The Lebanese Hezbollah’s refusal to implement the International Monetary Fund’s program reveals its adoption of a cautious policy that does not exclude the outbreak of a new internal crisis, due to the repercussions that this may impose, in addition to the restrictions that may result from it, not only in its sources of financing, but rather It extends to its military activity as well, employing at the same time the refusal to promote work in the so-called "resistance economy", which Iran is pursuing in the face of US sanctions and attacking its political opponents.

Advance position

Hezbollah recently reiterated its position rejecting the implementation of the International Monetary Fund's program for economic reform in Lebanon. The last person to express this position was Representative Hassan Fadlallah, who said, on March 3, that "the party rejects the conditions contained in any rescue plan for the International Monetary Fund, because it will lead to a popular revolution", calling for a "national solution" For the economic crisis.

And before that, the party’s deputy secretary general, Naim Qassem, said: “We do not accept that we are subjected to precautionary tools in treatment. I mean, we do not accept submitting to the International Monetary Fund to manage the crisis. Yes, there is no objection to providing consultations .. The government can devise a plan and take constructive measures to start Monetary and financial treatment and putting it on the way to a solution .. God willing, the government will do this, and show some results ... even after a while.

Several motivations

Hezbollah’s refusal to implement the International Monetary Fund’s program, which several directions indicate is now the only option available to Lebanon, to deal with the worsening economic crisis, in light of several considerations, the most prominent of which are:

1- pressure inside

The party does not exclude that any plan that the fund may put forward, and is applied, results in the escalation of the internal crisis, in light of the continuing protests, as many of the forces that participated in it have already issued warnings about the implications of imposing new taxes, or reducing government spending to respond to that plan. Potential. Without a doubt, this is inseparable from the pressures that the March 8 team is currently facing, due to the lack of success of the government’s policy in dealing with the demands of the protesters, as well as the continued resentment of its involvement in external crises, led by the Syrian crisis, And the escalation between Iran and the United States of America.

2- Possible inconsistency

The party is concerned that any response to the fund's plans could send messages to the interior that it does not adhere to its electoral platform, which it announced during the May 6, 2018 parliamentary elections, which could lose the party's credibility even in areas where it has a clear influence.

3- Narrowing the siege

It is known that the Fund's programs require to provide loans to carry out some measures under the umbrella of economic reform, which include reducing informal economic activity, and its inclusion in the state’s formal economy, and the measures imposed by it that include raising the level of control over cross-border smuggling, which will represent an obstacle to movements His fighters to and from Syria.

4- The economy of “resistance”

The party seeks to follow the example of Iran's "resistance economy" model, which is based on the idea of ​​self-sufficiency and reducing the state's exposure to the outside. In this context, the party demanded that the reform measures be carried out from within the state by means of national arms, which were restricted to banks that could provide loans to the government, especially With the maturities of Eurobonds, which are worth $ 1.2 billion, close to March 9. The Lebanese scene is witnessing a growing argument about the mechanisms that can be used to deal with the financial benefits that are approaching.

5- Disengagement

The party aims to minimize Lebanese-American relations, whether by reducing the level of bilateral relations, or by refusing to deal with international economic institutions, in which Washington plays a prominent role. This is undoubtedly inseparable from the escalation of pressure imposed by the latter on the party in the context of its continuous escalation with Iran, over the nuclear and missile programs and the regional role.

Double speech

Although the party is still insisting on sticking to its position rejecting the implementation of the IMF program, calling for limiting the latter's role to the advisory scope, it sought to use this file to send several messages to the interior, with the aim of achieving political gains, as it included the media speech issued by the party to public opinion. Several angles, on top of which are the warning against the Fund’s threat to national sovereignty and the economy, and attacking its political opponents by accusing them of “supporting foreign interference in Lebanon”, in parallel with holding the previous governments responsible for the aggravation of the economic crisis, and promoting that the political opposition (March 14 forces), targets The swishing Maintain its economic and political interests, by supporting the fund's plans.

Those forces were quick to respond to this speech, as was evident in the statements of the leader of the “Lebanese Forces” party, Samir Geagea, on March 3, in which he said: “Sheikh Naim Qassem considered that the International Monetary Fund is (the accursed Satan) and described it Imperialism. Let Sheikh Naim, then, come to a non-accursed demon to save the situation in Lebanon. Reality today does not need these ideologies. ”

Strong pressure

It can be said that the cautious policy that the party adopts regarding the data that may be imposed by raising the level of cooperation with the International Monetary Fund in the face of the worsening internal economic crisis, reflects the size of the strong pressures it is exposed to at the present time, as a result of the repercussions imposed by its involvement in the Syrian crisis in a way Broad, and its identification with the public discourse of Iran, which in turn faces several crises on various fronts.

The party aims to minimize Lebanese-American relations, either by reducing the level of bilateral relations, or by refusing to deal with international economic institutions, in which Washington plays a prominent role.