LONDON: The British government is under renewed pressure to outlaw Hezbollah in the UK by making no distinction between its military and political wings.
In the House of Commons, Labour chair of the friends of Israel Joan Ryan moved a motion on Thursday that called for Hezbollah to be designated a terrorist organisation and for Britain to impose a complete ban to bring it into line with Canada, the US, the Arab League and the Netherlands.
Currently, Hezbollah’s military wing in is proscribed but not its political organisation which is based in Lebanon and supported by Iran.
“There is no distinction and we need to be clear about that,” Ryan said in the UK parliament.
She listed the string of deadly attacks carried out by Hezbollah in recent decades and said the organization, “Has wreaked death and destruction throughout the Middle East” while helping to drive Iran’s expansionism in the region.
Hezbollah’s mounting military capability poses a growing threat to the Middle East she continued. “It has trebled the size of its fighting force from 17,000 to 45,000 men…it now has an estimated 120,000 to 140,000 rockets and missiles – an arsenal larger than that of many states.”
Ryan also accused the group of “aiding and abetting the Assad regime’s butchery in Syria”.
UK government policy currently opposes changing the designation for fear of further destabilizing Lebanon.
Speaking in favour of full proscription, Conservative MP David Jones said that "Hezbollah is the most destabilising influence in Lebanon," and described the group as "a dangerous, aggressive terrorist organisation."
Ian Austin was one of several Labour MPs to defy a party briefing note circulated prior to the debate advising MPs to vote against a full ban and stating that: “Full proscription could be a move against dialogue and meaningful peace negotiations in the Middle East.”
“The idea Hezbollah is a partner for peace is misguided,” Austin said.
Speaking in support of the motion, Conservative MP Theresa Villiers said Hizbollah had been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks around the world, with the “most notorious” at a Jewish centre in Buenos Aries, Argentina where a bomb killed 85 and injured hundreds in 1994. An Argentinian inquiry pointed the finger at Hezbollah and Iran.
Villiers added that Hezbollah been a “deeply malevolence presence in the Syrian civil war”.
The Ryan motion has not received support from the UK government or the Labour shadow cabinet and is unlikely to gain traction.
But Ryan said: “Hezbollah is a terrorist organisation, driven by an anti-semitic ideology which seeks the destruction of Israel. It has wreaked death and destruction throughout the Middle East. It makes no distinction between its political and military wings, and neither should the British government. “
David Ibsen, the executive director of the Counter Extremism Project, said that Hezbollah itself does not recognise a distinction between these entities and emphasised the need for “a new realism in the UK about the nature of Hezbollah.”
“There is no ‘military’ and ‘political’ wings of Hezbollah, it is one pernicious terrorist organisation founded and bankrolled by Iran. Hezbollah’s top officials brazenly acknowledge this fact.”
Arab governments have expressed mounting concern over Iran’s growing sphere of influence in the Middle East and its use of Hezbollah to engineer an expanded role in regional conflicts.
A statement released by the Arab League last November accused Tehran and its proxy of destabilising the region.
Ibsen said: “Thousands of Hezbollah fighters made the crucial difference in Syria for Bashar al-Assad and have trained Houthi rebels in Yemen on behalf of their Iranian benefactors.”
A spokesperson for Syria Solidarity UK outlined the “extensive crimes against Syrian civilians” carried out by Hezbollah, which “took part in the mass displacement of hundreds of thousands” of people in Aleppo and other areas.
“The failure of British MPs to come together to protect civilians in Syria has allowed Hezbollah to expand, has increased the threat of terrorism, and has worsened the refugee crisis,” the spokesperson said.
Pressure to extend the ban has intensified in recent weeks following a US crackdown on Hezbollah’s international financing networks with the launch of a new ‘narco-terrorism’ task force to investigate the group’s cross-border drug trafficking and money laundering activities.
During a speech on January 12 in which he described the Iranian regime as “the world’s leading state sponsor of terror,” President Trump called on all US allies to re-classify Hezbollah in its entirety as a terrorist organisation and take stronger steps to “confront Iran’s other malign activities.”
Visiting Lebanon on Tuesday, the U.S. Treasury’s Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing Marshall Billingslea “urged Lebanon to take every possible measure to ensure (Hezbollah) is not part of the financial sector,” according to a statement by the US embassy in Beirut.
Hezbollah is one of 60 groups listed as foreign terrorist organisations by the US State Department.
In addition to bringing the UK’s position into closer alignment with Trump’s hardline stance on Iran, a move to extend the ban would also answer voices from the Israel lobby, which has repeatedly called for a crackdown on the group.
Michael McCann, director at the Israel Britain Alliance, described the UK’s designation of Hezbollah as “wrong headed” and said it “bears responsibility for the murder of innocents across the globe.”
“Hezbollah’s operations breach the 2000 UK Terrorism Act and the group must be banned, it’s that simple,” he said.
British government under pressure to impose total ban on Hezbollah
British government under pressure to impose total ban on Hezbollah
House Republicans barely defeat Venezuela war powers resolution to check Trump’s military actions
WASHINGTON: The House rejected a Democratic-backed resolution Thursday that would have prevented President Donald Trump from sending US military forces to Venezuela after a tied vote on the legislation fell just short of the majority needed for passage.
The tied vote was the latest sign of Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson’s tenuous hold on the majority, as well as some of the growing pushback in the GOP-controlled Congress to Trump’s aggressions in the Western Hemisphere. A Senate vote on a similar resolution was also tied last week until Vice President JD Vance broke the deadlock.
To defeat the resolution Thursday, Republican leaders had to hold the vote open for more than 20 minutes while Republican Rep. Wesley Hunt, who had been out of Washington all week campaigning for a Senate seat in Texas, rushed back to Capitol Hill to cast the decisive vote.
On the House floor, Democrats responded with shouts that Republican leaders were violating the chamber’s procedural rules. Two Republicans — Reps. Don Bacon of Nebraska and Thomas Massie of Kentucky — voted with all Democrats for the legislation.
The war powers resolution would have directed Trump to remove US troops from Venezuela. The Trump administration told senators last week that there are no US troops on the ground in the South American nation and committed to getting congressional approval before launching major military operations there.
But Democrats argued that the resolution is necessary after the US raid to capture Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and since Trump has stated plans to control the country’s oil industry for years to come.
The response to Trump’s foreign policy
Thursday’s vote was the latest test in Congress of how much leeway Republicans will give a president who campaigned on removing the US from foreign entanglements but has increasingly reached for military options to impose his will in the Western Hemisphere. So far, almost all Republicans have declined to put checks on Trump through the war powers votes.
Rep. Brian Mast, the Republican chair of the House Armed Services Committee, accused Democrats of bringing the war powers resolution to a vote out of “spite” for Trump.
“It’s about the fact that you don’t want President Trump to arrest Maduro, and you will condemn him no matter what he does, even though he brought Maduro to justice with possibly the most successful law enforcement operation in history,” Mast added.
Still, Democrats stridently argued that Congress needs to assert its role in determining when the president can use wartime powers. They have been able to force a series of votes in both the House and Senate as Trump, in recent months, ramped up his campaign against Maduro and set his sights on other conflicts overseas.
“Donald Trump is reducing the United States to a regional bully with fewer allies and more enemies,” Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said during a floor debate. “This isn’t making America great again. It’s making us isolated and weak.”
Last week, Senate Republicans were only able to narrowly dismiss the Venezuela war powers resolution after the Trump administration persuaded two Republicans to back away from their earlier support. As part of that effort, Secretary of State Marco Rubio committed to a briefing next week before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Yet Trump’s insistence that the US will possess Greenland over the objections of Denmark, a NATO ally, has alarmed some Republicans on Capitol Hill. They have mounted some of the most outspoken objections to almost anything the president has done since taking office.
Trump this week backed away from military and tariff threats against European allies as he announced that his administration was working with NATO on a “framework of a future deal” on Arctic security.
But Bacon still expressed frustration with Trump’s aggressive foreign policy and voted for the war powers resolution even though it only applies to Venezuela.
“I’m tired of all the threats,” he said.
Trump’s recent military actions — and threats to do more — have reignited a decades-old debate in Congress over the War Powers Act, a law passed in the early 1970s by lawmakers looking to claw back their authority over military actions.
The war powers debate
The War Powers Resolution was passed in the Vietnam War era as the US sent troops to conflicts throughout Asia. It attempted to force presidents to work with Congress to deploy troops if there hasn’t already been a formal declaration of war.
Under the legislation, lawmakers can also force votes on legislation that directs the president to remove US forces from hostilities.
Presidents have long tested the limits of those parameters, and Democrats argue that Trump in his second term has pushed those limits farther than ever.
The Trump administration left Congress in the dark ahead of the surprise raid to capture Maduro. It has also used an evolving set of legal justifications to blow up alleged drug boats and seize sanctioned oil tankers near Venezuela.
Democrats question who gets to benefit from Venezuelan oil licenses
As the Trump administration oversees the sale of Venezuela’s petroleum worldwide, Senate Democrats are also questioning who is benefiting from the contracts.
In one of the first transactions, the US granted Vitol, the world’s largest independent oil broker, a license worth roughly $250 million. A senior partner at Vitol, John Addison, gave roughly $6 million to Trump-aligned political action committees during the presidential election, according to donation records compiled by OpenSecrets.
“Congress and the American people deserve full transparency regarding any financial commitments, promises, deals, or other arrangements related to Venezuela that could favor donors to the President’s campaign and political operation,” 13 Democratic senators wrote to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles Thursday in a letter led by Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California.
The White House has said it is safeguarding the South American country’s oil for the benefit of both the people of Venezuela and the US
