Hizbullah: Delimiting the Boundaries of Nonviolent Resistance?

Abstract

Hizbullah emerged in the mid-1980s as a response to Israeli invasion and occupation and acquired in the 1990s a dual and contradictory reputation. The Lebanese viewed Hizbullah as a legitimate political actor, but the U.S. and Israeli governments considered it a terrorist organization.1 Two aspects of the party explain this seeming contradiction: on one hand, it operates a large network of charitable organizations and has fielded members and sympathizers in legislative and municipal elections, which has anchored it in the Lebanese polity; on the other hand, its military wing carries out operations against Israel. These same aspects also explain Hizbullah’s dual approach to resistance, a concept central to its identity. In Lebanon, Hizbullah’s opposition to the government and other political actors has for the most part been nonviolent—despite a recent notable exception—while its resistance toward Israel continued to involve the use of violent force.