lemonde.fr
Hezbollah's Founding: A Four-Decade-Long Strategic Alliance
In the summer of 1982, Syrian and Iranian intelligence agencies secretly created Hezbollah in Lebanon, forming a strategic alliance against Saddam Hussein that profoundly impacted the Lebanese and regional landscape for four decades, until recently showing signs of strain.
- What were the immediate consequences of the Hezbollah's founding in 1982?
- In the summer of 1982, Syrian military intelligence and Iranian Revolutionary Guards secretly founded Hezbollah in Lebanon. This alliance stemmed from a strategic partnership between Hafez Al-Assad and Ayatollah Khomeini against their mutual enemy, Saddam Hussein. The creation of Hezbollah provided Assad with a key ally in Lebanon and the region.
- How did the Hezbollah-Syria alliance evolve over four decades, and what were the key turning points?
- Hezbollah's founding filled the void left by the PLO's expulsion from Lebanon in 1982. Hezbollah's actions, including the 1983 Beirut bombing that killed American and French soldiers, solidified Syrian control over Lebanon and allowed Assad to act as a mediator in hostage negotiations. This alliance, initially beneficial for both sides, has recently turned against them.
- What are the long-term implications of the changing dynamics between the Assad regime and Hezbollah?
- The Hezbollah-Syria alliance, solidified after Bashar Al-Assad succeeded his father, faced challenges with the 2005 Lebanese protests following Hariri's assassination. Hezbollah's unconditional support for Damascus and its involvement in the Syrian conflict since 2013 demonstrates a continuing, albeit strained, partnership.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the long-term strategic alliance between Syria and Hezbollah, highlighting its benefits for both sides before its supposed 'spectacular' reversal. This framing might lead readers to oversimplify the complexities of the relationship and its evolution. The headline (if any) would likely emphasize this aspect, shaping reader understanding from the outset.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral, but terms like 'dictator' and 'militia' carry negative connotations. While these terms might reflect the author's perspective, they could be replaced with more neutral terms like 'leader' or 'armed group' to maintain objectivity. The repeated use of 'alliance' implies a certain level of collaboration, which might not fully reflect the intricacies of power dynamics.
Bias by Omission
The text focuses heavily on the Syrian-Hezbollah alliance and its impact on Lebanon, potentially omitting other perspectives on the conflict and the involvement of other actors. There is little to no mention of the internal Lebanese political dynamics outside of the relationship with Syria and Hezbollah. The article also doesn't analyze the impact of external actors like Israel, or the broader regional geopolitical context beyond mentioning Saddam Hussein.
False Dichotomy
The narrative presents a somewhat simplistic 'win-win' scenario for the Assad regime and Hezbollah for 40 years, followed by a sudden and unexpected reversal. The complexity of the relationship and the various factors that contributed to its shift are not fully explored.
Gender Bias
The analysis primarily focuses on political actors, and there is no overt gender bias in the language or representation. However, a deeper analysis examining the roles of women in Lebanese or Syrian society during this period would provide a more complete picture.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article details the formation and actions of Hezbollah, a militant group sponsored by Syria and Iran. Hezbollah's involvement in violence, assassinations (like that of Rafic Hariri), and its role in undermining national movements in Lebanon, directly contradict the goals of peace, justice, and strong institutions. The prolonged Syrian occupation of Lebanon and the actions of Hezbollah destabilized the region and hindered the development of strong, accountable governance.