Rep. Charles W. Boustany, Jr. said the U.S. government should develop “a clear, coherent strategy with Lebanon” during an event at the United States Institute of Peace on May 10.

May 11, 2011

The U.S. government should develop “a clear, coherent strategy with Lebanon,” Rep. Charles W. Boustany, Jr., told an audience at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) in Washington on May 10.

Noting Lebanon’s political fragility and “complex environment,” Boustany said, “I’m not sure we have a clear strategic imperative that’s been defined,” Boustany is a Republican who has represented the seventh congressional district of Louisiana since 2005. He chairs the Subcommittee on Oversight of the House Ways and Means Committee and has been active on foreign policy issues. He was speaking in the fourth of an ongoing USIP series of meetings featuring members of Congress. Boustany called USIP’s work “invaluable” to Congress.

Boustany has had a longstanding interest in U.S. relations with Lebanon, both from a foreign policy and personal perspective. Boustany is Lebanese-American and has traveled to Lebanon twice since becoming a member of Congress. “Lebanon has been our most accessible window into what’s going on throughout the greater Middle East”—useful in helping the United States understand the forces in play in the region. He has also been an active member of the House Democracy Partnership, which arranges exchanges with lawmakers in 14 countries, including Lebanon, to develop more effective, democratic parliamentarians.

Boustany suggested principles for guiding thinking on a U.S. strategy. He urged looking at the specific circumstances of each country individually. He said the U.S. government is better positioned when it has developed a military-to-military relationship with particular countries and when it has opened lines of communication with the political opposition. And he said that development of a strategy should focus on identifying U.S. interests and priorities for each country, then seek to connect that to a wider regional approach.

The congressman cited factors that are buffeting Lebanon’s stability, including the political arrangements in the current, Syrian-backed governing coalition, political violence in Syria, the roles of Hezbollah and radicals in Palestinian refugee camps and the continuing work of a United Nations special tribunal investigating responsibility for the assassination of then Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and 21 others in a 2005 bombing. Boustany also pointed to the Iranian factor in Lebanese politics. “Lebanon has been the focal point for the consolidation of the Syrian-Iranian alliance,” along with its Lebanese partner Hezbollah, he said. Among the aims of U.S. strategy, Boustany said, should be “rolling back the power of Hezbollah.”

Boustany called for continuing the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program with Lebanon, which since 2005 has helped that country purchase defense equipment and aims to help build the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) into the country’s “dominant military force.” He said the LAF had stayed “relatively free of sectarianism,” and that the FMF program should be monitored and supported with increased efforts to promote the professional education of Lebanese military officers under the International Military Education and Training program. U.S. strategy on Lebanon should include “benchmarks” for “stepped-up coordination” among the LAF, U.N. peacekeeping forces and Israeli defense forces—especially as the LAF expands its deployment in the south. The United States could also provide help the LAF with creating a plan to disarm Palestinian camps and to improve Lebanese inter-agency cooperation on seaport and airport security.

Hezbollah, which functions both as a political party and an armed militia, “has global financial and criminal networks” that “pose a direct threat to U.S. national interests,” and it threatens Israel as well, Boustany said. However, he added, “More controversially, whether we should establish some form of back-channel communication with Hezbollah is something that needs to be considered.” He indicated that such an effort could probe the intentions of the group, including about its relationship with its patron Iran. Lebanese American Shiites and European intermediaries could prove helpful in understanding Hezbollah’s aims as well, he said. Boustany said that he had “no illusions” about such efforts but added, “We would be foolish not to investigate all channels.”

U.S. trade ties with Lebanon should also be strengthened and trade policy aligned more closely with U.S. foreign policy objectives in the country, Boustany said.


Related Publications

The Middle East on Fire

The Middle East on Fire

Thursday, October 3, 2024

Iran’s ballistic missile strikes on Israel on October 1 have raised fears of an all-out war in the Middle East. The deepening spiral of bloodshed began on September 17 and 18 with the detonation across Lebanon of thousands of pagers and two-way radios used by Hezbollah operatives — one analyst deemed the unprecedented Israeli operation “the most extensive physical supply chain attack in history.” Ongoing airstrikes in Beirut and southern Lebanon have marked the most significant Israeli barrage in 11 months of tit-for-tat escalation. On September 27, Israel dealt Hezbollah a devastating blow by killing its leader Hassan Nasrallah in an airstrike on a Beirut suburb. Despite reeling from these latest reverses and the evisceration of its command structure, the Shiite militia continues to lob missiles at Israel. Stunned and outraged, Iran — Hezbollah’s patron — fired around 200 ballistic missiles at Israel; at least one person was killed in the West Bank. Iranians are now bracing for Israeli retaliation. The cycle of violence, it appears, is far from over.

Type: Analysis

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Hassan Nasrallah is dead. What happens next in the Middle East?

Hassan Nasrallah is dead. What happens next in the Middle East?

Tuesday, October 1, 2024

Two weeks ago, Israel announced that halting Hezbollah attacks had become an official goal of its post-October 7 war effort. Since then, Israel conducted a sophisticated clandestine attack on Hezbollah’s communications infrastructure and struck numerous Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon and the suburbs of Beirut, killing many of Hezbollah’s senior leaders. Then, on Friday, an Israeli airstrike assassinated Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who led the group for over 30 years.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Israel and Hezbollah Change the Rules, Test Redlines — Will it lead to War?

Israel and Hezbollah Change the Rules, Test Redlines — Will it lead to War?

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

Tensions between Israel and the Lebanese Shia militia Hezbollah are at their highest point since their 2006 war. They have exchanged tit-for-tat attacks since October, displacing tens of thousands from northern Israel and southern Lebanon. But in recent weeks, both sides have escalated the violence and rhetoric. USIP’s Mona Yacoubian looks at what’s driving this escalation, what each side is trying to tell the other and the diplomatic efforts underway to lower the temperature.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

The Growing Flashpoints Between the U.S. and Iran

The Growing Flashpoints Between the U.S. and Iran

Wednesday, April 10, 2024

Tension between Washington and Tehran has been a growing undercurrent of the war in Gaza, even as both countries tried to prevent it from sparking a direct confrontation during the first six months of fighting. Robin Wright, a joint fellow at USIP and the Wilson Center, explores the evolving flashpoints in the world’s most volatile region as well as the challenges for U.S. diplomacy, the new triggers for a wider regional conflagration and the historical backdrop.

Type: Question and Answer

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

View All Publications