Hezbollah’s Crisis and the Lifeline of Nasrallah’s Funeral
Hezbollah is grappling with significant losses after conflicts with Israel, including the death of Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. The massive turnout at Nasrallah’s funeral may bolster support for the organization and deter governmental actions against it. The group needs to maintain its arms and secure reconstruction funding to preserve its legitimacy among the Shiite population. Recent events highlight Hezbollah’s enduring influence and the intricate dynamics of Lebanon’s political landscape.
Hezbollah currently finds itself in a precarious situation, having suffered significant losses to Israel, including the death of its Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. The organization faces increasing Israeli military freedom within Lebanon, skepticism towards its effectiveness, and the loss of its supply line via Syria following the Assad regime’s decline. This turmoil has led to heightened criticism among its primary constituency, Lebanese Shiites, particularly due to the severe economic conditions following Lebanon’s 2019 financial crisis and the aftermath of the recent conflict.
In a crucial turning point, Nasrallah’s funeral on February 23 attracted a massive crowd, which may serve as a stabilizing factor for Hezbollah, potentially deterring actions against its arms and domestic influence. The group’s strength lies not only in its military capacity but also in its deep-rooted popularity among the Lebanese Shiite population, which has historically supported its political endeavors. In the 2022 parliamentary elections, Hezbollah amassed some 356,000 votes, demonstrating considerable popular backing within its core demographic. Recent polls indicated that between 89 percent and 93 percent of Lebanese Shiites currently support Hezbollah, reinforcing its prominence in the political landscape.
Hezbollah’s success in maintaining domestic solidarity is evident in its adaptive membership model, which prioritizes responsiveness to its constituency over simple territorial control. This model has enabled Hezbollah to attain legitimacy within Lebanon’s sectarian power-sharing framework and maintain influence within the Shiite community. Furthermore, as the group navigates the post-war landscape, retaining its weapons and securing reconstruction funding for its devastated areas are pivotal priorities. Secretary-General Naim Qassem acknowledged a ceasefire agreement necessitating a repositioning of arms through national dialogue, underscoring the collective responsibility for reconstruction.
Qassem contended that government collaboration is essential in attracting international aid for reconstruction efforts, signaling Hezbollah’s intent to shift some reconstruction blame onto the Lebanese state. This strategic move may safeguard Hezbollah from blame should aid fall short. Furthermore, reports of Iranian financial support—the day after the ceasefire—might not suffice against the overwhelming war-inflicted damages, ranging from an estimated eight to eleven billion dollars. As Hezbollah’s funding channels become more constricted post-Assad, a failure to secure necessary aid might incite backlash from its supporters.
The turnout at Nasrallah’s funeral was not merely an act of mourning; it represented a demonstration of strength and collective identity. Estimates of attendance varied, with different sources claiming figures between 200,000 and 1.4 million. Independent analysts settled on a more plausible range of 700,000 to 900,000 attendees, affirming Hezbollah’s ability to rally significant support in a time of crisis. This show of force could deter Lebanese authorities from taking punitive actions against the organization.
Such turnout emboldens Hezbollah amid ongoing tensions regarding its armament and funding. Various Lebanese leaders have adopted a conciliatory approach towards Hezbollah’s position, acknowledging the group’s entrenched role within the political system. The current Prime Minister, Nawaf Salam, is positioned to face challenges in navigating Lebanon’s reconstructed political landscape while managing Hezbollah’s considerable influence. The substantial attendance at the funeral serves as a potent reminder of Hezbollah’s prevailing support among Shiites, potentially limiting government interventions against it.
While the relationship between Hezbollah and its followers is not solely transactional, the historical bonds have fortified the organization’s presence. By mobilizing large crowds, Hezbollah not only reaffirmed its political significance but also signaled to both internal rivals and the Lebanese state that any attacks on Hezbollah equivalently target the Shiite community. Despite uncertainties surrounding its future, the group has managed to secure a strategic foothold, enabling it to remain a significant actor in Lebanon and beyond.
In conclusion, Hezbollah’s recent struggles and the subsequent mass turnout at Nasrallah’s funeral highlight the organization’s attempt to reassert its influence within Lebanon amidst internal and external challenges. By showcasing popular support, Hezbollah has reinvigorated its political standing and emphasized the importance of armed resistance. As it seeks to navigate reconstruction efforts and maintain legitimacy, Hezbollah appears poised to preserve its role as a central player in Lebanon’s complex political landscape. The dynamics of its relationship with the Shiite community will continue to shape its actions and influence in the region.
Original Source: www.atlanticcouncil.org
