Lebanon's voters answer Iran's guns
Hezbollah's loss in Sunday's election should end its veto power, and perhaps its gun power.
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
The outcome gives a pro-West coalition called March 14 a stronger hand to rule, but it also sends a signal to voters in Iran. They go to the polls Friday to elect a president, and the ruling clerics and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must be worried that popular will could also could turn against them.
Pro-West voters in Lebanon saw in May 2008 how Iran-backed Hezbollah used its military dominance to take over Beirut in order for its coalition (known as March 8) to gain veto rights over the government. And they also saw how a popular prime minister, Rafik Hariri, was assassinated in 2005, allegedly by anti-West killers.
Now, perhaps, with this election – which had an unusually large voter turnout – Hezbollah has clearly been told that democracy forces do not want to be coerced by guns (or Iran's vote-buying money). Perhaps other democracy supporters in the Middle East will take heart from Lebanon's example.
Hezbollah, however, won't be cowed easily. After its loss, one leader claimed that the group had "legitimacy" simply by the power of its guns.
The group fears being disarmed – as called for under a UN mandate – or blended into Lebanon's weak Army, which would be akin to recognizing its enemy, Israel. Iran uses Hezbollah and its rockets to keep Israel on the defensive. This election (and perhaps the one in Iran) might now weaken that strategy.
The March 14 coalition likely won't be able to disarm Hezbollah because of this one election. (Hezbollah has a nasty habit of assassinating political opponents.) But the ruling coalition should at least have the courage to end Hezbollah's veto power after it has slipped in its electoral appeal.