Hezbollah's Partial Isolation

Hezbollah's Partial Isolation

  •   Published in the New York Daily News
  •  
     
    Those of us caught in the Sisyphean struggle against terrorism long for the sort of good news that emerged last week when, finally, the European Union agreed to label Hezbollah a terrorist organization. While the EU should be commended for this step, its decision only to brand the military wing a terrorist group ultimately falls short.

    It is for good reason that the United States, Canada, Australia and the Netherlands long-ago labeled Hezbollah a terrorist group — and did so without distinguishing between the political and military wings.

    Until Sept. 11, 2001, Hezbollah held the distinction of being responsible for more American deaths than any other terrorist organization. In 1983, Hezbollah orchestrated the truck bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, which resulted in the death of 241 U.S. servicemen, mostly Marines. They were also responsible for an attack a few months earlier on the U.S. Embassy in Beirut that killed 60 people.

    Around the same time, Hezbollah began a bloody campaign across Europe. Among its crimes: In 1985, it hijacked TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome and soon afterwards launched a series of bombings in France. Trained and funded by Iran, Hezbollah went on to establish terror sleeper cells, weapons stores and safe houses across the continent.

    Against this backdrop, it was no surprise that when the EU issued its first list of terrorist organizations in 2001, a number of Hezbollah operatives were included.

    Yet despite its notoriety, the EU inexplicably declined to list Hezbollah as an organization. It continued to operate with impunity in Europe, continually expanding its murderous reach. Most recently, Hezbollah was found to be responsible for murdering six people in Bulgaria and plotting a terror attack in Cyprus.

    While I applaud last week’s decision on the part of the EU, the semi-designation presents a number of troubling questions, the first of which is a moral one. Hezbollah has a decades-long history of using violence to advance its ideology. What does the EU’s partial declaration say about its unequivocal condemnation of terrorism? It’s worth noting that even the Arab Gulf countries — including Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Bahrain — have agreed to blacklist Hezbollah in its entirety.

    Second, it’s unclear who or what is served by this partial designation. For many years, a number of European states claimed that labeling Hezbollah a terrorist organization would lead to further destabilization in Lebanon. In truth, Hezbollah has been placing its ideological interests before the interests of the Lebanese people for years.

    These states should ask themselves whether Hezbollah members helped “stabilize” the country when they participated in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafik Hariri, in 2005. The assassination plunged Lebanon into a series of severe political crises, killings and bombings that led to widespread sectarian clashes.

    Similarly, Hezbollah’s role can be seen in the ongoing warfare in Syria that has left more than 100,000 civilians dead and millions displaced. At Iran’s urging, Hezbollah fighters are pouring into Syria to prop up Bashar Assad’s despotic regime. The longer the battle wages between Hezbollah’s Shiite force and the Sunni rebel movement in Syria, the greater the threat that a regional war will ignite between Shiites and Sunnis.

    Third, the EU has put itself in a diplomatic quandary. Consider what would happen if Hezbollah’s top official, Hassan Nasrallah, paid a visit to one of Europe’s capitals. He is both secretary general of the organization’s administrative arm and commander-in-chief of the military wing. He is also Hezbollah’s top political authority, instructing representatives in the Lebanese parliament and government on how to vote.

    Would Nasrallah be greeted as a legitimate political interlocutor or detained as a heinous criminal?

    Finally, there are practical considerations. EU officials now face the impossible task of trying to unravel the links within Hezbollah’s organizational network. The decision to differently categorize different parts of Hezbollah will ultimately confound any efforts to impose meaningful restrictions on the organization’s funding and operations in Europe.

    As far as the state of Israel is concerned, Hezbollah is an interconnected organization that should be judged by the totality of its actions. Criminal and terrorist activities shouldn’t be given any allowance to hide behind a facade of political pursuits. The EU has taken a small step in the right direction, but it must now consider what must be done to end Hezbollah’s terrorist activities on European soil once and for all.

     
  •