Hizbullah's shooting on a Lebanese army helicopter has raised many eyebrows, writes Raed Rafei in Beirut Hizbullah's shooting on a Lebanese army helicopter, entailing the killing of an officer on Thursday threatened to create a crisis between the army and the militant group, pushing to the forefront the question of a defence strategy for Lebanon, analysts and politicians said. Yet Hizbullah's seeming readiness to cooperate with the army's investigation by handing in the culprit to authorities helped put a lid on yet another heated debate over the legitimacy of Hizbullah's arms and their role as the country's national army tries to rise. With the military probe slowly dying down, the key question remains whether the attack was the result of a lack of coordination between the army and Hizbullah or whether the militant group was trying to draw limits for the army's activities in South Lebanon. "There is no doubt that the incident was very serious," a high-ranking military officer said on condition of anonymity. "But the fact that Hizbullah showed goodwill in cooperating with investigations reduced the tensions," he said. "I don't think the relation between the army and the resistance is at stake, but we need to make sure that such a significant incident is not repeated," the army official added. According to a statement issued by the army, a Lebanese military helicopter came under fire around noon Thursday as it was conducting a training mission over the area of Iklim Al-Toufah in South Lebanon. The incident led to the death of the helicopter's pilot, Lieutenant Samer Hanna, the statement added. Although the assailants were not directly identified, Hizbullah was held responsible by the local media and some politicians because the area concerned is reportedly a sensitive operational zone controlled by the resistance group. The area in question lies to the north of the Litani River, near the zone of deployment of UN peacekeeping (UNIFIL) troops stationed in South Lebanon since the end of Israel's war on Lebanon in summer 2006. As the army deployed in the south alongside UNIFIL troops for the first time since the civil war, Hizbullah tried to maintain the image of a strong alliance with the army. The Lebanese daily, As-Safir, Monday published statements by Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah, saying "no incident, no matter how serious it is, will create a divide between the army and the resistance." Although Hizbullah kept silent about the incident at the beginning, it issued a statement on Friday, calling the shooting incident "sad and painful". The group said that it would "fully cooperate with the brothers in the Lebanese army as well as with concerned judicial authorities to bring out the truth and guarantee justice". The same day, as the cabinet appointed a new army commander, Hizbullah reportedly handed over the culprit to Lebanese military police without revealing his identity. According to a military official, the attack was apparently "unintentional". It seemed that Hizbullah's fighters were unable to identify the helicopter, which was one of four Gazelle models offered by the United Arab Emirates, adding that three shots were fired at the helicopter. But for former army General Nizar Abdul-Qader, the incident raised important questions as to whether it could have really been the result of a "lack of judgement" on the part of Hizbullah fighters, especially given that the helicopter in question had been carrying out military drills in the same area for three days. "Investigations will have to elucidate a crucial point: Who gave the order of the shooting?" said Abdul-Qader, a military expert and columnist for the Lebanese daily, Ad-Diyar. "If the decision of the shooting was made by a high-up source, then Hizbullah's aim would be likely to draw red lines for the army. But if the decision was made on the field, then we are facing a psychological issue: Do the fighters of the resistance accept the presence of Lebanese soldiers on a land they regard as their turf?" Whatever the conclusions are of the military investigation, the incident unleashed new calls for addressing Hizbullah's weapons and an overall Lebanese strategy of defence during national dialogue sessions, soon to be launched by President Michel Suleiman. Samir Frangieh, an MP with the 14 March group, accused Hizbullah in a radio interview Sunday of seeking to "eliminate the military establishment". Other remarks by politicians from the parliamentary majority also criticised Hizbullah for trying to draw limits to the army's operations. According to Abdul-Qader, there is a way to integrate Hizbullah within the army as long as the key decision of waging war or not remains in the hands of the state. He said it was possible for Hizbullah's armed fighters to turn into a "special force" under the state's control. "A lot of nations have special forces that are technically militias and that support the role of traditional security forces," he said. "There is a law still in effect in Lebanon that allows the state to form a militia for specific security purposes. Integrating the resistance under this law will resolve an important legal issue and will make the state responsible financially for the costs of the resistance," Abdul-Qader said, adding that this would reduce dependency on external powers, namely Iran, allegedly financing Hizbullah. For political analyst, Ali Al-Amine, however, the parliamentary majority -- 14 March -- does not have the means to change the equation of power on the ground to force Hizbullah to integrate itself into the army. "The incident exposed the fragility of the military institution. Hizbullah is not worried that an army officer would stand up to it," said Al-Amine, who is an editor of Lebanon's Al-Balad newspaper. "Hizbullah is strengthening its military control over many areas north of the Litani River, denying access to the state's forces," Al-Amine said. He added that the current regional context does not suggest that Hizbullah is being pressured to curb its military clout, as Iran and Syria continue to support the resistance movement.
