check it out: Israel routed Hezbollah out of Southern Lebanon.

True, Hezbollah wasn’t forced to disarm (as the U.N. mandated in the cease fire), but honestly, has Hezbollah hit Israel at all since? No. What they have done is issue a statement —contrary to anything they’d ever said before—saying they were willing to find a diplomatic solution to their dispute with Israel.

Hezbollah has also been forced into the political realm and put to the test as a political movement, which, frustrated, led them to shoot it up with the Lebanese army and rival political factions (like the March 14th Movement) in May 2008. (Hezbollah’s military win against Lebanese military forces at the time allowed them to bully their way into a power sharing agreement.)

And that leads us to this year’s election: Obama? Did the NYT ever stop to think that Hezbollah’s strategy of bullying and machine gunning isn’t popular with the Lebanese voters, and this week’s vote was a straight up rejection of Hezbollah’s militarism.  

The reason I voted for Obama is because I believed his peace-making style would work miracles in the Middle East, and his awesome speech last week convinced me it’s true, but to give him credit for the moderates’ victory in Lebanon this week—when they were predicting a Hezbollah victory only moments earlier—underscores what the mainstream press has missed all along: Hezbollah was diminished in its war with Israel and forced to operate in the political arena where their militarism has proven to be a turn off for the Lebanese people.

  • Tom Foss
    Thoughtful post, Josh and I appreciate it. But what about tomorrow's elections in Iran? If Ahmadinejad (sp?) does get beaten, despite his blatant efforts at voter intimidation and suppression, are you ready to say that perhaps the makings of a miracle are taking form? I was very struck by the montage of pictures across the Muslim world that showed many public gatherings studying their televisions during what I consider a truly amazing speech by our President. (And isn't it refreshing that this is a speech he actually WROTE largely by himself? It is an amazing piece of work, worth studying.)

    As Robert Dreyfuss said, it was just a speech. But it was a hell of a speech and a great start.
  • @7,

    H left S. Lebanon, their base of operations against Israel.
    Israel's military objective was to move H out of S. Lebanon.
    True, they also wanted to disarm them, but that was a ridiculous goal...even though, the cease fire did mandate it... which, in fact, led to H's overt political aspirations vs. their military ones. And, surprise, they didn't do so well.
  • Trevor
    Hezbollah was "routed" without leaving or losing? Israel was "successful" though it didn't accomplish its military objectives?

    I suspect that Hezbollah's lack of popularity in parts of Lebanon is not directly tied to Obama OR to Israel's military operations.
  • Their (one) Christian ally fared poorly because they made a political decision—as opposed to other Christian groups— to ally themselves with Hezbollah. It didn't work. It backfired.

    You're right that H didn't lose seats, but that's not the issue. They were expected to gain seats. But, it turns out, their appeal is limited to their base. Not a good sign for them.
  • Fat-tailed
    @Josh -- I can see some merit to that distinction even if I think you're overplaying it. But the bigger point with regard to your original posting is that Hezbollah themselves did *not* in fact lose seats in the election, and they continue to operate a state-within-a-state in Southern Lebanon. Their Christian allies fared poorly in Christian areas in this election. Maybe that's because of Israel's war with Hezbollah, but if so, it's filtered through Christian allies, not through Hezbollah core supporters in Southern Lebanon. Since there's a strict religion-based electoral system in Lebanon, it would be clear if Shia in Southern Lebanon were voting against Hezbollah. But they didn't -- and that's a whole different theory than you set forth in your posting.
  • Fat Tailed,

    I'm not taking a position on the merits of Hezbollah's claims re: Shebaa Farms. But Nasrallah's statement about negotiating with Israel was unprecedented for the Iranian-backed militia leader.

    He didn't say he was willing to negotiate with Israel once they leave S. Lebanon. He said he was willing to negotiate to get Israel to leave S. Lebanon.
  • Fat-tailed
    And actually, Hezbollah has long had the position that negotiations with Israel are possible once Israel leaves Southern Lebanon. They haven't participated in acts of terrorism in Israel proper (they have launched rockets, but under that definition of terrorism, Israel & the US are surely terrorist groups as well), but rather engaged in a war to liberate Southern Lebanon from Israel occupation. That's just not the same thing.
  • ObamaNerd
    Thanks Josh. Will come up for air tomorrow.
    Great post.
  • Fat-tailed
    But reports are that Hezbollah kept the same # of seats in this Parliament as the last one. Their Christian allies didn't do as well as anticipated. So your theory would have to be that the war with Israel undermined Hezbollah among its Christian ally voters, but didn't impact their support among their base in Southern Lebanon where the war was actually fought. That seems a tougher theoretical leap.
blog comments powered by Disqus