Lebanon and the prospect of war
Issandr El AmraniMy new column in Masri al-Youm is out, about Lebanon and the prospects of war there, and outlines the rather twisted road of the past decade to get to the present situation.
But of course this is Lebanon, it's already superseded by the rather dramatic news of the clash between the Lebanese Army and the Israeli one yesterday, which claimed the lives of three Lebanese soldiers, a journalist from al-Akhbar, and a senior Israeli officer. Lebanon appears to have been in the wrong according to the UN, but of course it's all hotly contested.
I recently finished reading David Hirst's Beware of Small States (more about the book and Hirst later this week), one of whose central points is that Lebanon has been where the Arab-Israeli conflict has perdured since the last time an Arab army (rather than guerrilla) fought Israel: 1973. Well yesterday that (almost) 27 year break had ended, with Lebanese uniformed men confronting Israel's.
This is just one of the many signs of tension, and a possible third Lebanese war (which Hirst says could also very well be a regionalized seventh Arab-Israeli war) now appears ever more likely. Let's hope it can be avoided, as the latest ICG report calls for more effective diplomacy:
The key to unlocking this situation is – without neglecting the central Israeli-Palestinian track – to resume meaningful negotiations between Israel on the one hand and Syria and Lebanon on the other. This is the only realistic way to shift underlying dynamics and, in particular, affect Syria’s calculations. Without that, Damascus will continue to transfer weapons to Hizbollah, the Shiite movement will successfully resist pressure to disarm and Israel will keep on violating Lebanon’s sovereignty.
There is scant reason for optimism on the peace front, however. That means little can be achieved, not that nothing can be done. The most urgent tasks are to restore momentum on 1701 by focusing on the most realistic goals and to establish consultative mechanisms to defuse tensions, clarify red lines and minimise risks of an accidental confrontation. Better channels of communication would help. At present, the U.S. is talking mainly to one side (Israel), keeping another at arm’s length (Syria), ignoring a third (Hizbollah) and confronting the fourth (Iran).
At the risk of repeating a bromide, it's hard to see a settlement of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict without some kind of solution to the Palestinian-Israeli one. We have had, for decades now, an Israel that simply does not want to return the Golan Heights to Syria or find a solution to the Palestinian question that is likely to ever satisfy the Palestinians. Its entire policies have been aimed at increasing its territory, fragmenting the West Bank and the overall Palestinian polity, and waging war to make its enemies accept peace on its own terms, i.e. surrender. It has also rejected the only serious offer for a comprehensive peace on the table, the 2002 Beirut Initiative.
On the other hand, a group like Hizbullah is not about to cease fighting Israel once the issue of the Shebaa Farms — its pretext for continued hostility since the liberation of South Lebanon (before that the area was not contested) — is resolved. The issue the Islamist camp really cares about, in the end, is Palestine and Jerusalem. An imposed peace will not satisfy it, only one that has full endorsement of a Palestinian majority as well as the Arab states and Iran (all of which agreed to under the Beirut initiative). This is why the crazed ideas of the neoconservatives and their friends in Israel (practically the whole establishment there) of imposing their own peace and creating a new Middle East will not work — what worked on Egypt or Jordan simply won't work with them.
Reader Comments (8)
focusing on the most realistic goals and to establish consultative mechanisms to defuse tensions, clarify red lines and minimise risks of an accidental confrontation
That would be great, if all parties involved were interested in avoiding confrontation and defusing tensions. Clearly, a peaceful settlement of the status quo is an Israeli interest. It is not the interest of Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, or apparently rogue Lebanese Army commanders.
The Arabs put themselves in double-binds, and then expect Israel to bail them out through concessions. I don't think the Lebanese government wants to go to war with Israel, or even has institutional animosity towards Israel. However, take a look at what just happened on the border. A Lebanese commander is responsible for the murder of a human being, across an international border, in front of the TV cameras. But, because the man his orders murdered - a husband and father of four - is a Jew, the Lebanese government cannot bring itself to condemn the action without coming off as Israeli collaborators and strengthening even MORE radical forces within Lebanon. That's insanity!
Anything less than Total War against the Zionist entity is unacceptable in Arab discourse. And that's from a government that probably sees the benefits of peace with Israel, and certainly is not interested in making war on the Jewish state.
Talking about a permanent settlement under these conditions is just crazy.
Victor is like all Zionists completely backwards. Thanks for humanizing yet again the one Israeli terrorist while denying the humanity of the 3 Lebanese killed. Thanks for putting Israel the racist, apartheid, colonialist state with nuclear, chemical, biological and horrific conventional weapons as the victim instead of the aggressor it is.
But all of those basics aside, let's get back to Issandr's review of the situation which I think hits two important points. The one obvious one of course is that Palestine and Jerusalem are the real core issues. Crucially left out of that is the refugees and the right of return for whom the Beirut initiative does basically nothing, but for argument's sake let's wrap them up under the "Palestine" issue label.
The other critical point here which is perhaps more germane to the moment is the point quoted from the ICG report that Washington is only really dealing with one party (and it must be said, the key aggressor party in the whole picture), the Israelis. To all the other key players, the US has chosen to either ignore or act belligerently towards. In such a scenario, the aggressor state and its key superpower ally have forced the weaker victimized states to try and find means to correct the balance of power. Now, Hizbullah especially since 2006 has decisively broken the balance of fear in the region, everyone knows the Israeli emperor has no knickers even if he has some shiny clothes on top. The Israelis can be faced down on the battlefield by a nimble guerilla force. The Syrians and the Iranians know they have no conventional battlefield option, but they've discovered that there is a genuinely effective proxy guerilla option. Since Tel Aviv has clearly shown it is fully committed to the Apartheid South Africa aggression, bantustanization model, and since Washington has shown it is a combination of no-cojones Obama in the face of the Zionists and a we-love-all-Arab-killers Congress, the Syrians and Iranians realize they have no incentive to play ball with Tel Aviv and Washington. Quite simply, they have nothing they are willing to offer. The Zionists are drunk on their own power. In some ways it's similar to the pre-1973 war situation. But of course the assembly of forces is very different and the cost in civilian lives for Israel actually gaining some humility is likely to be horrible and one-sided yet again (worse than 2006 Lebanon or the Gaza slaughter). Yet that is the only option the Israelis have put on the table. Similar to pre-1967 you have a military establishment itching for a fight. Unlike 1967, Israel is likely to again find itself well matched on the battlefield and so will once again seek to deliberately target masses of civilians on an even grander scale than its slaughters of the past 4 years. Washington's unwillingness (inability due to the racism of the US system on the issue?) to seriously pressure the Israelis away from their path of Apartheid destruction leaves the increasingly myopic Zionists living in their bubble of believing that their racist system can "win" by ratcheting up the killing and colonization. The Syrians, the Iranians, and Hizbullah in turn (each admittedly with their own interests but in this case with a lot of alignment) realize in such a situation their most realistic option is to utilize Hizbullah's capabilities by arming them to be able to confront the onslaught Israel has been preparing since 2006 and to try and ensure the group gives the Zionist terrorist army at least the same level of bloody nose they got in 2006.
That's a lot of words to justify and rationalize an unprovoked murder of an innocent human being.
A husband and father of four is dead. He's not coming home to his family tonight because some piece of shit Lebanese commander wanted to prove his dick was longer for the cameras. That's it, that's what happened. That's why a human life was ended. How can you live with yourself, justifying murder like you're playing a game, to take such pride in your own cruelty.
Yo Victor, don't even get me started. You don't care one lousy bit about the 3 Lebanese - also fathers, husbands, sons - murdered by Israel defending racism. You clearly don't care about the thousands and thousands of - to you utterly nameless - fathers, mothers, grandfathers, grandsons, sons, daughters, and so many others murdered by Israel over the years and decades in defense of racism and theft. You don't know their names, and you don't care. You are cold, callous, cruel and only take up the warm fuzzies when it serves the defense of racism. Don't even start, because you've lost before you've even started. When you start seeing every human being as a human being, and not seeing their race, religion, or ethnicity as the filter by which to determine if they should be seen as a human being, then we can talk. Til then you are just another defender of slavery, racism, and colonialism. If you want to blame someone for the death of this particular Zionist terrorist, look to the leaders of the racist terrorist state and militia that he served.
You could have an argument with yourself, all by yourself. A human being, a husband and father of four was murdered, for no reason than to stroke one Lebanese commander's ego, but you can't look past the "Jew" to care. You can call Dov Harari a Zionist, a racist, whatever makes you feel better about justifying the murder of an innocent man. The fact remains that he was murdered for nothing more than who he was - a Jew - and you approve, you really do.
That's life.
It's fascinating to watch a pro-Israel-hardline propagandist prove once again that one Israeli life is arrayed in gold, while three arab and muslim lives are shit.
Anyway, the UN would appear to be wrong about whose fault the incident was, as Israel clearly should not have been reaching over the security fence, and should not have ignored Lebanese demands that they stop - but who is really to blame? Isn't it the international community, which has demonstrated its usual unconditional tolerance for Israel, which has made a mockery of the Lebanon border? Of course it is. Israel is allowed to act as though borders only exist when Israel wants it to, which in turn creates rising border tension, which in this case apparently led to a very unfortunate clash.
Another thing that is interesting, along the same lines, is that western policy makers are constantly concerned with changing 'calculations' in Lebanon and Gaza and Iran, but NEVER in Israel, which is allowed to kill, bomb, kidnap, steal land, starve, all with utter impunity. Allowed? No, it is actively encouraged to do those things by the massive military and diplomatic support it gets from the US.
Look at the mental gymnastics you have to go through to deny the humanity of an innocent person, murdered for no reason other than being a Jew. It is at moments like this that I both sad and grateful. Sad at the injustice in this world, the hatred and intolerance that would deny my people peace. Grateful that for the first time in 2000 years the Jewish people need not rely on the goodwill of others for their defense. Dov Harari was innocent; the shedding of his blood will not go unpunished. May those that murdered him be brought to swift justice, in this world and the next.
Seriously Victor, I really wonder if people like you believe the stuff you're saying. Do you really live in a world where you don't hear or see anything around you? Do you really live in a world where you can throw reality out the window, make things up, and declare them reality? Or do you actually know the rubbish you are regurgitating (and it is regurgitation, you're not saying anything original or meaningful) and just enjoy it knowing you are doing wrong? There's an Egyptian catch-phrase that pretty much sums you up: "a2ul lu tuur, yi2uul i7libu". "I tell him it's a bull, he says 'milk it'". You and pretty much every other Zionist troll in a nutshell. But really, I shouldn't feed the trolls, so later.