The incident in which “a group of women” with ties to Hezbollah confronted a team of investigators from the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), in the southern suburbs of Beirut the day before yesterday, raises a number of questions. There are questions about the background of the incident and its repercussions for Lebanon's relations with the STL, and thus, its relations with the international community, not to mention the relations of various Lebanese groups with each other, in dealing with the international investigations into the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. If the incident indicated Hezbollah's intention to implement its policy of non-cooperation with the STL, as it no longer trusts the international body, and considers its work to be politicized and influenced by Israeli theories and American influence, then it also indicates the possibility that the party has moved to a new phase in its dealings with the tribunal. Such a phase would be based on confronting the STL's work on the ground, in a bid to block or halt these activities in Lebanon. However, this policy will once again clash with the national division over dealing with the STL. Opinions here are divided between a group that exhibits readiness for such a move, and is enthusiastic about cooperation with what is requested by the Security Council resolution that established the STL, irrespective of the objections of Hezbollah and the groups supporting it, and between other groups, including the party itself and its allies, which reject any dealing with the STL and accuse the others of working with the enemy, as a result of their openness to the tribunal's activities. Thus, the struggle over the issue of cooperating with the STL will shift to another level. There is a political authority in which certain groups enjoy decisive influence; they will not accept closing the doors to the international investigation, as long as these groups have hope in reaching truth and justice, through the tribunal. Once again, the incident at the women's clinic against the STL investigators is leading Hezbollah to a new, large-scale political gamble, if the party continues its policy of prohibiting cooperation with the tribunal. This will lead Hezbollah to push for amending the political authority, in order to guarantee the implementation of this policy, by bringing about a new government that would dismiss the STL, its requests and its work, and overturn the agreements that have been concluded with it. But the change in government will expose the party abroad even more, in its ongoing battle with the international community. Moreover, there will be repercussions for this towards a confrontation inside the country, at the level of civil relations, and more deterioration and sensitivity, which Lebanon needs to calm, rather than stoke. In this sense, relying on the policy of obstructing the STL's work in Lebanon and activities on the ground indicate that the party has begun to lose its considerable patience, which it has proven skillful at in the past, at least in the confrontation with Israel. If it is true that there is a conspiracy against the party via the STL, such confrontations cannot be decided with a “knockout blow” or through measures involving obstruction on the ground. This has been proven with previous international tribunals, which continue to function for years, despite the objections of local groups, authorities, and rulers. Such court cases take years, and this requires patience, not getting ahead of things, or accelerating matters to reach a conclusion that is unfeasible. Meanwhile, the “conspiracy theory” that the Lebanese love prompted some to ask whether Hezbollah has ambushed the STL team, to lure it into a women's clinic and confront it so openly. There is also the question of whether it was a trap that was set for Hezbollah, to lure it into highlighting its revolt against the agreements that have been signed between the international community and the authorities in Lebanon. It is true that Hezbollah did not use weapons in blocking the STL team, and that its weapons were veiled women. However, the incident allows those who accuse Hezbollah of giving itself the status of state within a state, and establishing an authority that is parallel to the state, by virtue of its having weapons, to re-focus on the issue of these arms. After a clear majority in the current government arose, and forced the international community to consider Hezbollah's arms a domestic issue, to be solved through dialogue among the Lebanese, the question is: Is there a trap being set to force Hezbollah to use its authority, which is protected by its weapons, to justify a return to highlighting the issue of these weapons, as it has been clear in the international reactions and the reports of the United Nations that have since emerged?
