Customer Reviews

Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion (Critical Studies on Islam Series)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

First I would like to state, "Everyone should read this book."

Recently Hezbollah has become very popular in the Middle East since the July 12, 2006 conflict with Israel that leveled Beirut and killed thousands of innocents, and we can't discount the Israelis who were traumatized by this sanguineous circumstance.
This conflict for many people (like myself) begged the answer to a million dollar question... why are the Lebanese and Israelis fighting?
I'm not going to discuss the conflict here because this is a book review about Ghorayeb's book, which was written prior to the July War, even still this book is a pertinent read.

But what's really striking about "Hizbu'llah Politics Religion" is that it provides the historical answers needed to properly ascertain the many scenarios leading from the Israeli twenty-two year occupation of Lebanon to the present. Ghorayeb's analysis also provides a carefully crafted psychological profile of this political party that the United States and Israel deem to be a terrorist organization. But are they really Terrorist, or as George Galloway surmised it "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter!"

It is interesting to note that one of the syllogisms that Ghorayeb writes was that, "Notwithstanding the fact that Israel's occupation of Lebanese territory was the main impetus for the formation of Hezbollah, the occupation is not the sole basis of the party's conflict with Israel or execration of it."
Furthermore, Ghorayeb writes, "Hezbollah's reluctance to grant Israel recognition is rooted in rendition of the origins of the Israeli state, which it unequivocally portrays as a `rape or `usurpation' of Palestinian land, thereby rendering it a state, which is originally based on aggression. Therefore, Hezbollah does not know of anything called Israel. It only knows a land called occupied Palestine. In fact, the party (Hezbollah) never refers to the state of Israel as such"...(meaning a recognized country.)

The fact of the matter is Hezbollah refers to Israel as "the Zionist entity." And does not recognize nor will it ever recognize Israel as a legitimate nation. Moreover, Israel's subjugation of the Shebaa Farms, which Hezbollah recognizes as their own territory, is continuing to fuel the flames of antagonism. The Shebaa Farms was lost in "The Six Day War" and today is recognized by the United Nations and Israel as Israeli territory usurped from Syria in 1967, but the truth is "both the Lebanese government and Syria maintain that the Farms belong to Lebanon."
Plus, Hezbollah holds on to the notion that they will someday defeat Israel and rightfully claim the so-called holy city of Jerusalem on behalf of the Palestinian people.

(For further reading on the origins of the Israeli state please read Frederic Morton's "The Rothschilds a Portrait of a Dynasty.")

Nevertheless, the truth is in 2006, Hezbollah has successfully transformed itself (with the help of Syria and Iran) from a radical Muslim faction to a political party that may indeed be a serious contender on the Middle Eastern main-stage thanks to Israeli aggression, which seems to be aided by the U.S. and European lobbyist. This is a result of Palestinian and Lebanese political and military prisoners in Israel, plus the captured Israeli soldiers in Lebanon. {To determine who is at fault should be left up to the reader.}

In retrospect, Israel has made Nasru'llah's "Party of God" look like heroes at varianced to Western rapaciousness. Ghorayeb writes that. "Hezbollah defines itself first and foremost as a jihadi movement or a party of resistance whose paramount function is the liberation of the Lebanese territory from Israeli occupation by means of armed resistance. It is a role which represents the core of Hezbollah's political and organizational concerns, and which therefore constitutes its fixed and invariable dossier." Her comments coincide with Noam Chomsky's "Attitudes toward Hezbollah are illustrations. Hezbollah has gained considerable support in Lebanon, particularly in the south, where its candidates won 80 percent of the vote in [the] June 2005 elections."
Ghorayeb also said, "As Hezbollah initial raison d'ętre, its resistance to the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon and West Biqá constitutes the very backbone of its intellectual structure. It is the one pillar of Hezbollah political thought that is not amenable to any form of temporization or accommodation of Zionism, but also by virtue of the pure logic of armed resistance, as opposed to non-violent means of confrontation."
She then adds, "The invariable nature of Hezbollah resistance is also a function of the party's commitment to fulfill its religious legal obligation to wage a defensive jihad, in the cause of God (Allah)."

I hope everyone reading this review is objective enough to realize that this isn't an indictment of Israel. As a matter of fact this book is about Hezbollah's contemplations and reactions to what's transpiring in their neck of the woods. It's about how they envisage the issues that underline their tribulations.

Also, Ghorayeb's book succinctly yet academically deciphers Islamic etymology, which will help the reader easily ascertain the pontifical rhetoric and ideas of this ambiguous yet eclectic people. It is also interesting to note (according to Ghorayeb) that even though Hezbollah is a radical religious political party it doesn't impose its views on others in Lebanon.
I must reiterate that "Hizbu'llah Politics Religion" can be summed up as a psychological and sociological profile of a political party more so than a diatribe that takes one bias perspective over another.

Not an outsider's misrepresentation or caricature of this foreign group, 'Hizbu'llah' is an empathetic perspective of the Islamist socio-political-religious worldview. However this bias is not disguised, so the reader is on alert to use discernment and doublecheck its assertions. Though the focus is Hizbu'llah in particular, the book more broadly valuable to understanding the Islamist movement at large, clarifying distinctions and interrelations between Shi'a Islam and Sunni (for instance, different ways of dividing the world: Muslim/nonMuslim or oppressed/oppressors). The writing is engaging, comprehensive, and not vague--specific religious bases are given to explain hostility to Israel, the different types of jihad are detailed, etc. This book has greater global significance than its title portrays. For example, understanding Hizbu'llah's concern for oppressed peoples helps the reader to realize the inroads being made by Hizbu'llah (and thus Iran) in outreach to nonIslamic or at least non-Shi'a groups and nations perceived as oppressed by the West. Furthermore, the Hizbu'llah model serves as an example to recognize when observing the transformation (at least external) of other Islamist groups. (Don't like Hizbu'llah?--this book's still helpful: "know thy enemy.")

In her well-written book Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion, author Amal Saad-Ghorayeb explains the historical and contemporary development of Hizbu'llahs' political, social, and religious ideologies. Though she shows pro-Hizbu'llah, pro-Shiite, pro-Lebanese bias she attempts to present a fair and balanced study of an extremely controversial organization. Gleaning her information from an assortment of articles, interviews, newspapers she argues that since it's inception, the party has evolved and changed to meet the challenges political and social challenges both in Lebanon and throughout the Islamic world. She focuses primarily on the a close examination of the parties theological arguments concerning its purpose or role in the conflict against the West and the "Zionist/Jewish entity."
Ghorayeb begins her study with a brief, but thorough discussion of the formation and early development of Hizbu'llah from a Jihadi or "resistance force" to a major political power in Lebanon. She argues that myriad Shiite political movements in Lebanon originated in the 1960s and 1970s, but failed to merge until the 1978 and 1982 Israeli invasions and subsequent occupations of Lebanon by Israel. She states that Shiites suffered the greatest number of casualties in the Lebanese civil war and Israeli occupation. Within that claim she also asserts that one third of those killed in Sabra and Chatila were Shiites who had fled the Israeli occupation. In fact, her claims might be true. Regardless, she presents a convincing argument for the existence of an organization like Hizbu'llah in Lebanon.
However, biased or objective her argument, Ghorayeb offers an intimate glimpse into mind of Islamic fundamentalism. She stresses the predominately Shiite theology that defends the protection and defense of the weak and oppressed peoples, both Muslim and non-Muslim, as a central to the ideology of Hizbu'llah. The concept labels the United States, Britain, and France as the primary European oppressors under the subtle control of Israel. Essentially the conflict between Islam and the West lies phenomenon of globalism and the effects of Western hegemony, primarily American, in Middle Eastern politics and Muslim culture. The two chapters on Hizbu'llahs' anti-Westernism and anti-Americanism offer a glimpse into Islamic socio-religious thought and are essential in understanding today's world.
Unfortunately, many who read this book will condemn it based solely on Ghorayeb's constant condemnation of Israeli actions and the American blockade of United Nation censor of Israel. Though she addresses Hizbu'llah's terror activities, she refuses to label the group as a terror organization. However, she demonstrates a profound understanding of the Islamic jurisprudence and reasoning concerning violence against civilians. In that sense, this book is an apologetic that defends the legitimacy of Hizbu'llah and the organizations right to struggle against Israeli oppression. She explains the party's view that Israel remains illegitimate and Jews are evil and cannot be trusted. Some reviewers argue that she needs to include a section explaining the Zionist argument for the legitimacy of Israel. I disagree; this is a book about Hizbu'llah written by a Lebanese Shiite who returned to live in Lebanon. We should accept it and try to learn from it. There are plenty of books that come from the other end of the spectrum.

I very much enjoyed _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_. It was insightful and often thought provoking to the point of being disturbing. It was the first book on political Islam that clearly explained that some Shi'a *literally* regard Israel and the United States as literally satanic polities, that is as Satan's cat paws in contemporary geopolitics. Intermediate and advanced American students of Shiism, political Islam, Lebanese, or Israeli history stand to gain from Saad-Ghorayeb's book so long as the reader is politically liberal or moderate. Middle East scholars and news junkies should seriously consider adding the book to their libraries. On the other hand, conservatives and neo-conservatives as well as any Americans with a touchy sense of patriotism may get too angry to actually finish.


If You have read less than six books on the Middle East and less than two on Islam then do not read _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_ ... yet.

If you think that Bernard Lewis is a convincing centrist in Middle East studies, but a bit too forgiving, do not read _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_.

If you hate everything ever written by the quisling John Esposito, do not read _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_.

If Fox is your major news source, do not read _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_.

OTHERWISE read _Hizbu'llah: Politics and Religion_.

I really liked the author's neutral tone throughout the work. I didn't feel the author was picking sides, but instead trying to lay out the bare, objective facts as they are. This gave the book a greater authority in my opinion. What the reader must understand is that the author is simply relaying Hizbu'llah's ideologies as they themselves see it, so the book is very much from the Hizbu'llah perspective but with a critical look into their beliefs as well. This is an important perspective to have for anyone hoping to fully understand this complex group and where it might be headed in the future.

The book mainly deals with the leadership and other pivotal figures such as Fadlallah. This approach allows readers the chance to see into the minds of the people who not only lead this group but also define its ideology. This is a unique and probing look into the mind of this group which allows the reader to understand where they come from and where they may be headed in the future.

I was very pleased to see the author delve into the concept of velayet faqih. He does a great job discussing this, and while I was surprised that Hizbu'llah does accept this concept, the book does well in explaining the reasons why Hizbu'llah accepts it. After reading this section it made much more sense that this group would accept the idea since they are closely alligned to Iran, but the contradictions inherent in the concept for Shiites and Hizbu'llah is something that has not been fully rationalized.

What was very enlightening was the discussion on democracy and the Islamic state. In some ways I think this group is an important bellwether for the possibility of Islamist groups ability to integrate into a representative form of government. While this group may seek to set up an Islamic utopia, if they continue to do so through democratic means rather than through force I think they could be a possible example for other groups to follow. I only wish the author could do another edition that incorporates the many developments that have occurred since this book was first written.

The main problem I had with this work is that it was mainly a top down approach with very little focus on those on the ground level. This creates a picture of a group that is monolithic and rigid, and while this group is a very disciplined organization, I have serious doubts that this group doesn't have its own rebels who act on their own initiative. In the end the book was bound to have a problem such as this though because it is impossible to encompass fully such a large and complex group as this one is, so I don't take off for what was inevitable. I also don't think it was intentional, but more of a by-product of the approach the author took.

This should not be used as a definitive book for the Hizbu'llah, instead it should be used to further one's understanding as they look at this group from many angles. The author provides a perspective that adds greater depth. I recommend this book.

Hizb'llah: Politics and Religion by Amal Saad-Ghorayeb explores the ideology of Hezbollah and the tension between its Shia theology and the practical demands of operating in the Lebanese political scene. Also, despite its unfortunate title, Hala Jaber's Hezbollah: Born with a Vengeance is a good journalistic account of the party from its roots in the 1970s until 1996. Online, the Middle East Research and Information Project has produced a good primer on Hezbollah by Lara Deeb or for a summary of the history of Lebanon and U.S. intervention, see Stephen Zunes' "The United States and Lebanon: A Meddlesome History."

Yes, I do think Bernard Lewis is a great scholar. But I do not mind at all that the author disagrees with him on some issues. I am politically liberal, a Pagan, and a Zionist. Still, I did not get angry when I read this book, even though I disagreed with the author on many issues. Amal Saad-Ghorayeb really does examine Hizbu'llah, a Lebanese terrorist organization. And as far as I can tell, she tries very hard to be politically neutral. Unfortunately, she could have done better in that respect.

Saad-Ghorayeb does not shy away from obvious questions about Hizbu'llah. She does mention statements which do "leave the indelible impression that martyrdom" is valued "as an end in itself." She discusses Hizbu'llah's fight against the West. And its anti-Zionism and anti-Judaism.

Now, is this a good scholarly work? It's not all that bad. And it is fascinating. But it could be improved. The first problem is that there is a difference between truth and falsehood. On issues such as Holocaust denial, it would be worth pointing that out. The author could also have explained which side is telling the truth, rather than merely citing opposing claims. And she could even have tried to discuss why one side would indulge in fiction here.

There many are other topics on which I think the author is simply wrong. She discusses Zionist domination of American films. Obviously, there have been some movies, such as "Exodus," which present an ardently Zionist perspective. But I think she could have simply dropped this topic from her book. That's what I would have done with a topic if I knew as little about it as she does about this one. And she could have presented a discussion of Israel that included arguments for its legitimacy, from a Zionist perspective, just to contrast it with Hizbu'llah's point of view.

I've read several books on this subject, talked to refugees and know many people in the information gathering sector. Had I not known, for example, why Israel invaded Lebanon in 1978 and 1982, Amal's treatment of the subject would have left me with the conclusion that Israel didn't have anything better to do than to aggress its neighbor. She never mentions the reasons why Israel attacked and acutally intimates that Israeli soldiers carried out the Sabra massacre. This book is simply a detailed propoganda instrument for Islam, Iran and Hizbu'llah.

She contradicts herself in many instances, and sometimes on the same page (first it's morally, religiously and politically wrong to take hostages and declares Hizbu'llah leadership strictly proscribe it but 2 paragraphs later it's OK, justifiable and sanctionable--which is it?!). I understand that anytime you try to justify what terrorists do in a logical sense, you'll have to switch back and forth regularly. She just isn't very adroit in how she does it. What isn't addressed is the simple fact that the reason Hizbu'llah exists is because they want control of Lebanon so they can unite with Iran under an Islamic Republic. They can't get the Lebanese people to go along with them and so the only explanation Amal and Hiz can put forward is that it must be due to US and Israeli meddling. The reality is, no logical, rational human being would ever go along with their extremist views and that's why they are unsuccessful. This book only allows a distrust of the West and Israel while justifying everything Hizbu'llah has done as honorable, justified and moral.

On the other hand, this does give the reader a very good idea how members of Hizbu'llah think. She certainly is able to convey their thought process, being that she clearly shares their views, and spares no quotation to expound on why destroying Israel is a noble objective. The reader will have to go elsewhere to find a complete history that shows what the US and other countries have done to help the region (like the fact that the West, the Pioneer of Evils, the First Root of Vice, the Great Satan, etc. aka the United States liberated the Middle-East twice from German control and then left -- i.e. no imperialistic motives gang). Anytime we give them aid, this work twists it into an attack on Islamic sovereignty.

For Hizbu'llah, attacking Israel as it invades is OK because it's a defensive action. However, Israel attacked in '78 and '82 because PLO terrorists were launching missile strikes from Southern Lebanon. By their skewed logic, it's not OK for Israel to defend itself and its citizens but it is OK for an Islamic group to do the same. The double standards in this missive are abundant and transparent. The only use for this book is to know how the enemy thinks and to see how tenuous their justifications for attacks truly are.