Commentary
Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.
Mikayel Zolyan
The Hizbullah Phenomenon: Politics and Communication
Hizbullah uses its image, language, and its charismatic leader, Hassan Nasrallah, to legitimize its political aims and ideology and appeal to different target groups.
Published on Aug 15, 2014
Source: Oxford University Press
Hizbullah is not only a leading political actor in Lebanon and a dynamic force in the Middle East, but it is also distinguished by a sophisticated communication strategy. From relatively humble beginnings in the 1980s, Hizbullah’s political clout and its public perception have followed an upward trajectory, thanks to a political program that blends military, social, economic, and religious elements and adapts to changes in its environment. Its communication strategy is similarly adaptive, supporting the group’s political objectives. Hizbullah’s target audience has expanded to a regional and global viewership.Its projected identity, too, shifted from an Islamist resistance party opposed to Israel’s presence in Lebanon to a key player within the Lebanese state. At the same time, Hizbullah’s image has retained fixed features, including its image as an ally of Iran; its role as a resistance group (to Israel); and its original base as a religious party representative of the Lebanese Shiites. The authors of this book address how Hizbullah uses image, language, and its charismatic leader, Hassan Nasrallah, to legitimize its political aims and ideology and appeal to different target groups.
About the Authors
Lina Khatib
Former Director, Middle East Center
Khatib was director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Previously, she was the co-founding head of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.
Dina Matar
Atef Alshaer
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?
- Next Steps Toward Peace After the Armenian ElectionsCommentary
It’s time to build momentum, and Ankara is the venue of the next opportune diplomatic window to do this.
Alper Coşkun, Garo Paylan
- European Security Strategy: In Search of a New AmbitionCommentary
The EU is putting together a new security strategy to meet today’s myriad challenges. But for any proposal to be effective, the union needs to grapple with its identity and ambitions.
Pierre Vimont
- Will Russia–Armenia Relations Improve Following Pashinyan’s Re-Election?Commentary
For all the menacing rhetoric, the Armenian prime minister remains a leader with whom Putin is prepared to interact: not as an ally, but as a partner, albeit a problematic one.
Alexander Atasuntsev
- Washington and Tehran’s Very Dangerous MomentCommentary
The Islamic Republic’s words and actions suggest that it has changed its approach to both diplomacy and war.
Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar
