April 28, 2008
Jibberish
Hezbollah is a fascinating and highly secretive organization, and these two facts give rise to some of the most ridiculous journalism around. The Observer's recent article is a great example:
The group's policy of refusing to discuss military matters extends to the highest levels. In speeches and rare interviews, Nasrallah refuses to answer even the simplest questions about the military wing, never referring even to the fact that his eldest son, Hadi, was a fighter himself. Life as a Hizbollah fighter is anonymous until death. But meetings with fighters, activists, Lebanese security officials, the UN peacekeepers along the border and residents of south Lebanon and the southern suburbs of Beirut, where the group is most active, offered a glimpse inside the workings of a group rarely open to outsiders. None of the sources within the group can be named - Hizbollah has barred members from speaking with the Western media since the mysterious death of a top commander, Imad Mughniyeh, in a Damascus car bomb.
Hezbollah has certainly been increasingly reluctant to talk to the western media, but I wouldn't peg it to Mughniyeh's assassination. Political Bureau member Ghaleb Abu Zeinab and international relations head Nawwaf Moussawi are still talking, at least. True, nobody's really doing sit down interviews, but again, that predates Mughniyeh's assassination.
Then we have this:
'The most important thing is to never talk' says one fighter, who agreed to speak about the group without revealing his name or specific duties inside 'the Islamic Resistance of Lebanon', as the military wing of Hizbollah is known. 'From the moment we begin our training, we are told two things: never disobey an order and never talk about the resistance. Hizbollah is not a job, it is not a family. It is a mix of religion, honour, dignity and discipline. It is my life.'
Emphasis mine. Is this the most reliable of sources? Especially considering that later in the article we have:
The US military study described Hizbollah's military wing as 'completely decentralised'. Its commanders famously exercised this independence when they refused orders by the top command to abandon Bint Jebel in 2006 - then under massive Israeli ground assault. The town did not fall and Hizbollah rank-and-file today laud the refusal of orders as one of the biggest victories in the war.
One would hope for at least some small nod to this little paradox. But by far the biggest red flag for me was:
'The villages in the south are empty of men,' said one international official. 'They are all gone, training in Bekaa, Syria and Iran.'A trip by The Observer through villages in the Hizbollah heartland confirmed a conspicuous lack of fighting-age men.
Having been through the villages of South Lebanon a few weeks ago myself, I can report that this is ridiculous. Given how drastically out of whack this particular claim is, how believable is it that the author actually met "with fighters, activists, Lebanese security officials, the UN peacekeepers along the border and residents of south Lebanon and the southern suburbs of Beirut?" The piece is downright fantasist.
Now, is Hezbollah secretive? Yes. Have they stepped up training and recruitment in recent months? This does seem to be the consensus in most circles in Lebanon. Is this article a reasonable basis for reaching these conclusions? Not in the slightest. Can we stop with the lurid hyperboles and stick to the alarming-enough-as-it-is truth? Please.
Posted by ben at April 28, 2008 07:54 AM