A Failed State

It is impossible to read Hassan Nasrallah's recent remarks without getting the impression that he believes that Lebanon is a failed state, and has no hope of ever exerting serious influence within its borders. Considering that Nasrallah runs a state within a state, this should not be surprising. It is certainly a reality which benefits his interests. But, if a national leader anywhere else in the world complained so persistently about the state's weaknesses, he would be considered hopelessly defeatist. Not Nasrallah. He's the leader of the Resistance.

Will Hizbullah be giving up its weapons any time soon? Nope. For that to happen, "there must be a strong state and a strong army capable of confronting any Israeli aggression on Lebanon." Is Nasrallah burning the midnight oil to strengthen the state's military, so that this is possible? Let's not descend into fantasy.

Nasrallah has a vested interest in a weak state -- in its current form, the state can't challenge Hizbullah's domination of the south or the dahiyeh. He has no incentive to end the current deadlock. If a compromise was reached, the state might get back to doing things that states normally do: convening parliament, aiding economic development, investigating the assassination of a Prime Minister. When the government cannot fulfill its functions, Hizbullah can move in.

Don't believe me? Nasrallah said it himself: "If the stalemate continues for a while until a solution is found or we go to a civil war, then let the stalemate continue."

Al-Jazeera goes on to say "the opposition was willing to bide its time until circumstances become convenient for a solution or regular elections are held in 2009." If this is still going on in 2009, Lebanese will have grown so accustomed to being at each other's throats that they will no longer see themselves as members of the same nation. And chaos like that only benefits the group with all the guns.