Posted on February 26, 2021
“Negotiating with Terrorists”
Hezbollah and The United States
By Imane Guissé
The adoption of a “no-concessions with terrorists” policy by the United States of America in 1973 reflected the fears of the larger international community that any concessions would incentivize and legitimize terrorist activity. The translation of this policy over time has evolved to the false narrative that the US has a “non-negotiation” policy.
Since then, there have been a number of instances when Western powers, in contravention of such policies, utilized terrorist negotiations for the benefit of its national security. For example, the United States and United Kingdom had negotiated with the Contra rebels or the Irish Republican Army (IRA) for means to achieve larger political goals. Even more recently, the Doha negotiations are being sponsored by the US, between the Taliban and Afghanistan.
This article will address US relations with Hezbollah, a Lebanese political party as well as a terrorist organization, that has had resilient loyalty to Iran since the group’s beginnings. Lebanon’s economic and political fragility is at an all-time high, pressuring Hezbollah to focus its interests and influence solely on Lebanon.
The catalyst that was September 11, 2001 sparked the Global War on Terror. Over the next two decades, the war and operations in Afghanistan had expanded the United States into no less than 80 countries. This “Global” War on Terror has cost the US an upward of $5.6 trillion…with a capital T.[i]
The United States has spent five decades with a plethora of sanctions in an effort to mitigate the Iranian nuclear problem. As the new Biden administration takes office, Iran is gaging its response to the killing of Iranian Quds Force commander and top nuclear scientist, Qasem Soleimani and Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. Hezbollah, Iran’s long time proxy, is facing domestic pressures from public uprisings. Financial costs of the Global War on Terror are at an all-time high. Combined, these events may be the catalyst through which the United States decides to open communications with Hezbollah.
U.S. Law on Terrorism
18 U.S.C section 2331 provides the United States’ definition of terrorism:
- Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
- Appear to be intended-
- To intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
- To influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
- To affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping[ii]
Under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, the Secretary of State holds the power to designate foreign organizations as ‘Foreign Terrorist Organizations’ (FTOs). The legal criteria for this designation states that it must be a foreign organization
engaged in terrorist activity, terrorism, or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism threatening the security of the U.S. nationals or national security (national defense, foreign relations, or the economic interests of the United States.)[iii]
International Law on Terrorism
Currently, no universal definition of terrorism exists in either customary international law, international treaty law or international humanitarian law.[iv] This is in direct relation to the conflict that not all states can come to a consensus on each specific non-state actors as terrorists. An additional layer of complexity is that this organization is also a recognized political party. Although Israel may consider Hezbollah a terrorist group United Nations, Syria, and Iran do not.
However difficult a definition is to obtain, UN Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) is to recognize “the duty of States to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts” is recognized out of jus cogens, a norm of general international law.[v]
Critics argue that the mere existence of a militant Hezbollah violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, sponsored by the United States and France and adopted in 2004, which ordered all Lebanese militias to disband and disarm[vi]. “The United Nations Force in Lebanon (UNFIL), first deployed in 1978 to restore the central government’s authority, remains in the country and part of its mandate is to encourage Hezbollah to disarm.”[vii]
Who is Hezbollah?
A Shia military and political group based in Lebanon, Islamic Amal, led by Husain al-Musawi, and formed in 1982 in reaction to the Southern Lebanon’s Israeli Occupation.[viii]Iran and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is responsible for establishing the group with financial and military training as an opportunity to broaden its Shiite influence.[ix]
This growth created proxies scattered throughout the Middle East under the influence of Tehran. Along with attacks against Israeli forces, Islamic Amal is known for its many anti-US attacks, such as the April 1983 suicide truck bombings of the United States Embassy in Beirut.[x]
In 1985 the group published a manifesto by the name of Hezbollah (The Party of God) which “vowed to expel Western powers from Lebanon, called for the destruction of the Israeli state, and pledged allegiance to Iran’s supreme leader.”[xi] Inspired by the not-so-distant Iranian Revolution of 1979, Hezbollah also promoted an Islamist regime similar to Iran’s, however, underlined that the freedom of self-determination ultimately lays with the citizens of Lebanon.
Hezbollah, a Political Party
Along with Hezbollah’s military operation, the organization focused on providing southern Lebanon with social services, such as infrastructure construction, schools and healthcare.[xii]Even after the 1989 Taif Accord, which ended the 15 years long Lebanon Civil War, these special services continued which led Hezbollah to an official political party in 1992, beginning with eight seats in Lebanon’s Parliament to 13 in 2019.[xiii]
Additionally, the Taif Accord, orchestrated by Saudi Arabia and Syria, called for the disarmament of all militias in Lebanon, with the exception of Hezbollah.[xiv] To this day, Hezbollah remains the only Lebanese sectarian party to hold on to its militia power after the civil war.
Arab Spring
In the midst of the 2011 Arab Spring, Hezbollah provided military advisors and combat forces available to the aid of Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. As a fundamental ally, maintaining Assad’s regime not only increased Hezbollah’s presence in Syrian territory, but simultaneously facilitated routes to transport Iranian missile parts and weapons.[xv]
Providing Assad with support seriously damaged Hezbollah’s reputation with other Arab states, which was arguably popular up to this point. “This growing unpopularity is believed to have been a key factor behind the decisions by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Arab League, and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization in the spring of 2016.”[xvi]
Hezbollah’s Strength
In 2017, the International Institute for Strategic Studies estimated that Hezbollah’s militia had “up to ten thousand active fighters and some twenty thousand reserves, with an arsenal of small arms, tanks, drones, and various long-range rockets…called it ‘the world’s most heavily armed non-state actor.’”[xvii]
In 2019, the State Department confirmed that Iran continues to support Hezbollah with arms and receives an estimate of $700 million dollars annually. These finances are in addition to the hundreds of millions of dollars established through the party’s legal businesses, global criminal ventures, and Lebanese diaspora.[xviii]
Recent Troubles
In October of 2019, Lebanon succumbed to one of the world’s highest public debt burdens. This ultimately led to mass protests of Lebanese citizens demanding the corrupt government, including Hezbollah, to relinquish power, “…some argue that the protest movement could undermine Hezbollah’s influence more effectively than any U.S. policy ever has, by opening the floodgates of criticism of the group, and potentially reinventing the system of government it has become expert in exploiting.”[xix] As the government is being reformed, in response to financial crisis and protests, many question the inclusion of Hezbollah. Lebanese President, Michel Aoun, mentioned that “no one can force us to remove a party that represents a third of the people.”[xx]
United States on Hezbollah
October 8, 1997 the United States publicly announced Hezbollah as a foreign terrorist organization. In order to issue U.S. sanctions on specific individual members, including Hassan Nasrallah who leads Hezbollah as the current secretary-general, are listed as specially designated global terrorists.
An attempt to reduce the large presence and recognition of Hezbollah’s military force, who is considered more capable than Lebanon’s, aid was provided to the Lebanon military by President Obama’s administration. However, and the two militaries joined together in pushing al-Qaeda and ISIS from their border with Syria resulted in Congress withdrawing additional aid.
In addition to the Hezbollah International Financing Prevention Act (2015), in June 2020, the United States enforced the Ceaser Syria Civilian Protection Act in an attempt to further undermine Hezbollah.[xxi] Recent sanctions on the group and individuals is an attempt to influence those who are leading reconstruction of Lebanon’s government to exclude Hezbollah.[xxii]
This new sanction may not be destructive for the organization, but in addition to the many other sanctions, it is an attempt to dissuade Lebanon’s other parties from collaborating with Hezbollah. “existing sanction programs against Hezbollah…have taken an economic toll on their targets but haven’t broken their political grip on power.”[xxiii]
“We Don’t Negotiate with Terrorists”
In 1985, President Ronald Reagan addressed the hijacking of TWA Flight 847 by persons associated with Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, “America will never make concessions to terrorists- to do so would only invite more terrorism- nor will we ask or pressure any other government to do so. Once we head down that path there would be no end to it, no end to suffering of innocent people, no end to the bloody ransom all civilized nations must pay.” [xxiv]
And yet, the very same president would push forward by selling weapons to Iran by means of Israel, or aiding Contra rebels in what became the Iran-Contra Affair in Nicaragua.[xxv]When the Irish Republican Army conducted the 1991 mortar attack that almost wiped out the entire British cabinet, the British government continued to maintain a back channel with the IRA.
It is most definitely in the United States’ best interest to readdress existing policies against Hezbollah in their current and future attempts to aid Lebanon. American reluctance is strengthening Lebanese attachments to Hezbollah. Even Lebanese officials who are critics of the Shiia political party recognize that abandoning Hezbollah could incite a civil war.[xxvi]
Additionally, this push of pressure from America towards the other Lebanese political parties is considered unwelcomed, President Aoun clarifies that “Hezbollah is supported because people in the region see U.S. policies to be wrong…if the American come up with a deal which is acceptable to the Palestinians, then what’s the reason for Hezbollah?”[xxvii] Now more than ever America is in strong support of Israeli policies. One of the most imminent threats to Israel is this elected Lebanese political party that the United States refuses to recognize as legitimate, Hezbollah. Aoun continues, “What do they expect us Lebanese to do when this is such a contentious issue in the Arab world?”[xxviii]
Israel, a government consistently fending off attacks by Hezbollah, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and surrounded by hostile Arab neighbors had still managed to negotiate the Oslo Accords with the expectation of a greater good effect.[xxix] If US policy in the Middle East is to be successful while simultaneously attempting to normalize recognition of Israel as a state, Lebanon’s multi-sectarian identity and economic stability is also essential.
Conclusion
Late in 2020, Israel and Lebanon agreed to negotiate their maritime border on the Mediterranean with the United States as mediator and UN sponsorship. The existence of such talks, “demonstrate that Hezbollah no longer vetoes such negotiations after preventing any breakthrough in the last decade.”[xxx] This compromise reveals a slow but steady growth of leniency from Hezbollah, for the sake of Lebanon’s economic growth. Which, in turn, suggests that a discussion between United States and Hezbollah is not entirely impossible.
Decades of tough US policies and sanctions, the people of Lebanon still support and rely on Hezbollah and their services. As the US continues to apply pressure, “collective punishment ordered by Washington against Lebanon would make Hezbollah’s victimhood narrative resonate more strongly in the wider region.”[xxxi] Even from the groups beginnings their relationship with Iran was public, and people of Lebanon have continued to support Hezbollah.
Although every president has upheld the ‘non-concessions’ policy (on paper), policy is not law. History itself tells us that with a nuanced position, nation-states are indeed able to create measured responses to terrorism with successful results. In acknowledging and weighing foreign policy that can be considered moral, functional, and strategic, it is at minimum that the United States should reconsider channels of communication with Hezbollah.
Citations
[i] Crawford, N. C. United States budgetary costs and obligations of post-9/11 wars through FY2020: $6.4 trillion, (Feb 6, 2021),
Click to access US%20Budgetary%20Costs%20of%20Wars%20November%202019.pdf
[ii] National Counterterrorism Center, National Counterterrorism Center Groups, (Feb 6, 2021),
https://www.dni.gov/nctc/groups/hizballah.html
[iii] United States Department of State, Foreign Terrorist Organizations – U.S. Department of State, (Feb 6, 2021),
https://www.state.gov/foreign-terrorist-organizations/
[iv] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, International Law Aspects of Countering Terrorism, (Feb 6, 2021), https://www.unodc.org/documents/terrorism/Publications/FAQ/English.pdf
[v] Ibid.
[vi] United Nations, Security council declares support for free, fair presidential election In LEBANON; calls for withdrawal of foreign forces There, (Feb 19, 2021),
https://www.un.org/press/en/2004/sc8181.doc.htm
[vii] Council of Foreign Relations, What is Hezbollah?, (Feb 6, 2021), https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hezbollah
[viii] Ibid.
[ix] Ibid.
[x] National Counterterrorism Center, National Counterterrorism Center Groups, (Feb 6, 2021),
https://www.dni.gov/nctc/groups/hizballah.html
[xi] Ibid.
[xii] Stanford University, Mapping Militant Organizations. “Hezbollah.”, (Feb 6, 2021), https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/mappingmilitants/profiles/hezbollah.
[xiii] Humud, Carla E. Lebanon, (Feb 6, 2021), https://search.proquest.com/docview/2273147524/fulltextPDF/9720A426D6FE4263PQ/1?accountid=13158.
[xiv] Alami, Mona. Hezbollah’s Military Involvement in Syria and its Wider Regional Role, (Feb 6, 2021)
http://www.kfcris.com/pdf/6f23c5a8743562eb0cb96e29d71c39575a1687c05d986.pdf.
[xv] Humud, Carla E. Lebanon, (Feb 6, 2021), https://search.proquest.com/docview/2273147524/fulltextPDF/9720A426D6FE4263PQ/1?accountid=13158
[xvi] Brit. Broad. Corp. (BBC), Arab League brands Hezbollah a terrorist organization, (Feb 3, 2021),
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35789303.
[xvii] Council of Foreign Relations, What is Hezbollah?, (Feb 6, 2021), https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-hezbollah
[xviii] Ibid.
[xix] Ibid.
[xx] Humud, Carla E. Lebanon, (Feb 6, 2021), https://search.proquest.com/docview/2273147524/fulltextPDF/9720A426D6FE4263PQ/1?accountid=13158.
[xxi] Voice of America, US Sanctions on Syria Leave Hezbollah More Isolated in Lebanon, (Feb 6, 2021),
https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/us-sanctions-syria-leave-hezbollah-more-isolated-lebanon.
[xxii] Dion Nissenbaum, Ian Talley & Benoit Faucon, U.S. Prepares Sanctions Against Hezbollah’s Allies in Lebanon, ( Feb 19, 2021),
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-prepares-sanctions-against-hezbollahs-allies-in-lebanon-11597234311.
[xxiii] Ibid.
[xxiv] FRONTLINE PBS, Target America, (Feb 6, 2021),
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/script.html.
[xxv] The Iran-Contra Affair Miller Center, (Feb 7, 2021)
https://millercenter.org/issues-policy/foreign-policy/iran-contra-affair.
[xxvi] Dion Nissenbaum, Ian Talley & Benoit Faucon, U.S. Prepares Sanctions Against Hezbollah’s Allies in Lebanon, (Feb 19, 2021),
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-prepares-sanctions-against-hezbollahs-allies-in-lebanon-11597234311.
[xxvii] Anchal Vohra, The Trump Administration Is Making Hezbollah Stronger Foreign Policy (1111), (Feb 19, 2021). https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/04/the-trump-administration-is-making-hezbollah-stronger/.
[xxviii] Ibid.
[xxix] U.S. Department of State, (Feb 19, 2021).
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo.
[xxx] Atlantic Council, Stormy waters: Israel and Lebanon negotiate their maritime border, (Feb 7, 2021),
Stormy waters: Israel and Lebanon negotiate their maritime border
[xxxi] Anchal Vohra, The Trump Administration Is Making Hezbollah Stronger Foreign Policy (1111), (Feb 19, 2021).
Hezbollah Supporters, in Lebanon, 2015.
https://ynet-images1.yit.co.il//PicServer4/2015/05/25/6070836/60708280991599640360no.jpg. [image].
Follow Us!