MEPE

[HBendor]

Omar al-Moussawi , former member of the Lebanese parliament, told the
Lebanese News Agency on March 11 that it was impossible to say contacts were
held with the political wing or the military wing because Hezbollah was "one
entity."

Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
at the Israel Intelligence Heritage & Commemoration Center (IICC)
March 17, 2009

Hezbollah welcomed the British policy of opening a direct dialogue channel,
but made it clear to Britain and the United States that they would receive
no political flexibility in return. Hezbollah stressed it would never
recognize Israel, be incorporated into negotiations with it, or abandon
terrorism.

Overview

1. Items recently appeared in the media that under certain conditions and
circumstances, Western countries might enter into talks with Hezbollah. A
spokesman for the British Foreign Office said that his country would
reevaluate its position towards Hezbollah and open a channel for direct
talks with the organization's political wing. French "diplomatic sources"
said that if Hezbollah won the elections in Lebanon , France would boycott
the Lebanese government. A German spokesman said that there were contacts
with the Lebanese government, in which Hezbollah took part. On the other
hand, the American administration made it clear that the United States did
not differentiate between Hezbollah's military and political wings, and that
its position toward the organization was different from that of Britain .
( Note : An op-ed piece in the New York Times on March 8 advised the Obama
administration to follow the British example and initiate diplomatic
contacts with the political wing of Hezbollah.)

2. Hassan Nasrallah and other senior figures in the organization welcomed
Britain 's decision to initiate a dialogue with Hezbollah. However they
strongly reiterated that Hezbollah had no intention of abandoning its
principles and paying for the dialogue in political coin. On March 13 Hassan
Nasrallah made it unequivocally clear in a speech that Hezbollah would never
recognize Israel and would not abandon its strategy of violence and
terrorism ("resistance") as long as Israel existed as a political entity.
Hezbollah spokesman Omar al-Moussawi said that there was no significance to
the distinction Britain made between the organization's military and
political wings, because Hezbollah was "one entity." In addition, in
response to comments made by Syrian president Bashar Assad, to the effect
that he would work to incorporate Hezbollah and Hamas into Syria's future
negotiations with Israel, Hezbollah spokesmen made it clear that the
organization completely rejected any negotiations with Israel because the
"Zionist entity" was illegitimate and it was out of the question to conduct
negotiations with it.

3. The responses of Hassan Nasrallah and other Hezbollah spokesmen signal
their self confidence (which is possibly a function of the self confidence
felt by Iran ). While Hezbollah welcomes the British policy, its own
political stance vis-a-vis both Britain and the United States is one of
defiance and lack of any willingness to display political flexibility that
might make it easier to initiate a dialogue with the West. On the other
hand, in his March 13 speech, Hassan Nasrallah named Iran and Syria ,
described by him as important regional factors, and suggested the United
States dialogue with them.

4. The following are the responses of Hezbollah to the possibility of
talking to Britain and the United States and of its incorporation into Syria
's future political
negotiations with Israel :

The British position

5. Bill Marston, a Foreign Office spokesman, recently said that Britain
intended to reevaluate its position regarding Hezbollah and to open a
channel for direct talks with its political wing . He said that Britain had
to recognize the fact that Hezbollah was "part and parcel" of Lebanon 's
national fabric (Al-Jazeera TV quoted in the New York Times on March 6,
2009 ). A Foreign Office statement said that Britain had "reconsidered [its]
position on no contact with Hezbollah in light of more positive recent
political developments in Lebanon ," including the formation of a national
unity government in which Hezbollah is participating. "Our objective with
Hezbollah remains to encourage them to move away from violence and play a
constructive, democratic and peaceful role in Lebanese politics.," the
statement said ( New York Time s, March 6, 2009 .)

6. A spokesman for the British Foreign Office said that as part of renewing
relations, meetings would gradually be held with Hezbollah representatives
in the Lebanese parliament to discuss various issues: [ Lebanon 's] internal
relations, the lull with Israel and the ties with Iran . He said that the
first meeting was held in Lebanon a month ago, attended by senior Hezbollah
figures, a number of British MPs and the British ambassador (Al-Arabiya TV,
March 13, 2009). British Foreign Minister David Miliband said that the
British government would make it possible to hold contacts with Hezbollah at
low levels to make it clear that Hezbollah intended to fulfill UN Security
Council resolution 1701, but he also said that Hezbollah's military wing
would be shunned by Britain (Britain Foreign Office website, March 6,
2009 ).

7. Michael Ancram , a conservative MP, said that during the past two years
he and two other MPs, one a member of the House of Lords, had held
unofficial meetings with senior Hezbollah and Hamas figures. He said that in
June 2008 he was part of a British delegation which met in Damascus with
Hamas political bureau chief Khaled Mashaal. He added that at the end of
January 2009 two British MPs had met in Beirut with the individual
responsible for international relations in Hezbollah's political council and
with the Hamas representative in Lebanon . He claimed the meetings taught
him that there was a foundation for continuing the dialogue, and added that
in his opinion, there would be no avoiding Hamas and Hezbollah if an
arrangement in the Middle East were to be achieved (CNN TV, March 6, 2009 ).

8. On the other hand, it was reported that the Secretary of the British Home
Office refused to grant an entrance visa to Ibrahim al-Massawi , 1 editor of
Hezbollah's paper Al-Intiqad . He was refused entrance after the Home
Secretary received requests from a number of institutions not to allow him
to enter Britain (e.g., the Conservative Party and the Centre for Social
Cohesion). The refusal was based on the fact that his presence in Britain
"would not be conducive to the public good" ( Telegraph , March 8, 2009 ).

Hezbollah's response

9. On March 11 Sheikh Naim Qassem, Hezbollah's deputy secretary general told
the Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar about Britain's so-called "openness," saying
his organization's firm stance in the face of the political attacks against
it and it's "effective" and "positive" role in Lebanon formed the basis for
the British decision. He added that Hezbollah had no objection to relations
with Britain and that the only obstacles were those forbidding relations
with Israel and the United States . He said the British decision was not
exceptional because "we have relations with the majority or European for a
long time" and meetings with the representatives of the French, Spanish,
Italian governments had been and would continue to be held.

10. Lebanese Labor Minister Mohammad Fneish , a Hezbollah representative in
the Lebanese government, praised the British decision. Asked if his
organization would be willing to enter into a dialogue, he said that he was
not of the opinion that Hezbollah would oppose contacts, but that the
organization had its own methods of doing things and had a person
responsible for international relations. (Al-Nashra website, March 6,
2009 ).

11. Other Hezbollah spokesmen said the following:

i) Omar al-Moussawi , former member of the Lebanese parliament, told the
Lebanese News Agency on March 11 that it was impossible to say contacts were
held with the political wing or the military wing because Hezbollah was "one
entity." He added that a renewal of the dialogue was a change in British
policy rather than in Hezbollah's . He said that Hezbollah would be open to
any future Lebanese regime, whether is sat "in the coalition or the
opposition" ( Al-Safir , March 12, 2009 ).
ii) Mahmoud Qamati , deputy chairman of Hezbollah's political council, said
that the British attempts were not new. He claimed that for the past year
Britain had been trying to hold a dialogue with Hezbollah, but wanted to
keep it a secret. However, he claimed Hezbollah demanded that the contacts
be open, because in the past Britain had called Hezbollah a terrorist
organization. He added that the British wanted to withdraw their designation
of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, but to do it in stages (Lebanese
News Agency, March 6, 2009 ).

The American position

12. The Deputy Spokesman of the American State Department said that the
British government had informed senior American figures that it was
considering holding contacts with Hezbollah's political wing. However, he
said that no change had occurred in American policy and that the United
States would not have contacts with Hezbollah or Hamas (American State
Department website, March 7, 2009 ). American ambassador to Lebanon Michele
Sison said that the American approach to Hezbollah was different from the
British and that the United States did not differentiate between Hezbollah's
military and political wings . She said that as far as the United States was
concerned, Hezbollah was still on its list of designated terrorist
organizations ( Al-Hayat , March 12, 2009 ).

13. A "highly-placed source" reported anonymously that the American
administration was not pleased with the British decision to conduct contacts
with Hezbollah's political wing, and that the United States did not
differentiate between the organization's politician and military leadership.
He said that Britain had informed the United States of its intentions [to
talk to Hezbollah] (Agence France Presse, March 13, 2009 ).

14. A different position was expressed in an op-ed piece written by
political commentator Roger Cohen 2 in the New York Times , who called upon
the American administration to follow the British example and initiate
contacts with Hezbollah . He also suggested that the United States see how
it could talk to "moderate elements" within Hamas to promote Fatah-Hamas
reconciliation. He claimed that the United States ' approach to Hamas and
Hezbollah as terrorist organizations was narrow and ignored the fact that
both had become social and political movements, and that their existence
could not be ignored in regional peace talks. He added that the time had
come to adopt the new British position and that such contacts might
encourage Hezbollah to stop its use of terrorism and begin playing a
"constructive, democratic and peaceful role" ( New York Times , March 9,
2009).
Hezbollah's response

15. Speaking in Beirut , Hassan Nasrallah referred to what he called a "new
American position" of a possible dialogue with Hezbollah and Hamas, on two
conditions, recognition of Israel and the abandoning of violence. 3
Nasrallah claimed that the reason behind what he represented as the American
position was the failure of regional United States policy, and he rejected
the preconditions he claimed were required of Hezbollah for initiating such
a dialogue. He said that Hezbollah, which was in a position of power, would
never officially recognize Israel , nor would it abandon the path of
"resistance" [i.e., violence and terrorism] . Asked what abandoning violence
meant, he said it meant, "abandoning the resistance [i.e., terrorism]. That
is, recognize Israel and abandon the resistance." (Al-Manar TV, March 13,
2009 ).

16.Nasrallah said that he rejected the American conditions which he claimed
had been presented to him: "Tomorrow, in another year, in a hundred years, a
thousand years.we, our children, our grandchildren.cannot recognize
Israel.Israel is a racist entity, it is an illegal country, an illegitimate
country.they are nameless people who were brought from all over the world."
As to abandoning violence and terrorism , he said that ".as long as the
terrorist, greedy, aggressive entity [of Israel ] exists.the resistance
brings us honor, glory and life." He boasted that "the resistance movements"
[i.e., Hezbollah and Hamas] were strong.

17. Hassan Izz al-Din , responsible for inter-Arab affairs, said that
Hezbollah had a guiding principle in its talks with the United States ,
based on the policy of former administrations and on the fact that the
United States was "the mother of all terrorism." He said that as long as
American policy did not change there would be no chance that Hezbollah would
talk to the United States (Al-Manar TV, March 13, 2009 ).

18. As opposed to his outright rejection of a dialogue with between the
United States and Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah called on America to hold a
dialogue with Iran and Syria . He claimed that all the attempts to isolate
Syria and change its regime had been ineffective. That, he said, was because
" Syria is a fact, real and influential in the regional equation." Iran , he
said, was becoming [militarily] stronger, it was flying into space,
producing its own civilian and military supplies and "there is a fear of its
nuclear capabilities." He said that Iran 's isolation and the pressure
exerted on it were "ineffective." "If you want to talk," he said, referring
to the American administration, "it should be done logically."

The European position

19. "French diplomatic sources" said that if Hezbollah won the [Lebanese
parliamentary] elections France would not boycott the [new] Lebanese
government. They also noted that for some time France had been in contact
with senior Hezbollah figures and that French Foreign Minister Bernard
Kouchner had met with Hezbollah representatives in France . In addition, the
French ambassador had spoken with them in Lebanon . The sources noted that
no comparison was being made between Hezbollah and Hamas, and made it clear
that while Hamas was on the European Union's list of terrorist
organizations, Hezbollah was not (AKI, March 15, 2009 ).

Syrian president Bashar Assad announces he will work to incorporate
Hezbollah and Hamas into future negotiations, and Hezbollah's response

20. On March 6, the Lebanese Al-Safir quoted the German Frankfurter
Allgemeine Zeitung , saying that a German foreign ministry spokesman denied
reports of German attempts to hold contacts with Hezbollah. However, he said
that at the present time there was no reason to initiate political contacts
with Hezbollah. He added that any contact established with the organization
was professional and part of German cooperation with the Lebanese
government, of which Hezbollah was a part by virtue of the participation of
labor minister Mohammad Fneish.

21. Syrian president Bashar Assad told the Japanese newspaper Asahi Shimbun
that for regional peace it was necessary that all the strong factors
participate in the peace process. He said he would work to incorporate
Hezbollah and Hamas in future Syrian negotiations with Israel (Agence France
Presse, March 11, 2009 ).

22. Hezbollah spokesmen rushed to respond negatively to Assad's comment.
Hassan Izz al-Din , responsible for inter-Arab affairs, said that Syria was
an independent country with its own opinions and that Hezbollah's position
was clear. He said that "the Zionist entity is illegal, terrorist and [was]
established out of an interest to rule the region." As far as negotiations
were concerned, he said that Hezbollah was not interested in any such
process, adding that from the beginning of the Madrid Conference in 1991
Hezbollah had emphasized it was against negotiations. He also said that
Israel had not fulfilled its commitments in the negotiations and that the
Arabs had not benefitted from them. In addition, Hassan Hajj Hassan , a
member of the Hezbollah faction in the Lebanese parliament, said that the
organization was not willing to enter into negotiations with Israel: "We are
not devoted followers of Syria and not of Iran but allies, and each group
has the right to determine its own position" (Al-Nashra, March 13, 2009).
---------------
1 Ibrahim al-Moussawi is a Lebanese journalist who in the past was director
of Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV, and was supposed to lecture at London University
.. Members of the Conservative Party demanded that the Home Office Secretary
deny his request for a visa on the grounds that he was a known extremist who
had made anti-Semitic remarks in the past. He had been detained in 2007
while trying to enter Ireland . He was recently quoted in the New Yorker as
saying that the Jews were "a lesion on the forehead of history."
Nevertheless, he was permitted to enter Britain in 2007, and received an
honorary degree from the University of Birmingham ( Telegraph , March 13,
2009 ).
2 He also advocates a dialogue with Iran .
3 That is a misrepresentation of the American position, whose official
policy toward Hezbollah has not changed, and as far as is known, the United
States did not present Hezbollah with conditions. Nevertheless, Hassan
Nasrallah aimed his speech at the United States and not Britain , whose
Foreign Office spokesman did speak of the possibility of initiating contacts
with Hezbollah's political wing.


--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il
_________________
JUDEA & SAMARIA are clear and unquestionably JEWISH!

MiddleEast Political Expressions