Arab League's Renewal Of Relations With Hizbullah Sparks Criticism In Lebanon And Arab World: Hizbullah Is Still Is A Terror Organization; It Does Not Deserve Free Gifts; The Arab League Is Motivated By Outside Interests

On June 27, 2024, Hossam Zaki, the assistant secretary-general of the Arab League, met with Muhammad Ra'ed, the head of Hizbullah's bloc in the Lebanese parliament.  This meeting, the first between an Arab League representative and a representative of Hizbullah in about a decade, reflects a significant shift in the attitude of the Arab League, which in 2016 classified Hizbullah as a "terrorist organization" and called for it to "cease promoting extremism and sectarianism and refrain from meddling in the internal affairs of countries."[1] In statements to the media after the meeting, Zaki addressed the shift in the Arab League's position towards Hizbullah. He explained that the move was made at the 2023 Arab League summit in Jeddah, during which the League decided to remove the "terrorist" label from Hizbullah. Subsequently, he said, during this year's summit in Bahrain, the Arab League also removed the reference to Iran, Hizbullah's patron, from the name of one its committees: it changed the name of the  "committee on Iran's interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries" to "committee on foreign interference in internal affairs of the Arab countries." Zaki added that Hizbullah is an "important party" in Lebanon and that it is only "natural" for the Arab League to hold ties with it.

The meeting between Hossam Zaki (left) and Muhammad Ra'ed (Image: Al-Manar TV, Lebanon, June 27, 2024)

Several assumptions were put forward in the Arab media to explain the shift in the Arab League's stance on Hizbullah. Some saw it as an Arab effort to prevent Israel from launching a war against Lebanon[2] or as another step towards normalization between Saudi Arabia and Hizbullah's patron, Iran.[3] It should be noted that, in the recent months, there have also been signs of a change in the UAE's attitude towards Hizbullah. In March of this year, Wafiq Safa, the head of Hizbullah's Liaison and Coordination Unit, visited the UAE, this being the first open and official visit by a Hizbullah representative in the Gulf in the recent years. Hizbullah claimed that the purpose of the visit was to arrange the release of Lebanese nationals detained in the UAE and that Safa met with "several officials concerned with this matter."[4] Other Arab sources claimed that the purpose of the visit was to discuss the tension with Israel.[5]

The Kuwaiti daily Al-Jarida speculated that the Arab League's rapprochement with Hizbullah stems from the desire of its secretary-general, Ahmad Abu Al-Gheit, to secure a role for the Arabs in resolving the presidential crisis in Lebanon, and also from concern about a possible escalation vis-à-vis Israel, a situation that "calls for coordination or contact with Hizbullah."[6] Yet another assumption is that the rapprochement is an Egyptian initiative, promoted by  Abu Al-Gheit, who is himself Egyptian, as part of this country's efforts to improve its relations with Iran so that the latter will direct its proxies, the Houthis in Yemen, to stop the attacks on Red Sea shipping, which are harming Egypt's economy.

Zaki's meeting with Ra'ed and his declaration that the Arab League no longer regards Hizbullah as a terror organization evoked intense criticism in the international community and in the Arab world, both in Lebanon and outside it. U.S. State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel said: "Hizbullah remains a dangerous terrorist organization and a destabilizing force in the Middle East… There is no reason to take steps to remove such a designation, and we have continued to urge governments around the world to designate, ban, or restrict Hizballah…"[7] Hizbullah opponents in Lebanon and in some Arab countries, mainly in the Gulf, stressed that Hizbullah is no different from ISIS or Al-Qaeda: it is a terror organization and is responsible for the death of millions in the Arab world. They accused the Arab Leage and its leaders of being motivated by foreign agendas, and some called to dismiss secretary-general Abu Al-Gheit and his assistant Zaki and to move the Arab League headquarters from Cairo.

The opponents expressed concern that the move is part of a regional arrangement aimed at appeasing Iran in disregard of Lebanon's interests or the good of the people of the region. The Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar reported that Zaki's statements were met with "chagrin" in Saudi Arabia and other Arab capitals, and that Saudi Arabia had charged the Arab League to clarify the meaning of its move.[8]

In response to the criticism, Abu Al-Gheit and Zaki briefly addressed the reasons for the Arab League's move, saying that the League needs to maintain contacts with political elements in Lebanon and that this does not detract from the Arabs' reservations about Hizbullah. Abu Al-Gheit clarified that he had sent Zaki to Lebanon as his "personal envoy" in order to maintain contact with political elements in that country, further to "the decisions of the [Arab] League Council regarding solidarity with Lebanon and in accordance with the authority it had bestowed upon the secretary-general in this context."[9] Zaki told the Al-Houra channel: "After years of disconnect, the Arab League wanted to make contact with Hizbullah for various reasons, mainly because of the war and the presidential vacuum [in Lebanon]… As for the issue of classifying [Hizbullah] as a terror organization or nor classifying it as such, this issue was imposed on the media agenda and it was not a top priority. The hope was and still is to enable the election of a president in Lebanon."[10] Zaki added that his remarks about revoking the classification of Hizbullah as terrorist had been misconstrued, and that they do not invalidate "the many reservations and objections to the conduct, policy, actions and position of Hizbullah not only in Lebanon but also on the regional level."[11]

This report presents details about the meeting between Arab League assistant secretary-general Hossam Zaki and the head of Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc, Muhammad Ra'ed, and reviews the criticism against the Arab League for the turnaround in its stance on Hizbullah.   

Arab League Assistant Secretary-General: The Arab League No Longer Classifies Hizbullah As A Terror Organization

According to Hizbullah's Al-Manar TV, the meeting between Zaki and Ra'ed lasted over two hours. The Lebanese Al-Akhbar daily, which is close to Hizbullah, reported that Zaki used the opportunity to announce that "the Arab League has decided to stop classifying Hizbullah as a terror organization, and believes it has a significant role to play in Lebanon's future."[12]  According to another report in the daily, the Arab delegation headed by Zaki called Hizbullah's position in the war with Israel and its act of opening a front against Israel in South Lebanon "very honorable," and stated that "the resistance in Lebanon is defending all the Arab peoples, not just the people of Gaza"; it also said that "the political arena in the region after the end of the war will not be the same as it was before, and large changes are expected." [13] 

In interviews after the meeting, Zaki clarified the background of the Arab League's decision to renew the relations with Hizbullah, which were severed about a decade ago. In one interview he said: "There have been problems, but Hizbullah is a central element and an important party in Lebanon. Today we maintain relations with it, as we do with the rest of the parties and leaders in Lebanon."[14] Zaki also said that that the claim made by Hizbullah's media outlets, that the Arab League had removed it from the terror list, was "inaccurate" because the Arab League does not have any terror lists. He told the Egyptian channel Al-Qahera News: "In the resolutions of the countries of the Arab League, Hizbullah has indeed been described as 'terrorist'… and therefore the contacts with it were severed…  When the countries that are members of the Arab League agreed that this phrasing should not be used, that was it. It gave us the opportunity to maintain contact [with Hizbullah]… In the Arab League, we do not have a list of terrorist organizations or whatever. We have no such thing to begin with…"

To view a MEMRI TV clip of his statements, click below:

In a phone interview with the Saudi Al-Hadath channel, he explained that Hizbullah was referred to as "terrorist" in a 2016 Arab League resolution dealing with Iran's interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries. This, he said, was a description applied to Hizbullah, not a classification, and it was removed at the 2023 Arab League summit in Jeddah. He added that another development occurred in the last Arab League summit in Bahrain, when the name of one of the committees was changed from "committee on Iran's interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries" to "committee on foreign interference in the internal affairs of Arab countries." Furthermore, a draft resolution on the Iranian interference was rejected. As a result of these developments, said Zaki, a new situation has emerged that allows the Arab League secretariat to hold meetings and ties with Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc as part of monitoring the situation in Lebanon. All the Arab countries agreed on the new wording, without reservations and without conditions, he noted.[15]

Former Hizbullah Minister: We Welcome The Change; Hizbullah's Role Cannot Be Ignored

Muhammad Fneish, a former Lebanese minister on behalf of Hizbullah, welcomed the development while clarifying that Hizbullah has no intention of changing its positions or policies. At a Hizbullah memorial for a fighter killed "on the path to Jerusalem," he said: "We welcome the correction and the clarification made by the Arab League assistant secretary-general during his visit with Hizbullah. We did not invest any efforts in making this happen. Our resistance activity transcends these definitions, which reflect obedience to the U.S. administration. Whoever comes to Lebanon knows that the resistance, which attained all these achievements and created this change [vis-à-vis Israel], is a major factor in the equation of the struggle, and that anyone who wants to participate or play a role in the political arena cannot ignore [Hizbullah's] role.  That is the truth… The fact that our struggle against the 'Israeli' enemy is a top priority is beyond dispute… The principle is that any definition taken from [the lexicon of] the U.S. administration or the Israeli enemy harms those who use it and does not serve Lebanon."[16]

Hizbullah's Opponents In Lebanon: The Arab League Ignores Hizbullah's Responsibility For The Death Of Millions Of Arabs

This change in the Arab League's position sparked intense criticism from  Hizbullah's opponents in Lebanon, who stressed that the reasons for designating Hizbullah as terrorist are still valid. The Arab League, they said, is ignoring Hizbullah's  responsibility for the death of millions across the Arab world, especially in Syria and Iran, and for destabilizing Lebanon. The critics also expressed concern that the move may be motivated by foreign interests that do not serve Lebanon.  

Former Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Al-Siniora: Stop Giving Hizbullah Free Gifts

In remarks to the Saudi Al-Arabiya network, Former Lebanese prime minister Fuad Al-Siniora, a staunch opponent of Hizbullah, said that the Arab League's decision had been handed to Hizbullah "for free," when it could have been used to obtain concessions from the organization. He said:  "Time will tell whether this decision was reckless or correct. The Arab League does not have a list classifying institutions, parties and the like as terrorist groups, [but] it has been using this term for some time now… [This classification] must be reassessed, but I believe that it would be better to stop giving Hizbullah free gifts… This reassessment could have been made in a way that served Lebanon's interests and its peace and security…" Al-Siniora added that Lebanon, which is suffering an economic crisis, a crisis of Syrian immigrants and a loss of Arab support, cannot afford to be involved in a war.[17]

After these comments sparked controversy, Al-Siniora's office clarified that Hizbullah is represented in the Lebanese parliament and government and that it is not viewed as a terrorist group in Lebanon. The statement repeated Al-Siniora's remark that "time will tell whether the Arab League's decision was reckless or correct," and added: "If [the Arab League members] agreed on this position, it would have been appropriate to check how it could benefit Lebanon and Hizbullah…"[18]

The Saydat Al-Jabal Association: Don't Surrender Lebanon To Iran; We Will Not Hand Our Heads To The Iranian Militias

The Saydat Al-Jabal Association, a Christian organization opposed to Hizbullah, said in a statement it issued on July 1, 2024 at the conclusion of its weekly meeting: "[Lebanon] is a founding member of the Arab League, and we are no less Arab than any of the other [member states]… We have paid a heavy price for our Arab identity… We object to any weapons outside [the control of] the legitimate Lebanese [institutions], especially to Hizbullah's weapons, which are directly controlled by Iran… We will not forget that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon convicted officials of this organization of planning, organizing and carrying out the assassination of [Lebanese] prime minister Rafiq Al-Hariri… We also call attention to what this organization did to the people of Homs, Damascus, Aleppo and Al-Qusayr. At a time when Iran's proxies in the region are threatening security in the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, we will not have Hossam Zaki come to Beirut and lift the terrorist designation from Hizbullah. We are the ones who defend Lebanon, its sovereignty, its independence and its freedom. We will not have any figure, on behalf of any organization, come and hand our heads to Iran and to its militias in the region. The Arab League has delivered Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen into the hands of the Iranian influence, and that is unacceptable… The Arab League charter does not say anything about handing the region's security and resources to any non-Arab element."[19]    

Lebanese Politicians, Journalists: Hizbullah Is Responsible For Assassinating Lebanese Officials; An Arrangement Is Being Made At Lebanon's Expense

Lebanese politician Hadi Machmouchi of the National Dialogue Party wrote on his X account about the Arab League's rapprochement with Hizbullah: "It indicates that an arrangement [is being made] at Lebanon's expense, and this is a free gift to the terrorist militia Hizbullah, as [former Lebanese] PM Fuad Siniora said." In another post he called on the Arab League to explain its decision to "tens of thousands of families of Arab victims whose blood was spilled by Hizbullah in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon… As Lebanese people," he said further, "we do not need the Arab League or any other governmental or non-governmental organization to tell us whether the Iranian militia Hizbullah is a terrorist group. The blood of our martyrs, our ruined country, and the war that we have been living since 1996 are reason enough to classify this radical sectarian group as terrorist."[20]

Similar sentiments were expressed by Lebanese activist Raymond Hakim, who wrote on X: "Remove the sanctions and classifications as you may, Hizbullah will remain  terrorist. It is 420 million Arabs who will avenge the blood [of Hizbullah's victims]." In a separate post, he wrote: "You can say whatever you like, but we will speak the truth. The organization that assassinated [former Lebanese PM] Rafiq Al-Hariri, caused the Beirut Port explosion, and assassinated [Lebanese Forces party officials] Elias Al-Hasrouni, [killed in a Hizbullah-controlled area in 2023] and Pascal Suleiman [killed in 2024], is a terror organization, not a charity organization."[21]

Raymond Hakim's post

Ma'rouf Al-Da'ouq, a columnist for the Al-Liwaa daily, wrote that Hossam Zaki's explanation for the Arab League's decision – namely that it feels the need to maintain ties with Hizbullah – was "pathetic" because the reasons for classifying Hizbullah as a terrorist organization are still valid. He noted that some Arab countries were "surprised" by the decision and opposed it, despite the claims that it was based on understandings made at the Arab Summit in Bahrain, and added that "Arab League secretary-general [sic] Hossam Zaki, or whoever made this decision, should have taken into consideration all the factors, as well as Hizbullah's behavior within and outside Lebanon… before  making it… unless there are hidden motives behind this decision, [namely a desire] to continue turning a blind eye to the control that Hizbullah – and through it Iran – has over Lebanon and the region."[22]

Lebanese Journalist: Egypt Could Have Helped Israel Finish Off Hamas, But Instead It Decided To "Make Nice" With Iran

Journalist Hussein Abd Al-Hussein likewise suspected the Arab League of being motivated by outside considerations. He directed his accusations at Egypt, which he said wants to appease Iran in order to stop the Houthi attacks against international shipping that harm its economy. He wrote in English: "The Arab League is another Egyptian foreign ministry. Because the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen have been targeting commercial cargo shipping in the Mandeb Strait (connecting the Indian Ocean to the Red Sea), revenue of Egypt's Suez Canal has dropped by half, from $9 bn to $4.5 bn. Cairo desperately needs this money. Cairo could have helped Israel finish off Hamas by offering [the] IDF to operate on [the] Egyptian side of Gaza border. Therefor Gaza war could have ended and Houthis would have (presumably) stopped blackmailing global shipping. But Cairo is populist and doesn't want to be seen as Israel's friend. Therefore, Egypt -- which receives $2.3 bn in annual aid from America every year -- decided to make nice with Iran. What can Egypt give Iran? [It can] make the Arab League take Hezbollah off [the] terrorism list."[23]

Hizbullah Opponents Outside Lebanon: It Is A Terrorist Organization Like ISIS; The Arab League Is Influenced By Outside Interests

Similar criticism was heard outside Lebanon. The daily Al-Akhbar reported that the Arab League's decision had been "received with chagrin in Saudi Arabia and other Arab capitals" and that Saudi Arabia was pressuring the Arab League to clarify the meaning of its moves.[24] The Kuwaiti Al-Jarida daily reported, citing "Arab diplomatic sources in Beirut," that "Arab countries expressed puzzlement [over the decision] and asked the Arab League for clarifications." According to the sources, "the Arab League did not take a clear decision to reverse its previous resolution [to describe Hizbullah as terrorist], and some believe that Zaki's position is at odds with the inclination of the Arab League itself. [This is because the League] approved this description of Hizbullah at its general assembly, so any other decision must also be taken by the general assembly. [25]   

Criticism In Saudi Arabia: The Arab League Is Out Of Touch With Reality

As stated, Saudi Arabia renounced the Arab League's decision and blamed it on the heads of the League and indirectly also on Egypt. Assaf Bin Salem Abu Thanin, a member of Saudi Arabia's Shura Council and Foreign Affairs Committee, asserted that the decision was made by the secretary-general of the Arab League and by his assistant, and not by the organization's member states. He questioned  the credibility and loyalty of these two figures – and indirectly also of Egypt, the country they come from and in which the Arab League is headquartered – and called for replacing them and for moving the Arab League headquarters out of Egypt. He wrote: "Do the Arab League secretary-general and his assistant, Hossam Zaki, work for the general secretariat, carry out the policies of the Arab League and implement the decisions of the leaders of the Arab countries? Or are they [actually] running the Arab League secretariat [in the service of] their personal goals and political careers without asking the [Arab] foreign ministers and accepting the directives that obligate everybody in all Arab matters? It seems we have entered a new phase that requires us to demand the relocation of the Arab League headquarters from Cairo and the appointment of a new secretary-general and assistant who are capable and who will defend the interests of the Arab nation."[26]

Senior Saudi Journalist: Hizbullah, Like ISIS And Al-Qaeda, Is A "Parasitical" And Illegitimate Terrorist Organization

In an article titled "The Arab League: Today Hizbullah and Tomorrow ISIS," Muhammad Al-Sa'd, a senior journalist for the Saudi daily Okaz, compared Hizbullah to ISIS and Al-Qaeda, saying that they are all "parasitical" terrorist organizations whose hands are stained with Arab and Muslim blood. He wrote: "For many years the Arab League was the home of the Arabs and their last safe haven… [But] some wish to hijack it or harm it in the service of narrow interests or petty disagreements…" He added that, although the Arab League has shown weakness on some levels, especially the economic and cultural ones, "it never served as a mouthpiece for organizations involved in terror operations or as a platform for relaying these organization's terror directives… Throughout the Arab League's history of over 60 years, neither Al-Qaeda, ISIS nor Hizbullah have been allowed to play a role in the Arab activity. They remained parasitical organizations without any valuable [role to play] in the Arab political activity. The Arab League was careful to support the independent political and security action taken by Arab states to defend themselves against transitory terror organizations. It also opposed neighboring non-Arab countries who tried, on their own or by means of their proxies, to infiltrate the Arab decision-making. This [decision] would never have happened if the Arab states had been completely united in their desire to withstand the infiltration efforts."[27]

Prominent Saudi Journalist: If Hizbullah Isn't A Terrorist Organization, Who Is?

Prominent Saudi journalist Tariq Al-Homayed wrote on X: "The declarations that the Arab League [no longer] classifies Hizbullah as a terrorist organization are strange and require clarification on the part of the League. If Hizbullah isn't a terrorist [organization], then who is?! Is this a league of Arab countries, or has it become [a league] of the militias? And what is more important – the [Arab] countries or the Iranian militias?!"[28] Mocking Hossam Zaki's claim that the Arab League never classified Hizbullah as terrorist but only described it as such, Al-Homayed wrote: "Hizbullah is a terrorist [group] and Hassan Nasrallah is a terrorist, whether [the Arab League] classifies them as such or [just] describes them as such."[29]

Saudi writer Mustafa Al-Na'imi shared Al-Homayed's post asking whether the Arab League has become a league of the Iranian militias, and commented: "It appears that [the Arab League] operates in accordance with the principle of [supporting] whichever is strongest – the militia or the state."[30]

Yousuf Abalkheil, a columnist for the Saudi daily Al-Watan, also shared Al-Homayed's post, and remarked: "If the Arab League does not classify the Iranian party in Lebanon [i.e. Hizbullah] and the Iranian militias in Iraq as terrorist organizations whose destructive plan is based on toppling the authority of the state and taking its place,… [then] it is partner to these parties and organizations, which are buried deep in backwardness and barbarity."[31]

Arab Writers: The Arab League Is A Pathetic Organization; Hizbullah Is Responsible For The Murder Of Millions Of Sunnis

Ahmed Al-Jarallah, editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa, wrote: "Arabs, congratulations! The Arab League has announced that the terrorist Hizbullah is no longer terrorist, [even though] the entire world says that the Party of Satan [i.e. Hizbullah, a play on the organization's name, which means 'party of Allah'] is a terrorist party that has brought ruin upon Lebanon, seized control of its government  and sold it to the Persians. [This] party trained terrorists to bring ruin upon Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, and countries in Africa and the West. [This] party has killed, ruined and destroyed – yet after [all] this the Arab League says that it isn't terrorist. The purpose of this is to enable the secretary-general of the Arab Leage [Ahmad Abu Al-Gheit] to meet with Hassan Nasrallah, scratch his beard, and [smell] from him the stench of gunpowder and of the blood of the innocent. O Secretary-General of the Arab League, where is the integrity of [your] position!!"[32]

Ahmed Al-Jarallah's post on X

Iraqi journalist Sufian Samarrai, editor of the Baghdad Post website, wrote: "O Arab League, Hizbullah is a terrorist [organization] and anybody who supports it is a terrorist. The blood of millions of Sunni Arabs is not cheap. O Arab League, you who have never agreed [amongst yourselves] on a single word – unfortunately, all your stances are hostile to our nation. The Safavids [a derogatory reference to the Shi'ites, led by Iran] and the ikhwanjis [a derogatory reference to members and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood] will not be pleased with you even if you worship their gods [Iranian Supreme Leader Ali] Khamenei and [deceased senior Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sheikh Yousuf] Al-Qaradawi… The coming big war will change everything and all the equations, and after it you will [stand] before the nations and regret this decision of yours, which is a secret conspiracy with Iran and Qatar against all our countries and kingdoms. I swear by Allah… even if all the villains on Earth join Iran in the trenches, we will join Israel and the international coalition in the trenches against Iran and its gangs, and you will not be able to stop the coming war, which will be destructive for the gangs of the Safavid-ikhwanji entity in the region."

Samarrai's post was accompanied by an image of Hizbullah secretary-general Nasrallah, and over it the text: "O Arab League, Hizbullah is a terrorist organization that traffics drugs and that has killed and expelled millions of Sunni Arabs."[33]

The image of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah tweeted by Iraqi journalist Sufian Samarrai

Liberal Kuwaiti journalist Jassem Al-Juraid wrote: "The Arab League is a lame organization that has proven that it supports terrorism, strengthens it and [plays an] essential role in the region's instability… Shame on you for removing Iran's Hizbullah from the terror list!"[34]

Lebanese-Iraqi journalist and researcher Hussain Abd Al-Hussain, who resides in the U.S., wrote in English: "The Arab League is shameless. It says it declassified Hezbollah off terrorism list, and can now communicate with its leaders. Lebanon is a member state of the league, represented by its government, but the Arab League talks to the de facto Lebanon ruler, the [Hizbullah] militia. Surreal!"[35]

Emirati political analyst Salem Al-Ketbi wrote on his X account: "Iran has clearly asked several Arab countries to intervene and use their authority to establish an Arab shield that will prevent the defeat and disappearance of its most important militia in Lebanon [i.e., Hizbullah] and preserve its influence with the support of the Arab states. There will be Arab channels of communication with the U.S. in order to convince Israel not to destroy Hizbullah and to suffice with reaching an agreement regarding the border that will preserve the tension and the threat…."[36]

Former Syrian diplomat and Syrian regime defector Bassam Barabandi wrote: "Ambassador Hossam Zaki, the Syrians have the right to know the background for the Arab League's decision to remove Hizbullah's classification as a terrorist organization. As is known, Hizbullah and the Iranian militias occupy a significant part of Syria's territory. Through a simple YouTube and Google search, the Arab League can see the crimes that they perpetrated against the Syrians from 2011 to this very day..."[37]

Algerian journalist Anwar Malek wrote sarcastically: "The Arab League no longer classifies Hizbullah as a terrorist organization. We are waiting for it to classify it as a humanitarian charity group that provides aid to the victims of wars, conflicts and terrorism in the region, or for that bastard Hassan Nasrallah to announce that his armed militia has transformed from a so-called resistance [force] for the liberation of occupied Lebanese lands into a resistance [force] for cleaning litter from the streets of Lebanon! What a joke."[38]

Arab League Secretary-General: We Are Implementing The League's Decisions; The Reservations Regarding Hizbullah Are Still In Place

Arab League secretary-general Ahmad Abu Al-Gheit and his assistant Hossam Zaki rejected the criticism against them and refused to apologize for the meeting with Hizbullah's representative, but noted that the League still has reservations regarding Hizbullah's conduct.  Abu Al-Gheit clarified that the move was in accordance with the decisions of the Arab League, which authorized him to maintain contact with Lebanese elements, and that he had appointed Zaki to meet with these elements further to "the decisions of the [Arab] League Council regarding solidarity with Lebanon and in accordance with the authority it had bestowed upon the secretary-general in this context." [39]

Zaki too issued a clarification, stating that his remarks about this affair had been "misconstrued," and that they do not detract from "the many reservations and objections to the conduct, policy, actions and position of Hizbullah not only in Lebanon but also on the regional level. The Arab League resolutions regarding this matter," he said, "were unanimously approved by its member states. The most central of [these resolutions] pertains to defending Arab national security and combatting terrorism, and includes a clause that bans providing any aid – direct or indirect – to entities or individuals involved in terrorist operations, including militias or armed groups that do not belong to the state."[40]

In an interview with the Al-Houra channel, Zaki said: "Many people badly misunderstood [my remarks], intentionally or unintentionally… After years of disconnect, the Arab League wanted to make contact with Hizbullah for various reasons, mainly because of the war and the presidential vacuum [in Lebanon]. That is why I met with the head of Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc, Muhammad Ra'ed. As for the issue of classifying [Hizbullah] as a terror organization or not classifying it as such, this issue was imposed on the media agenda and it was not a top priority. The hope was and still to enable the election of a president in Lebanon."[41]

 

* N. Mozes is a research fellow at MEMRI.