Iran's poll did not worry Hezbollah

The stereotyping of Iranian politics in the Western world, along with a misunderstanding of how the Iran-Hezbollah relationship works, has led to a variety of fantasy-driven stories on what the Iranian elections mean for Lebanon.

Many fantasised that reformist candidate Mir Hussain Mousavi would put an end to Iran's alliance with Hezbollah, terminate Iran's nuclear programme and normalise relations with the US.

That simply is not how Iran works. Although Mousavi harbours reformist policies that he would have sought to implement domestically, on foreign affairs related to the Arab world, Iraq, and Lebanon, he has very similar views to those of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his two predecessors, Mohammad Khatami and Hashemi Rafsanjani.

Let us not forget that all three presidents were committed to Hezbollah. Under Rafsanjani, Hassan Nasrallah became secretary-general of Hezbollah, despite his young age, in 1992.

Also under Rafsanjani, now considered a relative moderate in the Iranian system, Hezbollah got to keep its weapons after the end of the Lebanese Civil War.

Under Khatami, the 'godfather' of Iranian reformers, Hezbollah waged battle after battle against Israel, climaxing with the May 2000 Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon.

Under Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah went to war in 2006 - again with the full backing of Iran - and staged its political strike against the pro-Western Cabinet of Fouad Siniora in 2007-2008.

Mousavi would have been no different because the Hezbollah connection comes directly from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

That explains why Hezbollah was not worried about who would become president of Iran. The organisation covered the elections with its Al Manar TV channel, standing at arm's length from both candidates.

The only comment it made, when the final election results were announced, was that Iran had once again "passed the test of democracy".

Al Manar candidly broadcast arguments from both camps in Iran, including those of people who spoke out against Ahmadinejad.

Mousavi was by no means a threat to Hezbollah, because his campaign concentrated on domestic issues, such as lifting the ban on private ownership of TV stations, ending discrimination against women and transferring control of all law-enforcement organs to the President's Office.

Many in the West were trying to draw a connection between three recent events: Obama's speech in Cairo on June 4, the Lebanese elections on June 7 and the victory of Ahmadinejad.

Some claimed that Obama's rhetoric on dialogue with the Muslim world helped bring about a Hezbollah defeat in Lebanon.

That is also not true, since as a party, within its constituency, Hezbollah was not defeated. It actually swept all Shiite districts, with great ease.

What was defeated was the coalition, known as March 8, that ran against the pro-Western March 14 coalition. Hezbollah's ally Michel Aoun is partly responsible for the defeat, because he won only half of the Christian vote. The rest of the blame should be shouldered by lightweights in the March 8 coalition.

The results of the Leban-ese elections means that the status quo of 2005-2009 will be maintained, with the Hezbollah-led opposition commanding a minority of 57-seats in the parliament.

It now looks like Sa'ad Hariri will become the new prime minister of Lebanon, while there is some debate on whether Hezbollah's ally Nabih Berri (a staunch ally of the Iranians) will retain his post as speaker of parliament.

Some claim that both Hezbollah and Iran are worried about the prospects of a Syrian-US honeymoon, claiming that any deal between Damascus and Obama, or peace between Syria and Israel, would come at the expense of Hezbollah and Iran.

This too is incorrect, since Obama is clearly no longer interested in breaking up the Syrian-Iranian relationship. On the contrary, he sees it as a boon and wants to use Syria to bring Iran to the negotiating table "with no preconditions" from the United States.

Speaking to US journalist Helena Cobban, Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mua'allem recently said, "We are ready to help... Why would the US want to persist in trying to mobilise an Arab-Israeli coalition against Iran? We are talking about peace in the whole region! ... If a close ally of Iran like Syria went to Iran and said 'This peace is in our interest,' what do you think would they [would] do? I can tell you they have never opposed any of our peace moves since 1991".

Meanwhile, Hezbollah remains as defiant as ever in Lebanon. Last week, it refused to meet former US president Jimmy Carter, while one of its 11 deputies in parliament, Hussain Haj Hassan, met with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana on Saturday.

This was the first meeting of its kind for the EU with Hezbollah, showing that despite the election results in Lebanon - and perhaps because of the election results in Iran - the Lebanese party is as strong as ever.

Carter himself best summed up Hezbollah's attitude after both elections, saying "I don't think Hezbollah's going to create any problems for Obama, or for Lebanon. I think they're satisfied to maintain the status quo. I think that withdrawing weapons from Hezbollah is out of the question. And that's the main thing that Hezbollah wants."

Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine in Syria.