Arab League brands Hezbollah ‘terror’ group

[alarabi]

Cairo Friday, 11 March 2016
Text size A A A

The Arab League on Friday formally branded Lebanon’s militant Hezbollah group a terrorist organization, a move that raises concerns of deepening divisions among Arab countries and ramps up the pressure on the Shiite group, which is fighting on the side of President Bashar Assad in Syria.

The decision came during a foreign ministers’ meeting of the Arab League at the organization’s seat in Cairo, the Egyptian state MENA news agency reported. It came just a day after the league elected veteran Egyptian diplomat Ahmed Aboul-Gheit as its new chief.

The move aligns the 22-member league firmly behind Saudi Arabia and the Saudi-led bloc of six Gulf Arab nations, which made the same formal branding against Hezbollah on March 2. It also brings the league in line with the United States, which is closely allied with the Gulf states and has long considered Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization.

The European Union only lists the military wing of Hezbollah on its terrorist blacklist.

In Cairo, Saudi Ambassador Ahmed Qattan, told the satellite TV station Al Arabiya that the vote was not unanimous as Lebanon and Iraq abstained.

Earlier in the day, the Saudi delegation walked out of a league meeting in protest over a speech by Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari hailing Hezbollah and Shiite militias as “resistant movements.”

“I only described Hezbollah as a resistant movement and rejected accusations against the Popular Mobilization Forces (a Shiite Iraqi group) and other resistant movements,” al-Jaafari told the state daily Al-Ahram.

The decision by the Arab League is a significant blow to Hezbollah and it is also likely to further aggravate tensions in Lebanon, undermining the country’s delicate political balance amid fierce political infighting between groups loyal to Hezbollah and Saudi-backed factions.

The league’s decision also reflects deep regional divisions between Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia and Shiite powerhouse Iran, Hezbollah’s patron. Saudi Arabia cut diplomatic relations with Iran earlier this year after protesters angry over the kingdom’s execution of influential Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr set fire to the Saudi Embassy in Tehran and another diplomatic mission in Iran.

In addition to diplomatic pressures, Saudi Arabia has just finished a three-week long counter-terrorism drill dubbed “Northern Thunder” that included 20 participating countries, in what observers say was a show of force by the kingdom against its foes.

It also sent a strategic message to Iran, and extremist Sunni groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS.

The kingdom has taken other punitive measures against Lebanon, including cutting $4 billion in aid to Lebanese security forces and urging its citizens to leave Lebanon - a blow to the tiny nation’s tourism industry - in retaliation for Lebanon’s siding with Iran amid the Sunni kingdom’s spat with the Shiite power.

The GCC’s and Arab League’s decisions underline the steep price that Hezbollah’s very public and bloody foray into Syria's civil war has had. Once lauded in the Arab world as a heroic resistance movement that stood up to Israel, Hezbollah has seen its popularity plummet among Sunni Muslims because of its staunch support for Assad.

In Lebanon, the main political divide pits a Sunni-led coalition against another led by the Shiite Hezbollah movement, which includes both political and military wings. The Mediterranean country has weathered a string of militant attacks in recent years linked to the war in neighboring Syria.

Lebanon’s Foreign Ministry Gibran Bassil, speaking to reporters after the meeting in Cairo, said labeling Hezbollah as a terrorist organization goes against the Arab treaty for combating terrorism, which distinguishes between terrorism and resistance. He said Lebanon asked that the word “terrorist” be struck from the records of the meeting as if did not happen.

“Hezbollah is a Lebanese party that enjoys broad representation in the parliament and Cabinet ... Naturally we cannot accept that Hezbollah be described as a terrorist organization,” he said.

There was no immediate comment from Hezbollah. On its main evening newscast, the group’s Al-Manar TV reported on al-Jaafari’s speech at the Arab League meeting without commenting on the league designation against Hezbollah.

Hours before the GCC decision, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah delivered a televised speech in which he harshly criticized Saudi Arabia for its punitive measures against Lebanon.

He repeated his accusations that the kingdom was directly responsible for some car bombings in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, and denounced Saudi “massacres” in Yemen, where the kingdom is leading a US-backed coalition of Arab states targeting Iran-supported Shiite rebels.

“Who gives Saudi Arabia the right to punish Lebanon and its army and Lebanese people living in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf just because Hezbollah is speaking out? We urge Riyadh to settle accounts with Hezbollah and not all the Lebanese,” he said.

He also accused Saudi Arabia of seeking to cause strife between Sunnis and Shiites everywhere in the world and said its execution of al-Nimr in January came in that context.

Alarabiya

 

[Azadkashmir]

yep both are widening the secterain gap. then west brands all muslim as people who cannot behave. when is that black sludge going to run out.

 

[Solomon2]

@alarabi : So what sage advice does KSA have for Pakistan? If Pakistan joins KSA Iran has threatened to turn it into another Yemen; maybe they'll even invade, since Pakistan's army isn't deployed to protect the Iranian border. Yet If Pakistan stands with Iran against everyone else it will inflame its own majority Sunnis.

 

[Beyonder]

Good Job League of brain-dead Dummies. They should've elected Netanyahu as the new President (he kind of is) ....

 

[Sage]

Awesome ...They should've done it long ago !

 

[KN-1]

If Pakistan joins KSA Iran has threatened to turn it into another Yemen;

when? source? comparing Pakistan with Yemen itself is worst joke.. Iranian know their place very well so does Pakistan.. we are neighbor, we will not fight each other for interests of others..

maybe they'll even invade,

With what? u seems drunk to me..

, since Pakistan's army isn't deployed to protect the Iranian border.

We have trust of almost 70 years...

Yet If Pakistan stands with Iran against everyone else it will inflame its own majority Sunnis.

another fart..

 

[Serpentine]

@alarabi : So what sage advice does KSA have for Pakistan? If Pakistan joins KSA Iran has threatened to turn it into another Yemen; maybe they'll even invade, since Pakistan's army isn't deployed to protect the Iranian border. Yet If Pakistan stands with Iran against everyone else it will inflame its own majority Sunnis.

You have been desperately trying on this forum to turn Pakistanis against Iran. Though nothing more is expected from a self declared Zionist, but at least do it in a way that no one notices, your lies are just too ridiculous and too stupid.

-----------------

On topic, as Iraq's foreign minister perfectly put it, those who try to brand Hezbollah and PMF as terrorists are terrorists themselves. Nothing more to add here.

 

[Falcon29]

I disagree with this move, There are better ways both sides can find common ground or compromise. For Palestinians, we won't forget what Hezbollah did on our behalf in 2006 or the men they sacrificed in Egypt to help assist us, and still appreciate that. Even if some Palestinians may disagree with positions in Syria for example.

 

[500]

On topic, as Iraq's foreign minister perfectly put it, those who try to brand Hezbollah and PMF as terrorists are terrorists themselves. Nothing more to add here.

U mean Ayatullah puppet brought to power by illegal US aggression, who does not control half of his country? Who cares what that clown is saying?

I disagree with this move, There are better ways both sides can find common ground or compromise. For Palestinians, we won't forget what Hezbollah did on our behalf in 2006 or the men they sacrificed in Egypt to help assist us, and still appreciate that. Even if some Palestinians may disagree with positions in Syria for example.

In 2006 Israel planned pullout from 90% of West Bank, removing majority of settlements (Hitkansut Plan). Thanks to Hezbollah aggression that plan was foiled. Many wars followed resulting in death of thousands Palestinians for nothing. Thanks Hezbollah.

 

[Falcon29]

In 2006 Israel planned pullout from 80% of West Bank, removing majority of settlements (Hitkansut Plan). Thanks to Hezbollah aggression that plan was foiled. Many wars followed resulting in death of thousands Palestinians for nothing. Thanks Hezbollah.

Israel did not invest as much as it did in the West Bank nor militarily occupy it for decades only to pullout. The agenda was to annex parts of it if not all of it, and increase Jewish demographic representation there, while also try asserting control over Jerusalem. So your premise is rejected.

 

[500]

Israel did not invest as much as it did in the West Bank nor militarily occupy it for decades only to pullout. The agenda was to annex parts of it if not all of it, and increase Jewish demographic representation there, while also try asserting control over Jerusalem. So your premise is rejected.

The idea was intermediate solution which would give Palestinians continuous territory instead of dozen islands like today. That definitely would reduce tensions, casualties and pave way to final agreement. Hezbollah foiled it as result we get what we get: some 4 K killed Palestinians for nothing.

 

[Falcon29]

The idea was intermediate solution which would give Palestinians continuous territory instead of dozen islands like today. That definitely would reduce tensions, casualties and pave way to final agreement. Hezbollah foiled it as result we get what we get: some 4 K killed Palestinians for nothing.

I think you need to calm yourself down, I'm not sure what 'continuous' territory means, that's a new term for me. Israel has hundreds of thousands of settlers in the West Bank. I already explained above the agenda in the West Bank and why there is no pullout consideration on the table. Israel didn't propose solution, it wanted to unilaterally annex the already existing settlement blocs, drawing boundaries in Palestinian land. Closing off Palestinians from those areas of their land. And that didn't include drawing borders either, which means it plans to keep building in the future.

Hezbollah has no relation to that, Israeli settlement policy has been around since 1967. Hezbollah conflict with Israel in 2006 was related to prisoners it sought to retrieve and dispute related to Lebanese territory.

 

[500]

I think you need to calm yourself down, I'm not sure what 'continuous' territory means, that's a new term for me.

Currently Palestinian territories in West Bank are divided into many "islands":

Olmert's plan was to unite them into one unit, removing most of the settlements.

Note. This was only a intermediate solution before the final agreement. Hezbollah aggression of 2006 foiled that plan. Thats why 10 years later we still have this:

 

[Falcon29]

Currently Palestinian territories in West Bank are divided into many "islands":

Olmert's plan was to unite them into one unit, removing most of the settlements.

Note. This was only a intermediate solution before the final agreement. Hezbollah aggression of 2006 foiled that plan. Thats why 10 years later we still have this:

It's not just currently, it always was that way, your map doesn't show that, here is UN map:

I explained the intentions in my previous posts, which you frame as goodwill on Israel's part, which it isn't. It's annexing East Jerusalem which represented half of Palestinian economy at the time.

But I don't see any relation to Hezbollah in that. You can keep repeating that notion if you'd like.

 

[raptor22]

It was expected after this :



Puppets have no choice ....