WTF? Hezbollah Calls For Referendum On Its Weapons?

There is a fascinating article over at Counterrorism Blog on how Hezbollah is seeking a Lebanese referendum to its weaponry. At first glance this seems even more than peculiar - why would Hezbollah want to shed any more light on the weapons it holds than there already is? Why would this terrorist group risk more questions on how they have rearmed? But the article does a great job of detailing the sinister reason for all of this. Look at this statement:

In my estimate, it is possible that the organization feels the time is ripe to score one more victory towards fully "legalizing" Hezbollah's military forces as a parallel to the Lebanese Army, as a sort of a "Lebanese Pasdaran."

Here's a bit more of the report:

This week, a Hezbollah official said his organization would call for a referendum in Lebanon over the Iranian-backed militia. This unprecendented statement signals a new stage in Hezbollah's gradual moves to dominate the country's defense and security apparatuses.

The issuance of such a call is a clear expression of Hizballah’s confidence in its ability to advance its control of Lebanon. It’s also a huge gamble for the terrorist organization.

Any analysis of Hizballah’s positions and initiatives today must be developed based on the new factor in the equation, which is that Hizballah’s control of Lebanon’s national security. Hence, when Hizballah’s leaders offer to submit their weapons-possession to a referendum it means they have insured a military-protected control mechanism over the political process in the country. They can determine the answer to the referendum, which negates the validity of the referendum.

That last paragraph from the article sums it all up - Hezbollah is so confident of their control of Lebanon's government, that they don't see this as a risk at all - seriously, who in Lebanon is gonna have then nads to dispute Hezbollah's arms?? At the same time, this move by Hezbollah will seek to legitimize any attack on Israel as a "national defense" move. You see, what Hezbollah seeks is legitimacy, at least from much of the world. At the same time, Hezbollah has learned from Hamas that they want no part of the dirty part of governing a country or a territory.

I think the risk that Hezbollah runs here though is that if they do reach this stage of governmental legitimacy, then they put Lebanon, as a country, in the hairs of the Israeli sights. An attack from Hezbollah, a kidnapping by Hezbollah could now be seen as an act of war by the country of Lebanon and what that does for the Israelis is to free up their rules of engagement and no longer have to avoid any confrontation with the Lebanese government.

Hizballah Calls for Referendum on its Weapons?

Ironically, I had suggested via Arab satellite TV three years ago, that the Lebanese people be allowed to decide on the weapons of Hizballah, in other words should an armed militia be permitted to exist outside the Lebanese Army. At that time and since then, no one from Hizballah or even the March 14 coalition considered the initiative. Obviously, at the time it wasn’t in Hizballah’s interest to accept a referendum knowing that an overwhelming majority of citizens would vote “no.” But after three years - and particularly since May 2008 - it appears as if they feel confident they can get a majority of Lebanese to agree to their keeping these weapons. Since they have the upper hand in the country militarily, they believe they can pull it off. As for March 14 and the Lebanese government: both have had multiple opportunities to have the UN by their side helping them implement UNSCR 1559. Unfortunately, they hesitated and lost that opportunity. In short, Hizballah’s call today for a referendum means they are close to transforming Lebanon into another Iran or Venezuela.
SMITH: Agreed. But why risk it? Hizballah already holds all the cards, so why try for a different hand?DR. PHARES: Hizballah is taking full advantage of the post-May era in Lebanon since seizing power; first on the ground in Beirut, then when its military role was recognized at the Doha Conference. And as the United States was preoccupied with its presidential campaigns and election, the Iranian-backed Hizballah moved forward to consolidate its gains and achieve as many small victories on the ground and in the government in order to insure its influence over more than a third of the cabinet and then enjoying the fact the new president of Lebanon would not - and will not - move against the group.
Now, with the election of a new U.S. president, the impression of the Iranian leaders is that they may have some time where diplomatic engagement may occur. Hence, the mood in Hizballah’s camp is that the time is ripe to further consolidate their grip over Lebanon and thus completely bypass UN resolutions by calling for a referendum over their weapons, and win it easily. Is it a risk? Unless the other side and the international community seize the opportunity and corner Hizballah, it won’t be a risk. SMITH: So do you believe that accepting the suggestion of Hizballah regarding a weapons referendum should be considered?DR. PHARES: Yes, but only if there is a smart, strong Lebanese leadership able to turn the initiative in the right direction. Because, after all, there is a real popular-majority in Lebanon, which is opposed to the armed militias, particularly to the pro-Iranian forces. This is a fact that has not changed.
In fact, according to the information I have, the anti-Hizballah majority has grown wider among the masses within the various communities: not the other way around. If the leaders of the Cedars Revolution are politically intelligent they would accept Hizballah’s proposal and take the challenge all the way. If they recollect themselves and think strategically, they can pull a massive victory with democratic means.