In turning its arms on its Lebanese opponents, Hizbullah transitioned from a movement in resistance to a movement embracing tyranny, writes Hussain Abdul-Hussain* Resistance is every peoples' right of self- defence against tyranny, whether foreign or domestic. In confronting colonial oppression, America's founders won their independence in the 18th century. The French resisted Nazi occupation two centuries on and the Algerians trounced the French decades later. In its domestic form, the Russians resisted their incompetent Tsar in 1917 and the Iranians toppled their oppressive monarchy in 1979. Lebanon has so far suffered from both forms of oppression -- domestic and foreign. In 2000, Hizbullah, spearheading the Lebanese resistance, successfully ended 22 years of Israeli occupation of Lebanese land. In 2005, a massive popular rally in the streets of Beirut, supported by UN Security Council Resolution 1559, brought three decades of Syrian occupation of Lebanon to an end. But as the Lebanese rid themselves of the occupations of their two neighbours, the creation of a sovereign Lebanon remained unrealised. In the aftermath of Syria's withdrawal from Lebanon, Damascus gave Lebanon's keys to Hizbullah. As such, the Iranian- supported party turned from fighting Israeli occupation to dominating Beirut, on behalf of Damascus and Tehran. Despite the shift in its role from fighting foreign tyranny to oppressing domestic foes, Hizbullah maintained the rhetoric of its so-called resistance. Instead of fighting the Israelis on the southern border, Hizbullah claimed to be confronting Ehud Olmert's army in the streets of Beirut last week. By doing so, this party of radical Shias committed -- knowingly or not -- the same mistake that Palestinian factions made when, under the pretext of waging a war for the liberation of their land, they oppressed a number of Lebanese groups who were not willing to listen to their diktat domestically. It was only a matter of time that the Lebanese, the Shia Amal group included, turned against their Palestinian guests and ejected them, during the Israeli siege of Beirut in 1982. Hizbullah must learn from history before it is too late. Lebanon is a mosaic of communities and Hizbullah presents itself as the representative of the Shia sect among them. But representation is one thing, and forcing other communities to kneel before Hizbullah under the pretext of "defending resistance" is another. As indicated by Lebanese history, it will not be long before other groups organise themselves and resist Hizbullah's domestic tyranny. History also tells us that tyrants are doomed to fall, always, sooner or later. By bullying other Lebanese groups in the streets of Beirut last week, Hizbullah drove a wedge between itself and these groups. While it seems that Hizbullah got away with its demands by forcing a Sunni and Christian supported government to reverse some of its decisions that Hizbullah deemed unacceptable, the confrontation between Hizbullah and the rest of Lebanon is far from over. Today, frustrations run high among Hizbullah's opponents in Beirut, and these are many, unlike what Hizbullah depicts. And if Lebanese history teaches us one other thing, it is that no tyranny can rule that country, whether by neighbour states with formidable military power such as Israel, or an efficient intelligence network such as Syria's, or whether domestic as applied by Sunni- backed Palestinian factions in the 1970s, the Western-supported Christian coalition in the 1980s, or Iranian-funded Shia radicals such as Hizbullah in this decade. Throughout history, foreign powers have supported one group or another in Lebanon, giving it temporary advantage over its foes. And in the same manner that Israel failed to rule Lebanon through its proxies in the past, and Syrian cronies crumbled in 2005, Iran and its ally Hizbullah will certainly come down one day. It is simply a matter of time before a new Lebanese resistance organises itself to fight and end Hizbullah's tyranny that calls itself resistance. Hizbullah should quickly beg its foes for reconciliation and seek true partnership, not partnership preached Hizbullah- style -- "My way or the highway". Should Hizbullah and the majority of Lebanon's Shias stick to their arrogance and militia bullying in the streets of Beirut and refrain from entertaining the fears and concerns of other communities, Hizbullah's plans are doomed to failure. And until Hizbullah's plans collapse, the writer of these lines is a Shia-born Lebanese who wants nothing to do with Hizbullah and its bullying under the guise of resistance. * The writer is a Lebanese journalist based in Washington.
