Photo Archive by ANWAR AMRO/AFP/Getty Images
In an interview published by Al-Hayat newspaper, Sheikh Sohbi Al-Tufaily a former Hezbollah Secretary General who is now one of the most outspoken figures against Hezbollahs role in the East and North Bekaa discusses elections, politics in the Bekaa, and his views on the position of the Shiite community in relation to the current Lebanese dilemma.
Question: In Baalbek-Hermel, where you are currently living, there seems to be a decrease in enthusiasm regarding the elections, contrary to other regions. What it is your opinion regarding this issue?
Response: Earlier this year there were a lot of events and activities in advance of the parliamentary elections in the East and North Bekaa, but all of a sudden one list stands alone without opposition. In fact, the only list officially registered in these areas is the March 8 list. The other bloc withdrew its candidacy. We do not know how much money was paid for all but one list of candidates to withdraw, but we all remember how much money was paid to the candidates who withdrew in 2005. In 2005, it was clear March 8 and March 14 negotiated to reach an agreement later called the quadripartite alliance. Now something similar is happening, and it is especially noticeable if we look at various arrangements in some electoral districts such as parts of Beirut and Bint Jbeil. Perhaps March 14 is surrendering prematurely because they feel they will not win. This does not justify a withdrawal, however, because it is important to prove you have support, even if it is not enough support to elect a candidate to parliament.
Q: Do you think the recent security operations in the Bekaa [because of the assassination of four members of the Lebanese Armed Forces] have something to do with the upcoming elections?
R: Regarding the elections, like any other issue in Lebanon, everyone is trying to win by using language familiar to a particular tribe or area. It is common to hear that clans and tribes in the Bekaa are under-represented, so now that elections are near, everyone is making statements about the lack of representation tribes and clans have. Regarding the security situation, the authorities do not think of Lebanon today as a state. The ruling elite is not composed of men devoted to the state. They still think there is a difference between those people and my people. Any leader in Lebanon who has managed to rise to power, regardless of his political position, has favored and served the interest of his community, leaving all other citizens to feel like outsiders. Im not exaggerating. Lebanon has been like this since its foundation. Naturally, the Bekaa does not receive the welfare it needs from the state.
The Shiite parties that have some influence in power could lead a significant portion of the community. Unfortunately, however, those leaders are not from the Bekaa region, and, true to the Lebanese mentality, they serve only those who belong to their community. Honestly we have reached a point where the people need the welfare of the state.
Q: But perhaps they dont have any interest in inviting the state into the area. Dont they have the channels to provide assistance directly to the people?
R: It is not the case that the state was substituted. What happened was a criminal act. For instance, if I gathered people around me by giving them monthly salaries while they work in my association, this is bribery. And if I pay them for their votes and for their participation in activities and events, this is bribery for sure. For example, some of the areas destroyed by the Israeli enemy have been reconstructed. Perhaps they naturally feel responsible for the attack, and they are obviously afraid of the peoples anger.
Q: You are addressing Hezbollah, but ultimately the party is part of a regional alliance and your demands are out of context considering that these issues are not in the hands of Hezbollah.
R: I would like to draw your attention to another issue. If we look at what we have on the ground in Lebanon today, almost all political movements have in their ranks members that have spoiled the country. The only political movement that can claim they did not benefit from looting the state is Hezbollah. From 1992 to 2005, Hezbollah might have had some responsibility in committing violations, but it was never directly involved. This we can forgive them because they were the only political movement that did not dirty their hands with public money. But these issues are in the past. They have a large popular base of support and a strong security and military presence that easily attracts people.
Today, with the help of those that did not participate in the street clashes in Riad al Solh, they could reach people through reconstruction and commitment to the law. They could do this. It is true that they are committed to foreign influences. This is sure, but they cannot enter Beirut as they did on the 7th of May. This was not their decision, they were following Iran, a state interested in fostering Sunni-Shiite strife in Lebanon and abroad.
The Shiite community in Lebanon is not the same as the Shiite community in Iran, but there is a regional and internal political struggle to push the Lebanese Shiites towards Iran. For instance, I know the Shiite community in Iraq very well. It would it be very difficult for Iraqi Shiites to fall into the Iranian orbit alone, but there are some pushing for this. There is an interest to create a climate of confrontation between Sunnis and Shiites that has led to this division. Who really benefits from the Sunni-Shiite clashes? If the Shiite community had other options, they would never choose Iran.
