Is it a terrorist organization? There appears to be some confusion. The Bulgarian government is backing off from an earlier claim by its predecessor that Hezbollah was behind the bus bombing in Burgas last July.
"It is important that the (EU) decision be based not only on the bombing in Burgas because I think the evidence we have is not explicit," Foreign Minister Kristian Vigenin, whose government took office last week, told national state radio BNR.
"There is an indication that it is possible (that Hezbollah was behind it) but we cannot take decisions with important consequences for the EU based on indirect data.
This report from the New York Times suggests that the new Bulgarian government has a keen eye for what determines the definition of 'terrorist':
The bombing investigation has placed Bulgaria in a tight geopolitical squeeze between the larger European countries, which favor the terrorist designation for Hezbollah, and those that oppose the designation. Bulgaria has also expressed concern about jeopardizing its historically close relations with Middle Eastern countries.
Other relevant material can be found here:
Nigerian authorities announced yesterday that they had made three arrests of Hezbollah operatives and uncovered a large stash of weapons, foiling a plot to attack Israeli and Western targets in Nigeria.
Nigerian military spokesman Captain Ikedichi Iweha said that three Lebanese men were arrested earlier this month in Kano, the largest city in northern Nigeria. Iweha said, "All those arrested have confessed to have undergone Hezbollah terrorist training." A raid on the home of one of the suspects revealed a large cache of arms, including eleven anti-tank weapons, four anti-tank landmines, twenty one rocket-propelled grenades, more than 11,000 bullets and an amount of dynamite.
This recent report from the Times (£) and concerning Iran also has a bearing:
Iran has spent decades establishing sleeper cells with the ability to carry out devastating terrorist attacks in Latin America, according to an Argentine prosecutor investigating a bombing blamed on Tehran.
The accusation by Alberto Nisman, who is investigating a 1994 blast at a Jewish cultural centre in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people, will raise alarms for Jewish and Western interests across the continent, at a time of growing tensions over Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions and its involvement in the conflict in Syria. Iran has denied involvement in the attack.
"These are sleeper cells. They have activities you wouldn't imagine. Sometimes they die having never received the order to attack," said Mr Nisman in his 500-page report.
The charge will be a blow to President Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina, who this year outraged Jews by offering to collaborate with Tehran on a "truth commission" to investigate the bombing of the Argentine-Israeli Mutual Association building. [On which see this post - NG]
Mr Nisman accused Mohsin Rabbani, an influential Iranian cleric who was the cultural attaché in Buenos Aires at the time of the attack, of spending the last 20 years developing an intelligence network in Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia, Guyana, Surinam and Trinidad and Tobago. Mr Rabbani is now based in Qom, a city in Iran.
Well, that's Iran, you might say. But the New York Times reported on Nisman as follows:
The special prosecutor investigating the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center here that killed 85 people released a report on Wednesday claiming that Iran had set up intelligence stations in different parts of Latin America with the aim of carrying out terrorist attacks directly or through Hezbollah, the powerful Lebanese militant group. [My italics.]
On a different but not wholly unrelated matter, have Hezbollah made a bad strategic mistake in supporting Assad in Syria? Steven A. Zyck thinks so: 'that backing Assad may in fact be the quickest route to the destruction and marginalization of Hezbollah'; 'it is hard', he says, 'to imagine a scenario in which Hezbollah's support for the Assad regime helps the group, the Syrian people, Lebanon, or regional peace and stability'. See, likewise, here:
... the intervention by Hezbollah could be problematic for that organization, which historically has been revered in Syria for its opposition to Israel. Now, in the eyes of the Syrian insurgency and its sympathizers, Hezbollah has turned its guns on fellow Muslims and taken on the form of an occupying force.
By contrast, Qifa Nabki offers some explanation of Hezbollah's strategic thinking. (Thanks: HG.)