As Israel’s war on Gaza has spurred broader regional violence, fears of a severe escalation in Lebanon are growing. Tucked away in the Democratic National Committee’s new 2024 platform is language that seems to indicate the party’s openness to it.
"The Lebanese people deserve to live in an independent and sovereign Lebanon that is free from the grip of Iran-backed Hezbollah, and a corruption-free, competent, reform-minded government focused on addressing the needs of its people,” the DNC 2024 platform reads. “In this regard, the Administration is also committed to facilitating a diplomatic resolution to the ongoing hostilities along the Israel-Lebanon border that would ensure the return of both Israeli and Lebanese families to their homes.”
No Democratic platform since at least 1984 has included this precise language. In 1988, the platform simply read: “We support the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Lebanon with a central government strong enough to unite its people, maintain order and live in peace in the region.” The 1996 platform supported the Clinton-Gore administration’s efforts “to achieve a comprehensive and lasting peace among Israel and all its neighbors, including Lebanon and Syria.” The 2008 platform warned of “the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah.” The closest, perhaps, was the 2016 platform, which read that “Democrats will push back against Iran’s destabilizing activities including its support for terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah….”
The 2024 platform calling for Lebanon to be “free from the grip of Iran-backed Hezbollah” is a far cry from the 2020 version, which read: “Democrats believe the United States should not impose regime change on other countries and reject that as the goal of U.S. policy toward Iran.” That earlier language seemed to acknowledge a basic reality: In Lebanon, Hezbollah is not seen by all as a terror group, but rather as a popular political and social movement. It is “a driving force in Lebanese politics,” enjoys “high levels of support among the country’s Shiite population,” and “many Lebanese favor some of Hezbollah’s basic positions,” as two writers with the Arab Barometer noted in Foreign Affairs in July.
At the risk of sounding like the bad sort of lib, Hezbollah hasn’t exactly been sitting around minding their own business for the past four years. I’m frankly stunned the US hasn’t rolled over them in response to the Jan drone attacks in Jordan, or their not-war with Israel (however justified those may have been). An escalation of just harsh language is deeply out of character, and while I hope it continues, the ball seems (surprisingly) to be squarely in Hezbollah’s court at the moment.
That was likely the Iraqi wing Kitaib Hezbollah. Not the Lebanese. This new language from the US administration suggests ‘liberating’ Lebanon in a similar way to how it ‘liberated’ Libya.
I appreciate the clarification, though I did intended to reference both groups with that statement (hence referencing acts by both groups). I probably shouldn’t have grouped them under the same name, I admit. It was 5:30am and summarizing the levantine geopolitical situation as it relates to US imperialism is tricky even after I’ve had my coffee…
Can’t blame you, it is quite tricky over there. Iran and Lebanon still appear open to a lasting peace. But Israel does not like anyone else having military presence in the region.