The Curse of Militias

In tracing the origins of the intertwined wars and tragedies now engulfing the Arab world, one invariably encounters the phenomenon of militias that continue to destabilize the region. Their leaders often display distinctive characteristics marked by remarkable ruthlessness, cloaked in actions whose claimed religious legitimacy is, at best, questionable. These militias typically emerge from sectarian or communal groups convinced that they have been denied the share of national power they deserve, whether they belong to a majority or a minority. In either case, they ultimately conclude that armed force is the only means of securing their portion of political authority.

The current conduct of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen illustrates this pattern. These groups have assumed the authority to represent their respective states, the Arab nation, and the wider Islamic community in waging war against what they describe as colonialism and in "resisting" Israel—without any mandate from their peoples or from legitimate state institutions. Their only claim to legitimacy derives from their willingness to exploit sacred slogans as a gateway to destructive and open-ended wars.

Hamas has carved out a unique exception for itself, asserting the right to maintain direct arrangements with Israel through which it has secured assistance that enabled it to separate the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian National Authority—even before the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.

The defining principle shared by all militias is their determination to divide sovereignty with the legitimate state. Lebanon's Hezbollah once took pride in possessing the so-called "blocking third," enabling it to prevent the government from adopting decisions, including those necessary to fulfill constitutional obligations. All such groups embrace a scorched-earth strategy that leaves their fellow citizens with no alternative but to surrender virtually every aspect of political authority—including decisions concerning war and peace.

A permanent divide exists between militias and the nation-state, whose sovereignty rests upon the exclusive and legitimate monopoly over the use of force. Even the prospect of disarmament has become a matter of political bargaining, as surrendering weapons is portrayed as requiring prolonged and exhausting negotiations that merely add to the toll of casualties and refugees. In some cases, the process has become so convoluted that it demands the intervention of major powers simply to secure the release of a single captive—methods more commonly associated with organized criminal syndicates.

The prevailing reality in the Arab world—where the state, its institutions, and its armed forces stand on one side while militias stand on the other—has effectively held the region hostage to actors who possess little understanding of the concept of a national project, which many Arab states are pursuing in an effort to modernize and integrate into the contemporary world. Ideologically, these militias represent an eclectic blend of religion, sectarianism, left-wing and right-wing doctrines, each selectively employed according to what best serves their capacity to dominate society while perpetuating endless conflict.

The leading and more politically mature Arab states—those pursuing comprehensive national projects for development, modernization, and progress—must recognize that militias constitute a central component of the ongoing regional conflict. Like Israel and Iran, they have become active participants in reshaping the Middle East through extraordinary levels of chaos, destruction, and bloodshed.

Arab states that have thus far been spared militias and civil wars should work to strip these armed groups of any legitimacy outside the framework of the nation-state. The threats posed by militias to the legitimate governments of Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Sudan, and Palestine are sustained through extensive mutual support. On numerous occasions, these groups have acted in coordination with Iran during conflicts involving the Arab Gulf states. More recently, the Houthi movement has escalated its actions by threatening Saudi shipping and attempting to exert control over the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, mirroring Iran's approach in the Strait of Hormuz, while disrupting international trade throughout the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

It is no coincidence that these militias maintain close ties with politically and religiously extremist organizations ranging from al-Qaeda and ISIS to the Muslim Brotherhood and their affiliated movements. Their role in destabilizing the Arab states mentioned above underscores the imperative of providing comprehensive support to legitimate nation-states committed to preserving state institutions and safeguarding regional stability.

The legitimate governments of Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon, which continue to defend the nation-state, require not only political, economic, and military assistance. Equally important is support in the ongoing battle of ideas against the militias and extremist movements that exploit, intimidate, and threaten both governments and societies through propaganda as well as armed force.

Originally published in Asharq Al-Awsat.