Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHezbollah has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
August 16, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
August 12, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
May 2, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 20, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
June 28, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 16, 2008, February 16, 2011, February 16, 2012, February 16, 2015, and February 16, 2020.
Current status: Good article

Norwegian terrorist designation[edit]

I don't think there are enough sources for Norway's designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist org. Could someone please add more?

Edit request: Designation of Hezbollah by United States as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist Organization[edit]

The Hezbollah page already documents (under "United States" header) that Hezbollah is designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and as a Specially Designated Terrorist Organization, but omits the more recently affixed SDGT (Specially Designated Global Terrorist Organization) designation. Verification available here:

Edit Request[edit]

Please add Polisario Front and Algeria to allies and Morocco as opponents. Here are all the sources. heck out Morocco-Iran relations, Hezbollah is supporting Polisario front. More sources:[1][2][3][4] fenetrejones (talk) 3:16, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 July 2019[edit]

It have now been signed into law, Argentina should be included in "Opponents", in the below infobox and Hezbollah foreign relations. Source 1 Source 2

Translations: Source 1: "AMIA: compensation increases, they declare Hezbollah "terrorist" and there will be national mourning"

Source 2: "The Government includes Hezbollah in the list of terrorist organizations"


Apparently, Malaysia designates all of Hezbollah to be a terrorist organization (

Terrorism should be in the lead =[edit]

As Hezbollah main purpose is to attack Israel, the terrorist label needs to be prominent. (talk) 13:37, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

V.B.Speranza: This edit is in direct violation of MOS:TERRORIST. I attempted to engage you in discussion, but you simply deleted my entry on your Talk page and reverted my revert. I informed a recently active admin, who does not want to get involved. Hopefully you will engage in discussion instead of ignoring this message. The issue is not whether you or I consider Hezbollah a terrorist group; the issue is that Wikipedia's policy is to refrain from using such characterizations without attribution. The article mentions in multiple instances that Hezbollah is designated as a terrorist group by numerous countries and organizations. That is not in doubt.--Orgullomoore (talk) 22:08, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was above lead in the past but some has deleted it. Shadow4dark (talk) 22:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ohnoitsjamie: Maybe you can help? I don't want to break the 1RR.--Orgullomoore (talk) 22:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 October 2023[edit]

2A04:4A43:95DF:F69D:353A:A668:4341:81F2 (talk) 11:42, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It has to be written that it's terrorism organisation!!!!

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit extended-protected}} template. DeCausa (talk) 13:13, 22 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isn’t US Government enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4300:EE90:75F6:18F4:6E3A:E056 (talk) 06:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Western countries including the United States designate Hezbollah a terrorist organisation. So do U.S.-allied Gulf Arab states including Saudi Arabia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4300:EE90:75F6:18F4:6E3A:E056 (talk) 06:47, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I get why different Arab socialist parties and alike (Nasserist, Ba'athist, Gaddafist ect.) are called left-wing but Hezbollah? Braganza (talk) 19:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Skitash and Aficionado538: Braganza (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Although Hezbollah's core ideology is Shia Islamism, it is typically positioned on the political spectrum as left-leaning due to its incorporation of leftist leanings to maintain support from left wing Shi'ite supporters from various groups such as the Lebanese Communist Party and the People's Movement of Lebanon. I have added a source which supports this to the article [1]. Another source [2] argues that the organization's political structure is leftist: "It starts with the political structure and the country’s declared purpose. In both structures, there is a supreme leader or secretary-general, followed by a guardian council or a politburo, followed by a central committee or expediency council and the members of the party. Each has its own colors, but the construction of the blocs is similar. And this goes to serve the objectives of the belief or theology. It is state over individual. It is the same structure as the Muslim Brotherhood has opted for. When it comes to the economy, free enterprise is replaced by a state-run economy. And so, by all accounts, Hezbollah is a left-wing political formation." Skitash (talk) 23:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nowhere in those sources does it say that is left wing in its core, only that it adopts some left wing view points. A political structure isn't what makes a party leftist or not. It is socially conservative, nationalist and theocratic. You could add that it holds left wing believes on economics. Jaxthesubhuman (talk) 06:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Isn't left-wing politics in the Arab world associated with (some) secularism?
There are other arab socialist parties which don't have a position at all because they don't really fit the western left-wing criteria (ALF, PLO, PLF, Syrian Ba'ath in Lebanon, Iraqi Ba'ath in Yemen, NVP, NDA, Sawab, Arab Ba'ath Progressive Party, Iraqi Ba'ath Party in Jordan, LPNM, NUPO).
Khomeinism has some left-leaning ideas (state controlled economy or anti-imperialism) but this doesn't make them left-wing either and the first two sources you have given are quite week: the first one states that only the milieu is left-wing but not the party leadership and the second one has a quite critical section on her wikipedia article (Judith Butler#Comments on Hamas, Hezbollah and the Israel–Hamas war). Only the last one is imo really reliable but i don't think its accepted by the mainstream. Braganza (talk) 06:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The academic sources cited previously in the page do not claim that Hezbollah is a left-wing group.
year: 2023
Publisher: Rowman & Littlefield

"Because the majority of the leftist parties' members came from the Shia community, this group was important for Hezbollah. Thus, Hezbollah has incorporated Shia with leftist leanings in its milieu–but not necessarily among its core military and leadership structure or trusted elites. Rather, these individuals have to be ideologically and religiously aligned, and Hezbollah has always been wary of leftist ideologies and views.
Because many communists and leftists supported Hezbollah's resistance but not its Islamic and ideological principles, the group sometimes had to tamp down its ideological stance when it needed support.
Indeed, when Hezbollah highlighted its connection to Iran's velayat-e faqih, many leftists were critical and expressed disillusionment.
The tension between Hezbollah and the leftist milieu in Lebanon is increasing today because of two factors: (1) Hezbollah's financial crisis and (2) its involvement in Iran's regional wars. Many leftists genuinely supported Hezbollah's resistance rhetoric but not its ideology, even while they benefited from the group's services and political power. As both have started to decline, the leftists in Lebanon are becoming an internal challenge for Hezbollah."[1]

Year: 2017
Publisher: Cambridge University Press

"Butler was asked whether the left could support Hamas and Hezbollah. She responded that "understanding Hamas, Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the left, that are part of the global left, is extremely important." It was possible, she added, to see them this way while being critical of "certain dimensions" of them. She has since insisted that fury at her remarks decontextualizes them. ...
To critics of her claim that Hamas and Hezbollah were part of a "global left," she replies, "My first point was merely descriptive: those political organizations define themselves as anti-imperialist, and anti-imperialism is one characteristic of the global left." Declaring herself this time against both violent resistance and the state, a seemingly pacifist stance, she insisted that she never actually took a position. "To say that those organizations belong to the left is not to say that they should belong or that I endorse or support them in any way" [emphasis in the original]. ... Slavoj Žižek, himself anti-Zionist, has written against leftists prone to "an all- too-easy and uncritical acceptance of anti-American and anti-Western groups as representing 'progressive' forms of struggle, as automatic allies: groups like Hamas and Hezbollah all of a sudden appear as revolutionary agents, even though their ideology is explicitly anti-modern, rejecting the entire egalitarian legacy of the French revolution." He does not name Butler, but this remark seems an obvious rebuttal of her."[2]

These academic sources are arguing against the claim that Hezbollah is a "left-wing" group.
As for the opinion piece in Arab News which was cited by the user "Skitash", thats not an academic book. Shadowwarrior8 (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is difficult for the uninitiated to interpret what this group is from the article. It’s apparently a political party, but not really, or a militia, but not technically, etc. What are the demographics of this group? Is it like a political party as in the US, where most are not active or something else. It may be possible this is in the article, but it is not easy to glean anything without getting lost in the weeds. Given many people will be reading it in the current situation, the article needs to be revised with some basic facts at the beginning, and leave a lot of the rest for later in the article. The situation on Hamas seems easier to understand. Again, just what IS it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:4300:EE90:F541:1AB1:F3EE:C13A (talk) 10:24, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem is that there isn't a clear answer to that question, the subject matter itself is blurry. Hezbollah is simultaneously a political entity, a deep state, and a militia, among other things. It participates in Lebanese elections (so it has a political party like you're describing), but it's also much more than that.
It doesn't map onto American politics particularly well, but I'll try to give you an analogy anyway. Imagine if the Libertarians were more popular (lol), and also had an active, highly effective militia that frequently involved itself in conflicts nearby, and also had its own "meta-state" within the United States, where it provided government-like services for everyone who lives in Montana and Idaho. Now imagine that this Libertarian Militia was somehow more powerful than the US and Canadian governments.
This analogy is pretty terrible, and has lots of holes, but it really isn't analogous to anything in American politics, so anything is a stretch. DeVosMax [ contribstalkcreated media ] 10:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. ^ Ghaddar, Hanin (2023-07-17). Hezbollahland: Mapping Dahiya and Lebanon's Shia Community. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 33. ISBN 978-1-5381-8300-7.
  2. ^ Jacobs, Jack (2017-03-24). Jews and Leftist Politics: Judaism, Israel, Antisemitism, and Gender. Cambridge University Press. pp. 135, 136. ISBN 978-1-107-04786-0.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 November 2023[edit]

Please change March 14 alliance to Opposition since the march 14 alliance is dead AlexBobCharles (talk) 17:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 20:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 November 2023[edit]

In the chapter "Designation as a terrorist organization or resistance movement", Switzerland is incorrectly named as a country which has designated Hezbollah a terrorist organisation. This is inaccurate and the reference gives talks about the Czech Republic.

The following report by the Swiss government (unfortunately only in French and German) shows that Switzerland does not designate Hezbollah a terrorist organisation:

Please delete the reference to Switzerland.

Thank you! Vpasquier (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This ref, referring to that report, says "A ban on Hezbollah and its activities in Switzerland could impair missions within the framework of good offices and also Switzerland's humanitarian engagement. Likewise, such a ban could damage Switzerland's credibility as a neutral country, according to the government."
It seems from this that Switzerland has not designated H as terrorist, so I will remove it unless there is some objection. Selfstudier (talk) 13:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removal of Japan[edit]

@Nableezy I saw the article, but can you provide the actual list? It seems a bit far fetched. In Japanese wiki the Japanese write their government considers it terrorists when I last saw. I'd imagine they would have removed Japan from their list if such a change was done. Can you present the Public Security list? Homerethegreat (talk) 08:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You just presented one article from Yahoo. I think the actual Public Security list will make more sense or a few more sources. Thank you for the time. Homerethegreat (talk) 09:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I dont have the primary source no, and we rely on secondary sources. Wikipedia is also not a reliable source. nableezy - 15:23, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You showed only 1 source though... Japanese Wiki still has it. Can you double check? Homerethegreat (talk) 19:12, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Have you not tried searching for yourself? Do you have some reason to doubt the info?
How about this? Selfstudier (talk) 19:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the source! So basically it appears that the news piece Nableezy sent is not related to whether Japan considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization. Thank you for sending this and making it clear! Nableezy can you self rv?
"the reason for the major deletion was ``a change in the source of the information.'' Starting with the 2023 edition , the content is said to comply with the sanctions list based on UN Security Council Resolution 1267. Previously, we used reports from overseas think tanks as sources, but we received inquiries as to what the standards were, so we published the 2013 edition with the policy of making the standards clear and easy to understand. Updating the web version. I think this timing made it a hot topic," said the person in charge." - Machine translation
Basically, it seems that the 2013 directive is still in place and that there wasn't an actual change in policy. Homerethegreat (talk) 16:49, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Starting with the 2023 edition , the content is said to comply with the sanctions list based on UN Security Council Resolution 1267." is the current position. Selfstudier (talk) 16:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, because what that actually means is that Japan never actually considered Hezbollah to be a terrorist entity. It had simply listed organizations that think thanks said were terrorist entities. So no, definitely not restoring Japan here, they appear to have never belonged in the first place. nableezy - 16:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]