| Submit your comments on this article |
| Thoughts on Leb... |
| 2006-07-13 |
There's a pretty complicated genesis to Hezbollah's jump into Israel's fight with Hamas in Gaza, but I think I agree in outline with Eyal Zisser's analysis in the Jerusalem Post. Attacks against Israel, in particular kidnappings of Israelis that could lead to prisoner exchanges, boost Hizbullah's popularity in the Middle East, especially at a time that the militia group is under regional and international pressure to disarm, said Eyal Zisser of Tel Aviv University's Dayan Center.Hezbollah's under pressure within Leb due to Resolution 1559. They have to "prove" that they're protecting Leb against Israeli aggression. The way to do that's to keep the pot stirred on the border, get a little aggression going now and then, but to keep it at a level they can handle, thus enhancing their heroic Arab warrior image. As long as Hamas is kidnapping Israeli troops, Hassan figures he might as well join in the fun. The 2004 negotiations and exchange tell him that there's not going to be much of a penalty and it'll make Hezbollah look tough. I don't think anyone's under any illusions that was a spontaneous decision by Hezbollah. Larijani arrived in Damascus the day before the kidnappings so he could be close at hand for the festivities. We can guess that Teheran has been pressuring Nasrallah even as Ahmadinejad's been howling for the destruction of Israel. Damascus needs a fight so Assad can "prove" that Leb needs Syrian occupation just to stave off civil war. Beirut's been steering a dangerously independent course since the Hariri assassination and the overt Syrian puppets within the country have been looking increasingly shabby. Nasrallah — and possibly the puppeteers in Teheran — miscalculated the effect of the kidnappings. Certainly they mistimed them. Leb's getting a thorough thumping -- Beirut airport is under attack as of this morning, expensive and painfully reconstructed infrastructure's being reduced to rubble, and Hezb is blowing off hundreds of Katyushas. There are the usual noises in the International Community™ about Israeli "overreaction," but the Lebs are left with the distinct problem of an act of war having been committed by an organization that's part of the government but which they don't control. Siniora's cabinet's stated that the government's not responsible, but the Leb ambassador to Washington said, stupidly, that the government stands behind The Resistance. Parties in Beirut are looking frantically to see which way to jump. Hassan's taken away all the middle ground: the government's either got to condone the actions and enter a state of war with Israel, thereby putting them firmly back in the Syrian/Iranian camp and on the road to another occupation and possibly civil war, or they've got to condemn the actions and shut down Hezbollah, which they aren't able to do. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #32 About the Druze. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-07-13 23:03 |
| #31 No need for a Maroniteistan because the nation will simply be known as Lebanon. Maybe they could have 10% of Syria to compensate for the loss! |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2006-07-13 21:46 |
| #30 I prefer Maroniteistan ...but that's cuz I'm Christian |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-07-13 21:39 |
| #29 While Walid Jumblatt isn't exactly the kind of guy you want to meet in a dark alley, the BBC has called him “the country’s [Lebanon’s] political weathervane.” Jumblatt has always had a knack for changing allegiance at just the right moment - not that he has much choice. If he screws up the Druze will undoubtably get massacred by some faction or the other. There really aren’t that many Druze compared to nearly any other Middle Eastern ethnic group. Anyhow, I like the smell of Druzistan in the morning. It smell like victory... for the West |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2006-07-13 21:29 |
| #28 I've been wondering for a while why Jumblatt turned so Anti-Syrian. A first I thought it was just fear the Syrians were going to whack him, but there may be more to it. Perhaps he has been talking to the Israelis and there may be a deal leaving him in charge of south Lebanon = Druzistan. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-07-13 20:43 |
| #27 Phil is right: it's definately time to fracture the Umma a bit farther. How about Druzistan, Kurdistan, Ismailistan, Alawistan... |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2006-07-13 19:31 |
| #26 Time to set up Druzistan in south Lebanon and southwest Syria. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2006-07-13 19:02 |
| #25 Cluster bombing will help eradicate the pests - the leafletting allows it since "innocents" will flee |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-07-13 19:02 |
| #24 "The US and Israel are perceived to be weak in the eyes of our enemies, and they are 100% right. We both have some catching up to do, or the terrorists will become further emboldened." Islamic terrorists aren't the only ones who'll become further emboldened: the whole world has been watching the sad, miserable show of cowardice our Left has been putting on for the last couple of years, and it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the Islamists, China, North Korea and even Russia have already concluded that all they have to do is bide their time until Bush leaves office, and they will then have a green light to proceed with their plans with complete impunity. I see hard times ahead. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-07-13 18:19 |
| #23 I remember that Lebanon had always (before the arrival of the Arafish during Black September)worked out horsetrading agremments for power sharing. Once things went to sh!t in Lebanon, the delicate balance was forever lost. Now the cancer that is Hizb'Allah is firmly entreched in Lebanon, and Syria has mucked about there, too, there is no stability. We owe Hizb'Allah a goodly wack for killing 242 marines in Lebanon, if anyone else recalls. Both the US and Israel got a big problem now because the dirty business of rooting out and killing off Hizb'Allah and the nasties in Syria was not done. Therefore, it is my belief that Hizb'Allah, especially the leadership needs to be removed by whatever military means are appropriate. Also, Syria is due for some serious hurting. They have been actively supporting terrorism in Iraq, and in Israel, being a client of Iran. The US and Isreal are perceived to be weak in the eyes of our enemies, and they are 100% right. We both have some catching up to do, or the terrorists will become further emboldened. If these enemies are not dealt with now, in the future, it will go nuclear and then we are talking about serious casualties. Also, some things have to be quietly done to put the hurt on the MMs in Iran. And the financiers in Saudi Arabia. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2006-07-13 17:38 |
| #22 Sorry a little clarity. Jumblatt being a Druze having any concern for Israeli Druze? Apparently, they're not druze (see article posted a bit earlier which names then, plus other material in comments), but jewish israelis. |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-07-13 16:52 |
| #21 The Israeli soldiers captured by Hizbollah were originally said to be Druze, but in a summary article further down this page they are named, and the names are Euro-Jewish. So much for that, although there are Druze and Beduins in the Israeli army -- volunteers, as they aren't drafted like the Jews. About Lebanon, remember that the society fractures along religious (Muslim-various, Christian, Druze), tribal, class and political lines, and that pretty much all the factions are well armed and live in enclaves for mutual protection against the rest. Hizbollah controls the patch of territory along the Israeli border, are exceedingly well-armed, and like many other groups controls the drugs trade in its area. Presumably the Lebanese ambassador either belonged to a faction that does support Hizbollah's move, was projecting his own belief upon his nation, or hadn't caught up with events and was still parroting the United Ummah v. Israel line. Which is as much as I am capable of understanding the Byzantine maze the Lebanese have created for themselves. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-07-13 16:50 |
| #20 Heh, didn't notice Fred wrote it, but I should have realized it was Fred or Strategy Page or someother clear headed thinker cause it made sense! Had I known it was Fred, I would have caught that lopt. But too many others (not rantburgers) think that it's all just poltical grandstanding that will go away in a day or two. Besides, it was stupid for the Ambassador to say that. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-07-13 16:39 |
| #19 Sorry a little clarity. Jumblatt being a Druze having any concern for Israeli Druze? |
| Posted by: Rightwing 2006-07-13 16:11 |
| #18 I'm curious about Gangea's and Jumblatt's position on this. I know Jumblatt is very anti-Syrian but Phalangist Christians were anti-Palestinian aka Sahbra and Shatilla but also were Pro-Syrian, I assume from the stability angle. Any takers? |
| Posted by: Rightwing 2006-07-13 16:10 |
| #17 Totten's back in the US since the spring. |
| Posted by: JSU 2006-07-13 15:27 |
| #16 2b, what Fred might have meant by 'stupidly' is that the rest of the Lebanese government was promulgating the position that the entry into Israel, attacks on IDF and capture of the Israeli soldiers was the work of a private group that has no government support. By openly aligning his government with Hizb'allah, he gives credence to the Israeli position that the attack was an act of war by Lebanon on Israel, thereby justifying a full-up response. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-07-13 15:11 |
| #15 I think I came off as a bit snarky, like I had all the answers, but it was a genuinely posed question. I don't know the answer-I just love poking at every idea to see if it holds up. Captain America, I didn't realize that was the extent of their political clout. |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-07-13 15:10 |
| #14 Not sure of that. An article I read in ??? recently says they've been supplied with well over a thousand of them. Wish I'd bookmarked it. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-07-13 15:07 |
| #13 it will be interesting to see how long Hizb can keep up their rocket barrage if Israel can prevent new rockets from coming in, they probably have no more than a day or two of rockets left |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-07-13 15:02 |
| #12 Druze are notoriously "unaligned". They fight for whoever is in charge. If tomorrow Lebanon were in charge, they would fight for the Lebanese just as well. Probably a survival tendency! |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-07-13 14:51 |
| #11 One point about the Druze angle #10 : most Shia and Sunnis do NOT consider Druze Muslims, but apostates that need beheading. The Druze believe that the Maahdi came in the 11th century as the Caliphe of Cairo, and they also incorporate reincarnation in their beliefs. Muslims killing Druzes has been almost as popular an activity as Muslim killing Jews, for the past several hundred years. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2006-07-13 14:45 |
| #10 I read today that the Israeli soldiers that were grabbed were actually Druze. If so what is that likely to do to the Druze population in Lebanon. Muslims will often back shit against the Jews, or even other Arab groups, that they would never tolerate against their own ethnic group. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2006-07-13 14:23 |
| #9 Laurence - good point about the hostages to Iran seeing since Ahammadinjihad got his start in life by using that as his opening play in the Carter years. Like a card or chess player, it's clearly one of his favorite moves and it makes sense that he might believe it would work again. Nobody is playing this time. This one is for keeps. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-07-13 14:19 |
| #8 I know it would never happen, but Lebanon could invite outside forces, including Israel, to come in and get rid of Hezballah for them. Aside from the fact that it wouldn't be the muslim thing to do, why wouldn't they? |
| Posted by: gorb 2006-07-13 14:18 |
| #7 What if Iran meant Hizbollah to just continue the gradual increase in pressure on Israel? This may have been just a step towards triggering a crisis down the road (gaining the last few months needed for working nuclear weapons) and Israel refused to play by their book and has now jumped several steps ahead? Iran is now (assuming this theory is correct) with letting Hizbollah get crushed and looking like wimps, or fighting Israel now without having things (nuclear weapons) ready. The attempt to take these kidnapped men to Iran may be an on-the-fly rush job to slow this down and turn it into another "hostage crisis" in order to gain the time they were expecting. It seems dumb to even try, might make sense if it's an off the cuff ploy. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2006-07-13 14:13 |
| #6 insightful comments all. But I do question this thought, " but the Leb ambassador to Washington said, stupidly, that the government stands behind The Resistance. I especially agree with Jules while acknowleging Phils comment. But it's time to stop rolling our eyes and pondering if this is all just political grandstanding when they are committing overt acts of war. I don't think so. The fact that they suddenly have better rockets is an indicator that the comment made by the ambassador wasn't stupid but telling. I think what he said was what it was. We are entering a major war. The fact that Arabs(TM) won't win doesn't mean that they aren't deluded into believing that they can. |
| Posted by: 2b 2006-07-13 14:05 |
| #5 Oh, and despite President Bush's best hope, the Cedar Revolution of 2004 is null and void. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-07-13 13:50 |
| #4 Some other thoughts... Hezbol has an active drug trade in several countries. Resolution 1559 is not worth the paper its printed on if Syria and Iran continue to ignore it. Yet another toothless resolution. The most prevalent political party today in Leb is Hezbollah. Israeli's strategic protection requires moving through Leb to Damascus. All roads lead to Damascus and Teheran, the rest is just tactical. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-07-13 13:48 |
| #3 Hezbollah is swimming in arms and money funded by "charitable groups" and cobelligerent governments throughout the Arab world. I don't think any of the other factions in Lebanese society enjoy any such support from anyone. |
| Posted by: Phil 2006-07-13 13:26 |
| #2 I would love a veteran Rantburger to explain to me why any of these goverments are "unable to shut down Hezbollah". What exactly is the civil war argument-that the populace supports Hezbollah? Is the basic idea that the populace of Lebanon would be resistant to outside help in drowning the rats? Are they being bribed to either support Hezbollah or else lose their lives? Or is the loss of charity services on the part of Hezbollah enough to keep them on that side? Can we flesh this out a bit? |
| Posted by: Jules 2006-07-13 13:07 |
| #1 Michael Totten is based in Beirut. I hope he's ok, and I would be interested to read his thoughts, if he's able and willing to write. |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-07-13 13:01 |