Shortly after a seminar in the French Senate that discussed Lebanese affairs at the end of 2024, a young Lebanese Christian woman asked me: “Why do you oppose Hezbollah if it has brought influence and privileges to the Shia community?” Before I continue, I should clarify that I am referring to her sect here because of the unavoidable reality of Lebanon. The young woman’s question stems from how sectarian groups in Lebanon view one another, and it was directed at me because I was categorized as belonging to one of these groups. This categorization only considers individuals’ ideas through their primary affiliations, and it is assumed that this categorization should determine an individual’s ideas and political affiliation, especially in the Shia case, making it surprising that it doesn’t.
I simply replied that I do not see Hezbollah as having brought any privileges to the Shiite community in Lebanon. Rather, I saw how it militarized the Shiite community, turning its members into potential fighters and martyrs who would be killed anywhere in the world, and I saw that it was leading us towards disaster.
And if I were to elaborate further, my opposition to this organization, which launched under the name of the “Islamic Revolution in Lebanon,” did not begin with an awareness of its regional role, but rather with the most personal aspect: my own. It began with its targeting of me and my rights as a woman, seeking to impose a role on me in society through the men in my family, and to crush my very being. This opposition then broadened as the party categorized individuals within society into ranks, their rights varying according to their proximity to and loyalty to it.
I opposed Hezbollah and the Amal Movement, as did others who were against the sectarian system in Lebanon and against corruption, because they formed the barrier between us and the state we aspire to. We hoped that all Lebanese would do the same and rise up against their sectarian leaders so that we could reach the state, since the sectarian leaders do not achieve for their members what a just and inclusive state can achieve, in addition to the fact that they were partners of the party.
I remember the question of the young woman, whose first observation in my arguments was my belonging to a Shiite family, while the party and its mouthpieces find nothing to complete their attempt to detach us from the society in which we grew up, except to accuse us of treason and of hatred and self-loathing, simply because we oppose its project and its cheapening of the Shiite self.
Unfortunately, this discourse is also being repeated by many of those with whom we stood against the party and its hegemony, and they too have begun to forget where their opposition to Hezbollah originated.
These people forgot that our opposition to the ideological party stemmed from human rights principles, and was born out of anguish over a society in which a child is convinced, from a very young age, that his future is martyrdom, and a girl is convinced that her future is to give birth to martyrs.
Our opposition stemmed from our desire to live within a tolerant society. Lebanese Shiite society was more tolerant before Hezbollah took control of its most basic aspects, and before expressing natural feelings became shameful, classified as treason and grounds for accusations of treason.
Recalling this question, namely, “Why do you oppose Hezbollah?” is an opportunity to respond to those who also ask this question from among the members of the sect who support the party, who also assume that we had no choice but to follow the group, even if the path leads to destruction, and it is as if it becomes our duty to march to destruction in light of an Israeli war that wipes out our villages and threatens to crush society.
I used to see the militarization of Shiite society as an adventure with its fate, and that colonialism or occupation cannot be defeated by ideological parties that were nurtured by colonialism itself. This is what I have become more convinced of today with the outcomes of the war, and after Hezbollah’s insistence on entering it in support of Iran and “in revenge for Khamenei,” the Supreme Leader in Iran, after the outcomes of the “support for Gaza” war, which drew for us a vision of what we would reach if Hezbollah were to wage war again, and warned us that the war that would follow would be more brutal.
In the context of the second war in less than two years, the questioning of our sincere intentions and feelings of fear for a society being crushed, and the call to reduce losses, serves a malicious function. It is an organized questioning that does not stem from a genuine inquiry but has a repressive function, which aims to place everyone who raises natural questions and concerns in a position of doubt.
The function of preventing the victims of Hezbollah’s policies—policies that appear to accelerate Israel’s projects and serve its narrative—from questioning and holding anyone accountable is to keep them silent fuel. It is the function of normalizing death, destruction, and loss, and normalizing aversion to all that is natural and genuine, in order to consolidate Hezbollah’s control while the cries of those harmed who dare to speak out are silenced.
I opposed Hezbollah so that we would not reach a moment where we see our villages being destroyed and our blood being shed, as is the case today. I opposed it in a desperate attempt so that we would not reach the moment that is before us, and I will oppose it openly, with friends whose balance and principles do not falter in difficult moments, in attempts that I hope will succeed in curbing the worst, so that we may live in a society that seeks life, whose children do not absorb ideas about martyrdom before they realize any meaning of life.
I opposed Hezbollah to free myself from the romanticization of suicide, tragedies, and calamities—even the addiction to them. I opposed them in pursuit of a society that embraces me and embraces diversity. Its leaders value human life; their sole strength in any military battle is not the cheapening of lives and property, sacrificing them for nothing.
Today, no one should ask us: Why do we oppose Hezbollah? Rather, it has become our right to ask many why they support those who have proven to have brought about the catastrophe, those who persist in throwing their people into destruction, those whose weapons have become a burden, every time they launch a feeble missile at Israel, they inflict a massacre on their own people?