So today, Lebanon’s Hizbullah raised the stakes in the rapidly evolving
confrontation between Israel and the militant Arab organizations on its
borders– and it also demonstrated its own continuing operational
prowess, daring, and inventiveness– when it sent
a squad into action against an Israeli tank operating apparently
just inside Israel, killing three of the tank’s crew members and
snatching two others into captivity. When the Israeli military
responded by sending other tanks into Lebanon, one hit a landmine
killing four more soldiers inside it.
Hizbullah’s capture of two Israeli soldiers
comes, of course, a couple of weeks into the crisis Israeli society is
already facing as a result of Hamas’s capture of an IDF soldier in
Gaza. I can easily imagine that many Israelis are in a turmoil of
emotion. Though their army has killed around 70 or so
Palestinians– many of them civilians– in the past two weeks of
military actions, Palestinian society shows few signs of “cracking”
politically, in terms of backing down on the demand of the PA
government leaders that Israel agree to a widespread release of
Palestinian detainees in return to the safe release of Gilad
Shalit. (This is, of course, very similar to the “sumoud” shown
by the Lebanese public when Israel tried to bomb it into political
submission back in April 1996. Other people might recall the response
of Londoners to the Blitz.)
Israeli PM Ehud Olmert is, fairly predictably, huffing and
puffing a lot of very angry rhetoric. That AP report linked
above, by Joseph Panossian, says:
government responsible for the two
soldiers’ safety, vowing that the Israeli response “will be restrained,
but very, very, very painful.”
(That page on the AP news site, by the way, had a photo of Hizbullah
leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah “taking questions at a press conference
in Beirut”– in which it looked for all the world as if he’d been
taking lessons in projecting a commanding public presence from the
School of Donald Rumsfeld… Oh well, on second thoughts,
Nasrullah was already able to give a talented and commanding public
performance a long time before Rumsfeld became Bush’s Secretary of
Defense.)
Panossian wrote this:
- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the Hezbollah
action went against the interest of the Lebanese people, and that Syria has a
“special responsibility” to resolve the crisis. [whatever that might mean– HC]
“All sides must act with
restraint to resolve this incident
peacefully and to protect innocent life and civilian infrastructure,”
she said ahead of meetings in Paris.
That latter statement is new and interesting. It seems clearly
directed at Israel, and indicates she has a new awareness of how
disastrous the consequences of a continuation or (heaven forfend) even
a new escalation by Israel of its use of military force could be for
all the status quo powers in the region… And yes, that certainly
includes the US military presence in Iraq and all its associated supply
lines, as well as the US’s network of political alliances and allies
throughout the region.
But guess what. If Haaretz’s often well informed Amos Harel is to
be believed, then his sources in at least the Israeli military (but
let’s hope not their political commanders?) are talking
about inflicting damage on Lebanon that will force the country’s
“civilian infrastructures [to] regress 20, or even 50 years.”
Well, at one level, we could say to that: no big deal. The
Lebanese people in general– and Hizbullah’s associated “jihad
al-bina'” construcvtion companies in particular– are really quite good
at rebuilding civilian infrastructures. The Israeli military gave
them plenty of practice doing that in the decades before 2000. At
anothert level, though, we all know well today that when roads and
bridges are cut, power generating plants and water and sewage plants
incapacitated, then real people suffer and die– and usually the sick,
the old, the disabled, and the weak.
Maybe that’s why Condi expressed some public concern for “civilian
infrastructures.”
So what will the Israeli government decide to do? I guess we’ll
see that in the hours and days ahead… But I should imagine they
are royally annoyed (which might be a dangerous circumstance, in itself.) Even
Harel, who is by no means a Hizbullah sympathizer, was forced to admit
that,
on Israel’s northern border was an impressive military achievement for
Hezbollah and a ringing failure for the IDF. Despite Israel’s
intelligence analyses and despite wide operational deployment,
Hezbollah has succeeded in carrying out what it has been threatening to
do for more than two years – and it couldn’t have happened at a more
sensitive time.
And this:
-
If
Israel is having difficulty in deterring Hamas in Gaza, and certainly
if it is unable to bring the crisis to a conclusion, indeed Hezbollah
is a much more sophisticated and experienced rival than its Palestinian
counterpart.
It is safe to assume that Hezbollah planned the
abduction months in advance, and that the Shi’ite organization has made
every effort to conceal the location where the kidnapped soldiers are
being held…
His prediction seemed to be that Olmert would now feel able to “take
the gloves off”– or, as he put it, “It now seems that the
government may be able to stop acting like it is walking on eggshells,
as it has thus far.”
(Walking on eggshells? Tell that to the people of Gaza!)
Anyway, let’s wait and see.
But meantime, let’s still keep in mind that that there are always
alternatives to the use of violence. Negotiating a complete,
comprehensive and final resolution of the Israeli-Arab conflict is
still quite possible. And perhaps today we should say it is more
necessary than ever. Enough fussing around with piddly little
nickel-and-diming partial and incomplete “acccords.”
So far, both the Israelis and their Hamas/Hizbullah opponents have been using force in their conflict. (Though with a very high degree of asymmetry.) But Hizbullah– and to a great extent Hamas– also has a very determined, well-thought-out, and intelligently implemented political aspect to its work, too. It is in the political domain that the real duel of wits will be determined. The IDF might kill and maim thousands of Palestinians and Lebanese– as indeed, it dhas done on several occasions in the past. But unless Israel’s leaders can figure out how to build a stable and sustainable peace with all its neighbors, Israel will never actually be the secure and prosperous little European-style state that most of its people would dearly love it to be…
this only further underscores the concern of the international community about private militias operating in Lebanon…altho Hizbullah is part of the present Lebanese government (heads 2 ministries I believe), it is making the entire Lebanese nation, without their consent, hostage to its provocative actions. Is this truly in the interest of the Lebanese people?
Hizbullah raised the stakes in the rapidly evolving confrontation between Israel and the militant Arab organizations on its borders– and it also demonstrated its own continuing operational prowess, daring, and inventiveness
It also committed an unprovoked act of war at precisely the time when such an act was likely to lead to a major escalation. That doesn’t excuse all the things Israel has done since, but wouldn’t you say it was just a touch irresponsible?
it also demonstrated its own continuing operational prowess, daring, and inventiveness
Wow. That’s certainly one way to put it.
But meantime, let’s still keep in mind that that there are always alternatives to the use of violence.
Even certain instances that warrant special praise for their “operational prowess, daring, and inventiveness”?
This is Iran through their Hizbullah puppet trying to do something to alleviate the pressure on the Hamas puppet in Gaza. It also distracts from the Iran nukes about to be brought up to the security council. With Iran in the picture it is time to take sides more than ever. I know which side I am with.
Last month I looked out over Shebaa Farms while traveling with a Lebanese friend and rejoiced that peace was finally coming to South Lebanon. While it is true and obvious that Hizbullah has broken the peace, it is also true and obvious to those with eyes to see that Israel is the possessor of overwhelming force in the area and seeks to dictate outcomes to everyone else by brute violence and arrogant fiat. This cannot go on forever. Asymmetrical war is inevitable while unequal violence and injustice continue.
I once heard the African American author Alice Walker deliver what amounted to a sermon; her message “only justice can stop a curse.” This seems very relevant to the situation between Israel and Palestine.
To the claim that Hizballah undertook an unprovoked act of war, let it be remembered that there are Lebanese prisoners that have been incarcerated in Israel for over 25 years even though the Israelis withdrew from (most) of South Lebanon 6 years ago. Specifically the Israelis have repeatedly refused to let go of Lebanese prisoners except when the latter were exchanged for Israeli ones. Let it also be remembered that for the Lebanese there remains a swath of Lebanese territory that is under continued occupation, not withstanding the plattitudes of Teri Rod-Larsen and the UN. To claim that the recent action is unprovoked is rather a stretch. More so, it is an excersie in ahistoricity: the conflict is still ongoing and has not been concluded. Lebanese territory is violated daily, Israeli special ops continue to assasinate Lebanese and Palestenian foes on soverign Lebanese territory, and a population of more than 300,000 Palestenians endlessly wait for a resoluton of the refugee problem created by the founding of Israeli state. Is there a bigger dynamic at work here, both local in Lebaon and regional? Of course. But to think that the above elements do no count is an exercise in cherry picking.
The “platitudes of… the UN” represent Lebanon’s internationally recognized border. (Out of curiosity, do you regard the UN resolutions on Israel and the Palestinians as platitudes?) And there are other ways to try to get the prisoners back, such as proposing a comprehensive peace treaty that includes their return.
The fact that there are outstanding disputes between Israel and Lebanon doesn’t change the fact that this morning’s attack wasn’t a response to an Israeli aggression.
As a thought experiment, suppose that (1) the cross-border raid had been carried out by the Lebanese Forces rather than HA; (2) the soldier captured was Syrian; and (3) the LF claimed that the purpose of the attack was to secure the release of long-term Lebanese prisoners in Syrian jails. Would you regard it as justified?
Helena
Our friends from tele Aviv have just upped the ante
They have just put in an airstrike on Beirut airport after destroying major infrastructure overnight.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5175160.stm
One wonders just how long it will be before they hit Damascus too.
I remarked a few months ago that there isn’t a firebreak in the middle east to stop the fires spreading, so I find it quite scary to find people playing with matches.
Since 1969, Beirut International airport has been a locus of interstate conflict, a refuge for terrorists, the location of the slaughter of a hijacked American hostage.
This is nothing new. Actually, the fact that the new airport road is both extremely dangerous from a traffic-safety perspective AND runs through Hebollahstan IS an innovation.
between Israel and the militant Arab organizations on its borders
Jonathan Edelstein, I think this statement needs some attention not all Hezbollah members Are Arab! Tope leaders are Iranians this fact and there are as I believe a lot of Iranians among the Arabs with Hezbollah militant.
Israel Graduates from Killing Gazans to Lebanese
http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=452
Technically the blue line is not the international border but the armistice line. Therein lies one of the issues between Lebanon and Israel: the Shebaa farms. The other immediate issue is that of the Lebanese prisoners in Israel. What is curious is that both a relatively minor issues that could have been settled in the wake of the 2000 withdrawl. That the israelis chose not too is an interesting issue in and of itself. Even as these 2 issues are used as proxies for a wider regional dynamic involving Syria and Iran, this does not detract from their legitimacy.
What are the other issues remaining unresolved between Lebanon and Israel? Unlike the other Arab states that have opted to join the American sphere of influence in the Mid-East and consequently concluded deals with the israelis, the Lebanese state (or the Lebanese collective) could not do that without fatally compromising the internal situation in Lebanon. There are several fundamental reasons for this outcome: the Palestinian refugee problem which impinges on the balance between the sects, the presence in Lebanon of major constituencies allied with oppositional forces in the region, and perhaps the affinity of the Zionist project in its present form with a Lebanese counterpart, Lebanon as a christian homeland, that has been effectively defeated as an outcome of the Lebanese civil war. Thus a permanent resolution of the Lebanese-Israeli dispute would more likely than not await a more general and equitable resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli and Arab-Israeli ones.
The thought experiment you proposed has several flaws. Salient among them is that Lebanon’s relationship with Syria is not equidistant to that with Israel. Major sections of the Lebanese population, including some christian Maronites, are allied to Syria. Furthermore, the demarcation of sovereignty between Lebanon and Syria remains unresolved (pertaining to the legitimacy of the Lebanese state, a previous province of Syria) and will in most likelihood not be defined in the near future. As a side, the Lebanese forces are the closest thing Lebanon has had to the facist Phallange (and of course grew out of the Lebanese Phallange party). In a country bloodied by brutalities of its factions (all of its factions), their crimes were in a class of their own.
(Incidentally Salah, the leadership of Hizballah in all of its tiers is Lebanese).
What is curious is that both a relatively minor issues that could have been settled in the wake of the 2000 withdrawl.
Look, I appreciate that Lebanon has a claim to Sheba’a Farms, but lots of countries have territorial claims. Israel had no obligation to withdraw beyond the internationally recognized border (although maybe it should withdraw in order not to leave HA with an excuse). If Lebanon can get a piece of paper from Syria saying the territory is Lebanese, then Israel should leave, but the fact that Lebanon says Sheba’a is its own territory doesn’t create any obligations. Israel couldn’t just say that Hebron is a historic Jewish city that the Palestinians are occupying, could it?
As for the prisoners, I’ve heard several versions of who was at fault for the breakdown of negotiations: some say it was HA, some that it was Syria, some that it was Israel holding out for inclusion of the SLA in the general amnesty. I’m not sure who to believe, and my best guess is that it was a multi-party foulup as most of these things are.
Neither of these issues are cause for unprovoked attack, although the attack in turn doesn’t justify Israel in running around destroying things like a two-year-old having a tantrum.
Furthermore, the demarcation of sovereignty between Lebanon and Syria remains unresolved
Well, that’s the point, isn’t it? There are unresolved issues between Lebanon and Syria, like there are between Lebanon and Israel. Syria, like Israel, has committed and is committing crimes in Lebanon and has violated Lebanese sovereignty. There are many Lebanese who have an affinity with Syria and others, like you say, who may have some affinity for the “Zionist project” (I hate it when a nation of seven million is described as a “project,” but I don’t think you meant it maliciously). And the bottom line is that neither of these sides of Lebanon should be able to unilaterally rule the destiny of the country and drag it into war, no matter how justified they may be in their own minds.
BTW, international law is clear that a country can’t treat a foreign presence in genuinely disputed territory as an invasion and use that presence to justify a retaliatory attack. The most recent case I can recall is the Ethiopia-Eritrea arbitration, in which the judges ruled that an Eritrean attack on Ethiopian troops that had moved into disputed territory was aggressive warfare and not self-defense. HA was not within its rights here although, in case I haven’t already made it clear, I think that Israel is also in the wrong.
BTW, international law is clear that a country can’t treat a foreign presence in genuinely disputed territory as an invasion and use that presence to justify a retaliatory attack. The most recent case I can recall is the Ethiopia-Eritrea arbitration, in which the judges ruled that an Eritrean attack on Ethiopian troops that had moved into disputed territory was aggressive warfare and not self-defense. HA was not within its rights here although, in case I haven’t already made it clear, I think that Israel is also in the wrong.
I am a bit depressed by Helena’s mash note to Hizbollah. These are not enlightened people fighting for a free and open democracy. All sides of this disgusting and unnecessary conflict are covered in the blood of innocents.
There are more important and useful things to be said at a time like this than celebrating the inventiveness and daring of those who hold nations of peaceful people hostage with their bellicose ideologies.
I’m not sure who to believe, and my best guess is that it was a multi-party foulup as most of these things are.
Wonder what you know more to post here, this is very clearer issue for years Israeli used arrested people from the occupied lands and lock them for long time with all sort of torturer and human right abuses exactly as US do and doing in Iraq we all saw what’s happened there from “Very Civilized ” military troops and “Very Respectfully” nation of human rights.
It’s shamble you don’t know as you one of supporter of sate of Israeli “if am right in this”.
Just read this (Arabic Text) will help you to understand what Israeli using these prisoners to use them as spies for them
BTW, I think Israelis insult against Lebanon have some root to punish Lebanon government with its successes of caught in action of Israelis funded spy/Assassinations network here Israelis also used the Arab/Lebanese / Palestinians prisoner to recruiting them for their spy/Assignations dirty work in Arab world,Read Jonathan Edelstein to remove your uncertainty…
Israli spy network Caught in Lebanon “Arabic Text”
Israeli spy rings in Lebanon
When UN surveyors marked the Blue Line between Lebanon and Israel in the summer of 2000 after Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon, they determined that the Shaaba Farms enclave was on Syrian, not Lebanese territory, that is, on land that will be the subject of peace negotiations between Israel and Syria at some time in the future.
Of course, it wasn’t Lebanese troops that crossed the border into Israel unleashing the present crisis…but troops of a private militia (Hizbullah)…without the consent of and to the dismay of the Lebanese people, presumably living in a democracy.
What if an armed Maronite militia invaded Syria because its political wing didn’t believe that the recent UN-instigated Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon was 100% complete in that Syria still occupied tiny Anjar Farms in the Bekaa Valley along the Syrian border?
Furthermore, the demarcation of sovereignty between Lebanon and Syria remains unresolved (pertaining to the legitimacy of the Lebanese state, a previous province of Syria) and will in most likelihood not be defined in the near future.
Good grief. Are you now claiming that Lebanon is an illegitimate state??
Taif: Syria which meticulously upholds the security independence and unity of Lebanon and the agreement between the two countries shall not allow any activity that threatens (Lebanese) security independence or sovereignty.
The Lebanese people in general– and Hizbullah’s associated “jihad al-bina'” construcvtion companies in particular– are really quite good at rebuilding civilian infrastructures.
The Lebanese were also famous in that period for their abductions. The Israeli response just raised the price of abducting people, and that is very welcome. Let’s see if they are willing to pay this higher price and keep abducting westerners like in Helena’s formative Beirut days.
The Israeli response just raised the price of abducting people,
Raised the price of Oil also, wonder you do not screaming this time like back in 1973!!! What the deference can u guess? Dose the Arab drinking their oil now as your friend Kissinger stated after 1973?
The Israeli response just raised the price of abducting people,
Raised the price of Oil also, wonder you do not screaming this time like back in 1973!!! What the deference can u guess? Dose the Arab drinking their oil now as your friend Kissinger stated after 1973?
Salah,
The rise in the price of oil is an outcome that unfairly punishes poorer countries that do not have oil. Iran and Hugo Chavez have repeatedly stated that the price should be higher, and maybe proxy wars are one way of doing that.
I don’t know what Kissinger said and I never bought oil in 73, but a runaway oil price is a sure recipe for US ground forces in the gulf. Note that the Saudis are blaming Hizbullah for this irresponsible attack. And again, all it takes to stop this is to return two abducted soldiers…
Davis,
The rise in the price of oil is an outcome that unfairly punishes poorer countries that do not have oil.
What a smart answer, so before 2003 the oil was US$25/B it’s punish for poorer but now US$78/B its rewards for the poorer, what a smart guy are you Davis?
all it takes to stop this is to return two abducted soldiers
Yes you are very right “all it takes to stop this is to return home and leave the land of Palestine” Davis…..yah
I always said we should leave that place and let them drink their oil if they don’t want to export it. Posted by: David at November 29, 2005 11:33 PM
“Then I made a fatal mistake,” Akins continues. “I said on television that anyone who would propose that is either a madman, a criminal, or an agent of the Soviet Union.” Soon afterward, he says, he learned that the background briefing had been conducted by his boss, then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Akins was fired later that year.”
Akins served as U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia under Kissinger,
“if we do make Dr. Kissinger’s recycling scheme work, we will have created the engine of our own impoverishment. Oil payments to the Arab members of OPEC amounted to $8.5 billion in 1972, and are projected at $65.4 billion for 1975, and $101 billion for 1980—an increase of just under 200 percent in eight years. And the transfers to OPEC are not just a matter of paper money. Right now, the Kuwaitis could easily buy British Leyland Motors, the largest industrial combine in Britain. Built up through the work of tens of thousands of English workers over a period of more than seventy years, BLM would then be acquired by a single family in Kuwait with only six days’ worth of oil production.”