Is Hezbollah Spreading Shiism?

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Among the reactions to my article titled “Hezbollah: The Historical Phenomenon,” published on 16/June/2013, was the claim that Hezbollah is not interested in liberating Palestine, that it is a sectarian party working to spread Shiism, and that Sunnis must therefore stand against it.

Before delving into this debate, let me affirm that I am a Muslim who believes that Islamic sects have had a negative impact on Islam, have fragmented Muslims, and continue to take their toll on the body of Islam. We still carry the weight of the battles among Muslims, from the Battle of the Camel to Siffin to Karbala, and some fools among the Islamic sects work day and night to drag us into further battles that would complete that history. If we are sincere, we must work to remove all the historical accretions that have eaten away at the body of Islam.

The Argument

If Sunnis are the majority—indeed the overwhelming majority—of Muslims, why would they fear a Shia tide, if such a tide exists? Although exact statistics are not available, my estimate is that Sunnis number more than one billion three hundred million people, that they possess enormous wealth, and that they could be a global power to be reckoned with on the international level. They would have no reason to fear for their sect, or to be concerned about whatever propaganda the Shia might spread for their own sect, nor would they have any reason to seek peace with the Zionists, since crushing Israel would become an easy matter.

And if Sunnis were educationally accomplished, possessed cultural resilience and firm faith, there would be no fear of a Shia, Christian, Buddhist, or atheist tide—no one fears the ideas of others except one who doubts the strength of his own.

As for whether Hezbollah is concerned with spreading Shiism, it could not do so without standing up to Israel and America. Hezbollah cannot spread Shiism unless it is capable of achieving enormous, convincing accomplishments for the Sunni public that would push them toward the conviction that the Shia possess material and moral strength and that their sect ought to be embraced. It does not seem to me that the party could possess this power of persuasion except by standing up to America and Israel and achieving military deterrence that could culminate in victory over the Israeli army. Hezbollah is not a state, so as to demonstrate to us its capacity to achieve development, dazzling scientific accomplishments, sophisticated technological progress, and so on. It is a jihadi party that says its eyes are fixed on Palestine, and it will not be able to persuade Sunnis except through active confrontation with Israel.

This means that denying the party’s desire to confront Israel does not square with the notion that it is a sectarian party whose goal is to spread Shiism. One leads to the other.

Would that those who believe the party is working to spread Shiism would tell people how, and would publish the names of the Shia institutions carrying this out and funded by Hezbollah. Spreading Shiism requires proselytizing institutions, on the model of Christian missionary institutions—so where are they? Perhaps there are individual Shia trying, through private means, to influence Sunnis, and perhaps there are Sunnis trying to influence Shia, but this does not mean there is an institutional effort working to draw people away from their sects. God, exalted is He, commands us to verify, and it is up to whoever makes such a claim to provide the evidence for us to believe him.

There are Sunni satellite channels that heap insults and abuse on the Shia, and there are Shia channels that do the same thing against Sunnis, and Hezbollah has no connection to any of these channels. The party has websites, a television station, and a radio station, and I have not found in its media anything resembling what is said about its supposed program to spread Shiism.

—not the preservation of the Sunnis, but rather the elimination of a great force confronting Israel, through the use of Sunni-Shia strife.

Fear of Hezbollah’s Strength

My assessment is that if the party were like any other Arab party, or like any Palestinian faction outside the Palestinian resistance, no one would care about it, and it would trouble no one. The party is not like the rest of the parties we have known on the Arab scene, nor is it merely an organization that busies itself with resounding slogans and empty rhetoric; rather, it is a unique phenomenon on the Arab scene, operating with a scientific methodology and scientific thinking according to clear ethical standards. This also applies to the Palestinian resistance in Gaza, against which many Arab states are ganging up in defense of Israel; had this resistance been mere form and an empty trumpet, the Gaza Strip would not have suffered under siege.

For this reason, I do not think the fear is of Hezbollah as an organization, but rather of its strength, which is capable of making events, dominating the media, and singularly shaping contemporary history, at least in the Levant region. The one who makes history and makes events is the one who leads, and those who do not make events must either fall in behind the strong or fall into regrets that push them toward attempts to destroy the one who leads. So if Hezbollah is not working to spread Shiism, and does not embrace any special program to that end, then its mere emergence on the scene as a force that defies Israel and stands up to its military might is enough to push many people to think about the Shia sect.

And if Hezbollah’s goal were to spread Shiism, or if it believed that its military strength constitutes a magnet drawing Sunnis toward Shiism, why would it provide support to the Sunni Palestinian resistance and take care to raise the level of its strength so that it could confront Israel? Hezbollah has made enormous sacrifices smuggling weapons into the Gaza Strip, and continues to do so—so how could anyone accuse it of seeking strength and monopolizing it as a means of persuasion? Has the party not repeatedly reached out to all groups, particularly Palestinian and Lebanese ones, to help them build a professional military force resembling its own, working to confront Israel? Why have those who criticize it not come forward to take up this offer?

Achievement or Toppling

Which is the safer and better path: working to move from a state of weakness to a state of strength, or toppling whoever is strong so that we become equal to him in weakness? The Arab regimes are working hard—and I will elaborate on this in a later article—to destroy Hezbollah’s strength, so that it does not spoil their subservience to America and their alliance with Israel. Unfortunately, many Sunnis have fallen in with the corrupt Arab media, placing themselves in a state of weakness that drives toward toppling rather than achievement.

This same debate applies to Israel. If Israel is strong, then the solution to the problem is not weeping, wailing, and complaining to the United Nations, but building strength to confront it. The Arab regimes do not want to become strong, and always take care that the Arab and Islamic nation remains weak. And the Arab regimes, just as America and Israel have done, have employed many corrupt jurists from among both Sunnis and Shia to ignite strife so that the nation remains under the boot.

For this reason, it is better for a person to seek strength in accordance with Islamic ethics if he wishes to preserve himself and to matter. All Muslims could achieve great accomplishments if they cast off from themselves the burdens of sectarian strife and devoted their efforts to building and acquiring strength. And instead of ceaseless carping at Hezbollah, its opponents ought to mobilize to confront the enemies of the nation, and then all their fears would vanish, because such a mobilization unites rather than tears apart.

Historically

Most Arab states have historically been implicated in opposing any Arab who raises his head, and are always prepared to cooperate with enemies, whether Israeli or Western, in order to topple every manifestation of Arab strength. The strong exposes the flaws of the weak, the honest man demonstrates the misdeeds of the traitor, and the active man reveals the secrets of the lazy—and for this reason the Arab regimes have persisted in keeping the nation in a state of weakness so that its shortcomings are not exposed. But what is more dangerous now is dragging Arabs and Muslims into grinding sectarian and confessional wars that spread calamities and tear at the innermost hearts.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “هل ينشر حزب الله المذهب الشيعي؟” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.