Advertisement

Community, Person, and International Norms in Hezbollah’s Political Language: Comparing the 1985 Open Letter and the 2009 Political Document

  • Filippo Dionigi
Part of the Middle East Today book series (MIET)

Abstract

The previous chapters have highlighted the impact of international norms on Hezbollah’s Islamist identity analyzing its interaction with international actors via process-tracing methodology. This chapter focuses on an analysis of the language of Hezbollah, in particular with regard to the kind of vocabulary used to refer to persons, sociopolitical groups and international norms. It carries out a comparison of the key terms between two fundamental documents for Hezbollah. The first is the 1985 Open Letter to the Downtrodden (OLD) which was already introduced before.1 The second is the Political Charter of Hezbollah (PCH)2, publicly announced by the Secretary General Nasrallah on Hezbollah’s satellite channel al-Manar in October 2009.3 These documents (which are of comparable length) have been chosen for their central importance in the overall discourse of Hezbollah. The first, as already seen, is the founding declaration of the movement, while the second is the main programmatic political document that has been released by Hezbollah in 2009.

Keywords

International Norm Religious Community Previous Chapter Islamic State Collective Entity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 4.
    Bernard Lewis, The political language of Islam (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), p. 17.Google Scholar
  2. Fred Halliday, “The politics of the Umma: states and community in Islamic movements,” Mediterranean Politics 7, no. 3 (2002): p. 23.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Tamim al-Barghouti, The Umma and the Dawla: the nation state and the Arab Middle East (London; Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto, 2008), p. 37.Google Scholar
  4. 6.
    Said Bensaid, “Al Watan and Al Umma in contemporary Arab use,” in The Foundations of the Arab state: nation, state, and integration in the Arab world, ed. Ghassane Salamé (London; New York: Croom Helm, 1987), p. 167.Google Scholar
  5. 19.
    Nairn Qassem, Hizbullah: the story from within, Updated ed. (London: Saqi, 2010). p. 59.Google Scholar
  6. 22.
    Augustus R. Norton, Amal and the Shi’a: struggle for the soul of Lebanon, 1st ed., Modern Middle East series (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1987), p. 168.Google Scholar
  7. 24.
    The Arabic edition is: Na’em Qāsim, Ḥizbu Allāh: al-Manhaj, al-Tajriba, al-Mustqbal [Hezbollah: method, practice and future] (Beirut: Dar al-Hadi, 2004). For example, see page 83 of the Arabic version and Qassem, Hizbullah, p. 59.Google Scholar
  8. 30.
    See for a historical discussion of the concept, Antony Black, The history of Islamic political thought: from the Prophet to the present, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011), pp. 79–138.Google Scholar
  9. 43.
    Literature on the “Lebanonization” of Hezbollah is vast; scholarship is almost unanimous in recognizing this phenomenon. See, for example, Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, Hizbu’llah: politics and religion, Critical studies on Islam (London; Sterling, VA: Pluto Press, 2002), pp. 82–7. Among others.Google Scholar
  10. 56.
    Fred Halliday, Islam and the myth of confrontation: religion and politics in the Middle East, New ed. (London; New York: I.B. Tauris; in US and Canada distributed by Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), p. 62.Google Scholar
  11. 58.
    Mona Harb and Reinoud Leenders, “Know thy enemy: Hizbullah, ‘terrorism’ and the politics of perception,” Third World Quarterly 26, no. 1 (2005): p. 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 59.
    As’ad AbuKhalil, “Ideology and practice of Hizballah in Lebanon: Islamization of Leninist organizational principles,” Middle Eastern Studies 27, no. 3 (1991): p. 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 64.
    Fred Halliday, Shocked and awed: how the war on terror and jihad have changed the English language (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011), pp. 163–4.Google Scholar
  14. 79.
    For an analysis that further looks into this process, see Joseph Alagha, “Hizbullah’s infitah: a post-Islamist turn?,” in Post-Islamism: the changing faces of political Islam, ed. Asef Bayat (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013). I am only in partial agreement with Alagha’s analysis in this respect, as he seems to claim that Hezbollah’s identity transition is a fully accomplished process, whereas I think this is only a stage of a process that can be reverted.Google Scholar
  15. 81.
    Alexander Wendt, “On constitution and causation in international relations,” Review of International Studies 24, no. 05 (1998): p. 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 92.
    With reference to the legitimacy of the use of force against occupying military army, see, for example, the discussion proposed by Harik. Judith P. Harik, Hezbollah: the changing face of terrorism (London; New York: I.B. Tauris, 2004), p. 165.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Filippo Dionigi 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filippo Dionigi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations