Hezbollah’s Useful Idiots in Congress

On March 27, 2026, members of Congress’ Progressive Caucus shared some outrageous thoughts and writing.

In the wake of Hezbollah’s (latest) unprovoked attack on Israel, Representative Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Representative Delia Ramirez (D-IL), and Representative Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) introduced two appalling resolutions — 1) Standing with the People of Lebanon against the illegal invasion; and 2) The Lebanon War Powers Resolution.

At their core, the resolutions seek to restrain and punish an American ally for ensuring its security while aiding and rewarding a US-designated foreign terrorist organization (FTO) with American blood on its hands.

The resolutions of Tlaib, Ramirez, and Velazquez exhibit the actions and ideas of individuals consumed by ideology. Their progressive zeal blinds them to reality. They ignore basic understandings and abandon commonsense while indulging in hyperbole and hysteria. Their fealty to progressivism runs so deep that they are willing to introduce ideas and advance an agenda that effectively works to jeopardize American security and interests.

The first six words of the Tlaib-authored resolution — Standing with the People of Lebanon — immediately raises red flags. Why must the representative “stand” with the Lebanese people? What happened to the Lebanese state? The Lebanese state is internationally recognized. The democratically-elected Lebanese government is tasked with protecting the people of Lebanon.

Also, did the people of Lebanon, let alone the state, request her solidarity? The Michigan representative, no less a Palestinian, feels entitled to intervene in domestic Lebanese affairs. She ignores the millions of Lebanese who welcome the further degradation of Hezbollah by Israel. Why do the people of Lebanon welcome this? Because, who else will do it?

For the last 26 years, Hezbollah, the scion of Iran, refused to moderate its views on destroying Israel and abandoning its weapons. The Lebanese state repeatedly failed to bring the militia to heel (even in a limited area).

Tlaib’s title and resolution are a master class. They epitomize the modus operandi for progressives, particularly when engaging with the Middle East. Tlaib’s progressive beliefs and principles compel her to ignore history while painting a misleading picture. Responsible parties go unaccountable. The aggressor seemingly disappears. The targeted becomes the aggressor.

Her resolution portrays Lebanon as passive. According to her, the 82-year-old country has no agency. The labels of aggression and accountability apply only to Israel. Her progressive delusions propound the idea that Lebanon would have “freedom from the threat or use of force,” if it were not for Israel. But is not that freedom responsibly achieved when Lebanon controls its borders and territory? Optimally it would entail the normalization of relations with Israel. But both of those items would require Lebanon to act.

Inexplicably, the entire 7-page resolution is devoid of any mention of Hezbollah; the initiator of conflict.

The Michigan representative also excuses the failings of the Lebanese state. Did she not celebrate President Biden’s 2024 ceasefire agreement that called on the Lebanese state to disarm Hezbollah? Tlaib makes no mention about how Lebanese authorities dragged their feet for the better part of a year and ultimately lied to US officials about disarming Hezbollah. Why is she not upset? Does she not want Hezbollah disarmed?

The glaring voids are intentional.

By focusing on the Lebanese people, portraying the Lebanese state as helpless, and erasing Hezbollah from the narrative, she heightens Lebanese helplessness, vulnerability and victimization. Tlaib manipulates the empathy of the ignorant to advance her intervention in Lebanese affairs and a cessation of violence.

In reality, Tlaib is not really concerned about the Lebanese. It is about advancing the “Free Palestine: From the River to the Sea” agenda. Her contrived Lebanese narrative transforms Israel into a greater “aggressor” — not limited to “Palestine.” It should be noted that at least 10 Palestinian-focused organizations endorsed the legislation. Absent from the list is an organization with Lebanon in its title.

The Lebanon War Powers Resolution (LWPR) drafted by Tlaib and co-sponsored by Ramirez and Velazquez is an exercise in progressive machinations and hysteria. They call for an end to US military assistance and aid to Israel in the Lebanese theater. Representative Ramirez compared the conflict in Lebanon to Gaza. She tweeted that the resolution seeks to hold President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accountable.

Is any of this necessary or true? No reports exist of US fighting forces being deployed to Lebanon. Ramirez wants to hold an ally accountable for defending itself? Furthermore, the US cannot provide intel on an enemy that attacked (unprovoked) an ally without Congressional approval? Ridiculous.

The LWPR is a tactic here, not a principled approach by progressives. They resort to the WPR as a means to punish a leader they dislike.

If the three members of the Progressive Caucus are serious about ending the conflict in Lebanon and alleviating the suffering of the Lebanese, they would draft a resolution calling for the normalization of relations between Lebanon and Israel.

How do either of these resolutions advance US interests and security? Does not the US have an interest in seeing Hezbollah (a US-designated FTO) further degraded? Any cessation of violence only benefits Hezbollah by providing them the opportunity to regroup and rearm (once again).

Representatives Tlaib, Ramirez, and Velazquez should revise the titles of their resolutions. Call one: Standing with Hezbollah and its Palestinian allies so it can continue to defy the Lebanese state. Call the other: How to handicap an ally fighting a US-designated FTO. The revisions would clearly demonstrate how the progressive Congresswomen’s resolutions make them useful idiots for Hezbollah.

Eric Bordenkircher, Ph.D., is a research fellow at UCLA’s Center for Middle East Development. He tweets at @UCLA_Eagle. The views represented in this piece are his own and do not necessarily represent the position of UCLA or the Center for Middle East Development.