It's the Tribes (merged thread)

[tribeguy]

Tribal politics tend, IMO, to be of greater concern to foriegn fighters who either transit the region or end up in the pay of local strong men. However, that said see the quote below....

Sir,

What you said above negates what William Owen said. He thinks that tribalism is irrelevant in Lebanon. I wonder how much time he has spent with the ((Al-Luhayb)) of the ((Al-Jubur)) - they spend their time going between Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq! Could it be that tribes such as the ((Al-Luhayb)) of the ((Al-Jubur)) represent culturally organic lines of logistics that we refer to as "smuggling?" And if tribes are irrelevant to Hezballah - then why do we see concentrations of tribes that constitute Hezballah whereas other insurgent organizations are predominantly other tribes? Because society in the Middle East ISN'T tribal?

I think everybody here understands counterinsurgency theory well enough to know that what is important to the "green" population is what is important in counterinsurgency. Tribes are the culturally organic organizations that are important to the green population in Iraq. They have been for centuries. In the absence of a strong and effective government, such will remain the case, no?


-Tribeguy

[William F. Owen]

What you said above negates what William Owen said. He thinks that tribalism is irrelevant in Lebanon. I wonder how much time he has spent with the ((Al-Luhayb)) of the ((Al-Jubur)) - they spend their time going between Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq!

hmmm... That's a bit of a stretch. Your point?
My initial contention was:

Originally Posted by William F. Owen
Knowing not a lot about Hezbollah, other than what is relevant to their use of violence for political aims, I would be amazed if they had any tribal affiliation at all. Even if they did, it would be almost entirely irrelevant.

Note that which is written in italics. Now, currently actually living among Arabs, and members of my family speaking Arabic, I am somewhat aware of the significance of "family" in it's broadest sense. However to assume that this influence is coherent and consistent across political and national dimensions of the Arab world would be grossly misleading.

Thus my initial point, that given Hezbollah's political objectives, - the ones they further by violence, - the tribal dimension is probably of little importance - especially as Hezbollah emphasises it's support and following from both Druze and Christians. See my point?

[tribeguy]

hmmm... That's a bit of a stretch. Your point?
My initial contention was....

Thus my initial point, that given Hezbollah's political objectives, - the ones they further by violence, - the tribal dimension is probably of little importance - especially as Hezbollah emphasises it's support and following from both Druze and Christians. See my point?

Stretch?

Let's see here - Hezballah exists in order to establish a caliphate. Caliphates must be ruled by direct descendants of Muhammad the prophet. Noble tribes are descendants of Muhammad the prophet. Noble tribesmen feel that they have a right and religious obligation to rule. Their supporters feel the same - it's the shari'a that compels them, and their pride. You can throw up the Israel thing as being Hezballah's raison d'etre, but it aint. They want power - and they'll either take it through the democratic process or through violence - whatever is easiest. And the Musawi tribe (vis a vis Nasrallah) is the prime beneficiary.

The insurgent organizations in Iraq, both Sunni and Shi'ite, are fighting to establish their versions of the Caliphate. What we see as sectarian violence is also a tribe war between the Sunni and Shi'ite noble tribes. It's an identity thing - they are both motivated by the same idea that their noble tribesmen have the right and obligation to rule the caliphate, should there be one.

The activities of the Luhayb are documented by scholarship - it's an example meant to drive home the point of the need to INVESTIGATE further. Since you are an Arabic speaker, I hope that it follows that you are an Arabic reader, as well. With this proficiency, I suggest diving all the way into the subject. Since neither one of us knows for sure, it requires that. However, I wouldn't be amazed if found that the majority of Hezballah's members come from the poorest Shi'ite Arab tribes in Lebanon, and that their recruitability stems largely out of economic need, perhaps MORE than the sectarian appeal. I hate to say it, but there is a social marxist theoretical application here that requires further exploration as well. Knowing the history of Lebanon and the concurrent "oppression" of shi'ites therein, this has to be a factor.

I see your point, but I don't concede it - not until the investigation of this issue is done. Such an investigation would require knowledge of what Hezballah's constituency looks like on a person by person level. It would then also require a thorough breakdown of Lebanon's tribal system using Lebanese scholarship.

Any Beiruti will tell you that there are no tribes in Lebanon. For Beirut, where there is relatively more government presence and effectiveness, this might be the case. But in the countryside, tribalism becomes more and more important. Where do you suppose Hezballah is strongest? Ibn Khaldun might suggest that if Hezballah is strong in the city now, then it is because they displaced those who were there before them.

For the sake of social dialectics, I'll conclude that tribalism as it pertains to Hezballah is more important than you suppose, and less important than I would guess. I place a lot of importance on the noble tribes as being key drivers of instability in the Middle East. As Nasrallah comes from the ((Al-Musuwi)) tribe, which claims nobility through Musa Al-Kadhim, who was a descendant of Imam 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib, and such Musuwis are important throughout the rest of Iraq as being high level leaders of insurgent organizations such as JAM, special groups, et al - I'm fairly certain that tribalism is an overlooked aspect in Lebanon's Hezballah, but not because it is irrelevant. It's because we drink too much progressive pan-Arabist kool aid, and because we are lazy and too prone to think that our Lebanese counterparts are "just like us." As if Hezballah is really just a political organization in modern clothes that isn't trying to get their version of a caliphate established...

Interesting subject - us Americans are just beginning to start studying tribes. The Brits were better at it 100 years ago, but they are as bad as we are now.

Regards,

tribeguy

[Rex Brynen]

Let's see here - Hezballah exists in order to establish a caliphate.

Not so much--being Twelver Shi'ites their views derive from their notion of the occulted/hidden Imam, and their support for the notion of Vilayat-e Faqih expounded by Khomeini. Unlike Sunni Salafist groups, they don't really call for the establishment of global Caliphate.

Caliphates must be ruled by direct descendants of Muhammad the prophet. Noble tribes are descendants of Muhammad the prophet. Noble tribesmen feel that they have a right and religious obligation to rule. Their supporters feel the same - it's the shari'a that compels them, and their pride. You can throw up the Israel thing as being Hezballah's raison d'etre, but it aint. They want power - and they'll either take it through the democratic process or through violence - whatever is easiest.

The "Israel thing" is big for Hizbullah, and I don't really know any major analyst (or, for that matter, member) of the organization who thinks otherwise. As for power, they want veto power in Lebanon so as to protect their interests, but actually refrain from maximizing their claim to either parliamentary or cabinet seats because it better serves them to not take on a major governing role. They certainly recognize that, given the sectarian complexity of the country, they will never be in a position to seize complete and direct power. This is why the brief May 2008 display of armed power, followed by Doha, the elections, and the 15-10-5 (with one of the 5 leaning towards the 10) cabinet formula works so well for them.

However, I wouldn't be amazed if found that the majority of Hezballah's members come from the poorest Shi'ite Arab tribes in Lebanon, and that their recruitability stems largely out of economic need, perhaps MORE than the sectarian appeal. I hate to say it, but there is a social marxist theoretical application here that requires further exploration as well. Knowing the history of Lebanon and the concurrent "oppression" of shi'ites therein, this has to be a factor.

Very few Shi'ites in urban Lebanon think of themselves in tribal terms (hamula is likely to be more important), although you'll certainly find it in the Biqa. Hizbullah has traditionally recruited from among the poorest segment of the population precisely because it positioned itself as a movement of the downtrodden--a point that everyone recognizes--although today I would say that their support is probably relatively constant across all socioeconomic strata.

I'm fairly certain that tribalism is an overlooked aspect in Lebanon's Hezballah, but not because it is irrelevant. It's because we drink too much progressive pan-Arabist kool aid, and because we are lazy and too prone to think that our Lebanese counterparts are "just like us." As if Hezballah is really just a political organization in modern clothes that isn't trying to get their version of a caliphate established...

If anything, Hizbullah is probably Lebanon's only functioning meritocracy. This isn't to say that kinship linkages don't have some effects, but it is to say that they do not play a substantial role in policy development and implementation within the organization with regard to important matters.

[William F. Owen]

Interesting subject - us Americans are just beginning to start studying tribes. The Brits were better at it 100 years ago, but they are as bad as we are now.

I don't know how bad Americans are, but I can tell you that having travelled or lived in Algeria, Tchad, Niger, Jordan, Israel and the Sinai, from 1984 to the present day, you'll find Brit Anthropologists researching tribes.

As I am sure you know, the largest Archive of English Language Research into Arab Tribes in the Middle East is in Jerusalem - and far outstrips that recorded in any other language - and 90% of it done by Brits, and still being done!

Hezbollah:
As Rex, - someone extremely familiar with Hezbollah - notes, the tribal issue is almost certainly a "so what." If indeed you can trace a tribal structure to Hezbollah, where does it get you?

Extended family structures seem to have pretty thin within the PLO and PFLP. Yes, certain families/Clans backed the PLO at certain times, but I never spoken to anyone who has ever reference those affiliations within the organisation. - Rex may add to that.

- now Clans and extended families are extremely important in the "internal politics" of the West Bank - and to some extent Gaza - but again not really relevant to that part of thier politics that cause a problem - opposing Israel.
If they were not fighting Israel, they would and some days do, kill each other in quite large numbers.

[Tukhachevskii]

I was mulling this over. Given the ethnic and sectarian bases of Hizballah's power base I am sure that the tribal network is useful in terms of the vetting of potential recruits, information sharing and counter-intelligence. Much harder to break into Hizballuh if you have no-one to vouch for you. That said, I think the tribal issue is peripheral to Hizballah's internal political/military structure or system of mobilisation but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a role to play.

[William F. Owen]

I was mulling this over. Given the ethnic and sectarian bases of Hizballah's power base I am sure that the tribal network is useful in terms of the vetting of potential recruits, information sharing and counter-intelligence. Much harder to break into Hizballuh if you have no-one to vouch for you. That said, I think the tribal issue is peripheral to Hizballah's internal political/military structure or system of mobilisation but that doesn't mean it doesn't have a role to play.

Absolutely concur and very much supported by the Israelis utilisation of studying extended families within the Middle-east.

[Fuchs]

The whole "tribal warfare" thing irritates me a bit.
I know "tribal warfare" as warfare composed of raids for loot, done by semi-permanent warbands that are led by a charismatic leader.

It shouldn't be difficult to identify those who benefited of loot or to identify a well-known charismatic leader.

It shouldn't be very difficult to make raids less profitable.
Actually, I don't see where there's loot to be had in attacking outposts and burning fuel trucks.

So maybe it's not as much tribal warfare as it is about highwaymen (taxation of civilian truckers at checkpoints), racketeering and smuggling (drugs, weapons, whatever) that keep the enemy (note I don't wrote 'Taliban') up economically?

Wouldn't "Mafia" be a better description than "tribe"?

[tribeguy]

Absolutely concur and very much supported by the Israelis utilisation of studying extended families within the Middle-east.

And that doesn't have any application to Hezballah?

[tribeguy]

As Rex, - someone extremely familiar with Hezbollah - notes, the tribal issue is almost certainly a "so what." If indeed you can trace a tribal structure to Hezbollah, where does it get you?

Sir, it gets you secular lines of communication and influence over those who are working for extremist thugs.

I think you can connect the dots from there.

-Tribeguy

[Tukhachevskii]

What you said above negates what William Owen said. He thinks that tribalism is irrelevant in Lebanon. I wonder how much time he has spent with the ((Al-Luhayb)) of the ((Al-Jubur)) - they spend their time going between Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq!

Tribeguy,

Actually, what I posted was a link to the opinion of another commentator. Although having both studied tribal structures in the MENA at Uni as well as having experienced them in Yemen personally I can only speak for myself. Thus, I belive that the methodological reductionism that logically follows from your over-emphasis on tribal systems of governance does an injustice to the extremely complex political imbroglio currently extant in the MENA. That said, we know that tribalism played an immensely important role in Saddam Hussein's regime, which was deliberate and heightened, and still does though it is partly superveined upon buy sectarianism which was "supressed" as a politically motivating force. Also tribalism is very important in Jordan ,Yemen ,Pakistan and Afghanistan but less so in Egypt and Lebanon (previous caveats aside). In Pakistan and Afghanistan the tribal aspect is almost wholly isomorphic with the ethnic divisions of each country to such an extent that the explanatory value of isolating the tribal elements alone is about as useful as only focusing on the ethnic, linguistic or sectarian aspects. The structural metamorphosis that tribes underwent under the Egyptian and Lebanese regimes did not remove them but altered their significance and modus operandi. Tribes are not unimportant; their importance derives from the presence or absence of other political forces, trends, structures. As Lenin said (and, IMO, it was perhaps the only thing he said that ever had a ring of truth to it) "everything is connected to everything thing else". We must take that to the grundnorm of any comprehensive understanding of any political/military phenomena.

[tribeguy]

I like your style - but see my post about noble tribes, caliphates re: Hezballah. Perhaps I do overemphasize it, but I think that most people just don't get it, including on this site. I am heartened somewhat that there people who have some degree of field experience, but I am disheartened by the fact that in the US all of 6 people graduated in 2004 with degrees in Arabic. I am pretty sure that none of them are here, although some seem to have a bit of skill with the language. As for me, I am comfortable with it as I am comfortable with English. Insert jokes about my spelling here.

V/r,
Sam

[Tukhachevskii]

I am disheartened by the fact that in the US all of 6 people graduated in 2004 with degrees in Arabic. I am pretty sure that none of them are here, although some seem to have a bit of skill with the language.

I agree. But I think in theatre experience is far more valuable than class room study. I myself learned Arabic in Yemen and quickly discovered that practice far outstrips theory when on a travel to the lawless wild east of hadramout myself and my friend found ourselves not only mis-understood but sometimes not understood at all. Learning on the job in theatre is IMO far better than class room study simply for the reason that context, subtleties et al are often far more important in threat identification than grammar.

As for tribes I apologies if I appeared to denigrate the importance of your project I just think that in some cases Jordan, Saudi, Iraq, Yemen tribes genuinely are more in,portant within the political/military matrix. But that is not always the case. Nonetheless, I find many of your findings fascinating if only as confirmation or negation of previous classroom study.

[tribeguy]

I agree. But I think in theatre experience is far more valuable than class room study. .

............Nonetheless, I find many of your findings fascinating if only as confirmation or negation of previous classroom study.

Thanks for the props - and I agree that field work is the key. I spent four years in Iraq dealing with tribesmen - and it took me many years to understand how and why tribesmen think the way that they do. My work is currently giving predictive power that I wasn't expecting.

Tribal analysis offers us a secular doorway of dealing with extremist phenomena.

As for lack of tribal identification, but rather identification with Hamula, or clan, or whatever - these are are all tribal identifications. (you didn't bring this up, but somebody else did) Semantic nit noiding aside, there is no doubt that tribal counterinsurgency TTPs are in their nascent state in the west, including Britain. The problem is in the language - and there is no place to start but in the classroom. Regardless of how many British anthropologists are working in Africa or elsewhere, there aren't enough of Americans or Brits that really speak Arabic.

And there is no better way to create misunderstanding than to hire interpreters from 7-Eleven or liquor stores and try to use them to bring understanding between two members of radically different cultures and mindsets. Anybody who has any experience in the middle east knows the importance of relationships. Most interpreters ruin the possibility of this - and the answer is for us to learn their languages if we hope to get anywhere at all.

And none of this is worth doing unless we are successful.

Tribeguy