Lebanese Druze leader Waleed Jumblatt recently called for the disarmament of Hezbollah's military wing and the election of a president who was not "a puppet like [current President Emil] Lahoud." The Lebanese political scene has begun to change as different Lebanese factions call on Hezbollah to dismantle its arms.

In his interview for World Peace Herald, Gamal A. Gawad Soltan, professor of Syria-Lebanon studies of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies (ACPSS), provides a political analysis of the current situation in Lebanon. He looks at Hezbollah, Saad Hariri [son of the assassinated former prime minister], Jumblatt, and Christian opposition leader, General Michel Aoun.

Q: Democracy cannot function if any one organization has excessive power. Hezbollah still maintains its arms. Is there any possibility that Hezbollah will disarm? What do Hariri or Aoun think about Hezbollah?

A: To begin with, Hezbollah will not disarm by any means in the near future. This is the main issue that is dividing Lebanon now. You have the following configuration of power in Lebanon: the Shiites, Hezbollah, and the [Christian] Amal movement on the one hand, and other figures on the other.

These other figures are very concerned that Hezbollah has its own militia, and that it is even stronger than the Lebanese army. They feel that is not fair, because they all had to disarm after the civil war. Yet, it was only Hezbollah who was allowed to keep its arms. This was justified for years as Hezbollah has represented itself as a resistance movement that struggles against Israeli occupation in Lebanon

Yet, after the Israeli withdrawal, this justification no longer works. This is why the different factions are now exercising pressure on Hezbollah to disarm. As for its own ideology regarding its current situation, Hezbollah believes that one day there will be another struggle against Israel. Hezbollah expects future attacks from the Israelis. Thus, Hezbollah has not given up the idea of being a part of revolutionary forces that still fight to eliminate the Zionist power in the region.

To justify its maintenance of military arms after the Israeli withdrawal, Hezbollah invented the 'Shebaa Farms' issue as a pretext. Shebaa is an agricultural area consisting of 14 farms that was occupied by Israel in 1967. There is an ongoing debate in Lebanon as to whether Shebaa belongs to Lebanon or Syria.

Both Hezbollah and Amal claim that Shebaa is a part of Lebanon and that Israel has therefore not fully withdrawn from Lebanon. They believe that there had been an agreement with Syria to put its security forces in the territory. The main task of these forces was to prevent smuggling along the border between Lebanon and Syria. According to this interpretation, when the Golan Heights was occupied in 1967, Israel considered Shebaa a part of Syria, although it was and is Lebanese territory.

However, the United Nations considers Shebaa a part of Syria, and has therefore determined that Israel has withdrawn completely from Lebanon.

It is clear that this debate will never end. The opponents of Hezbollah think that Shebaa is a part of Syria and not Lebanese territory. In their view, as Lebanon is no longer occupied, there is no need for an armed militias, and they call on Hezbollah to disarm.

For Hezbollah disarmament depends on "the liberation of the Shebaa Farms, the release of Lebanese held in Israeli prisons, and the defense of Lebanon from Israeli threats."

However, Security Council resolution 1559 calls for the elimination of all militias and allows the Lebanese army to take control over all Lebanese territory. An agreement between the different Lebanese factions was reached after the last Lebanese elections to dismantle Hezbollah's arms. However, they have not been able to implement this since Hezbollah is now a part of the government and participates in governmental meetings and activities.

Lebanese factions realize that they cannot really force Hezbollah to disarm. Otherwise, they risk a new civil war in Lebanon. As a result, many non-Shiites in Lebanon, particularly the Druze and the Maronite Christians, are very concerned about their security and have began to rearm, which is a very serious business and a risky situation,

There is still broad agreement among all forces in Lebanon about Hezbollah. Most Maronites (who support Samir Geagea, commander of the dissolved Christian militia group Lebanese Forces), the Lebanese Forces, and the Qornet Shahwan center-right Christian coalition, advocate a realignment of Lebanon with the West. Maronites are anti-Syrians and pro-Western. On the other hand, Sunnis, as well as Saad Hariri, stand for limiting Syrian influence in Lebanon as well as eliminating Lebanon-Syria ties. All forces stand in a united national front against Hezbollah.

As for tackling the Druze situation, to understand the Lebanese political scene, we have to keep in mind the demography. The Druze is a very small ethnic group that lives essentially in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine. Unlike other groups, it does not have a foreign source to provide it with security or support. Thus, to a great extent, the Druze feel isolated. This can explain the strong position taken by Waleed Jumblatt against Hezbollah and his desire to establish strong relations with the United States.

No one can exclude the possibility of another civil war in Lebanon. That is why each group is now working to ensure its future status and powers, seeking support in the event of civil war. In Lebanon, it is always a "balance of power game" between the different groups. Even in peaceful times, we can see some factions who are trying to gain power over the situation. Lebanese politics are all about different groups who try to weaken each other.

Michel Aoun aims at taking over the leadership of the Lebanese government. He is such a well-known and respected figure among Lebanese, particularly Christians. He had considerable gains in the last elections.

Any significant numbers except within Hezbollah and the Shiites does, not support the current pro-Syrian president Emile Lahoud. He is supported by neither the Christians nor the Lebanese Forces. That is how Michel Aoun got his chance. Aoun has good relations with Hezbollah. Recently, he held a meeting with Lebanon's Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. All forces accept him because of the strong position he used to take against Syria. He was the one who fought against the Syrians in 1990 and was forced to go into exile in France for 15 years.

Therefore, Aoun has his own credentials as anti-Syrian. He is viewed as a real Lebanese nationalist who is concerned about Lebanon's independence. At the same time, Hezbollah accepts him on condition that he allows them to maintain their own militia or replenish their arms. In addition, Aoun assures the Lebanese public that while allowing Hezbollah to keep arms, he will be a strong independent president, and not a Syrian puppet. This is the complicated game of factional politics takes place in Lebanon.

Q: What is Saad Hariri's policy? Is he pro-West or pro-Iran or on the Arab League side? What are his plans for the future?

A: As for Saad Hariri's true intentions, he plans to win full independence from Syrian control. In Lebanon, all Sunnis in general are looking forward to get out from under Syrian control, yet without turning against it. This is in contrast to the Maronites and Lebanese forces' attitude towards Syria. They are willing to turn against Syria at any moment. The Sunnis and Saad Hariri want only to limit Syrian influence and regain Lebanon's independence. Putting Lebanon in the mainstream of Arab politics is Saad Hariri's current vision for Lebanon. As for the current situation, everyone is divided over Hezbollah. Saad Hariri, Waleed Jumblatt and Samir Geagea are all getting together against Hezbollah. Once this issue is over or settled, the regional situation will start to change.

Q: What is the relationship between Syrian intelligence and Hezbollah? Which one is behind the terrorism that took place after the killing of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri?

A: The relationship between Syrian intelligence and Hezbollah is very strong. Syria provides Hezbollah with military equipment. Regarding terrorism, Hezbollah is not involved. Syrian intelligence is behind it. Hezbollah is an ideological organization. Terrorism is not a part of its ideology. Hezbollah is trying to gain its own credibility as anti-Israel and anti-American party. It tries not to get involved in Lebanese politics. Since it was established, Hezbollah has not participated in any struggle with another faction, with a few minor exceptions. That is because it is directed mainly against Israel. Staying aside during Lebanon's civil war, Hezbollah was able to enhance its credibility as a resistance, and not a militia. With regard to Syria, it has a large network of secret intelligence agents in Lebanon after running the country for years. Thus, it uses this network to commit terror attacks. There is no sign that Hezbollah is involved in such attacks.