Sunday, July 30, 2006

Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah round-up #2

A few good links:

In an interview with The Times, Hezbollah's second in command, Sheikh Naim Qassem, claims that Hezbollah has been preparing for an Israeli offensive for six years: "If it was not for these preparations Lebanon would have been defeated within hours." He also criticized Britain for allowing U.S. weapons bound for Israel to go through London.

Qassem's boss, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, ratcheted up the rhetoric on Saturday, threatening Israel with further rocket attacks. As quoted in Haaretz: "The bombardment of Afula and its military base is the beginning... Many cities in the center [of Israel] will be targeted in the 'beyond Haifa' phase if the savage aggression continues on our country, people and villages." In a speech broadcast on Al-Manar, Hezbollah's television network, he also claimed that Israel is "a slave of the U.S.," that "[t]he enemy [has] attained no military achievements," and that Hezbollah's "strong position" has prompted diplomatic efforts to end the conflict.

On the ground, according to The Jerusalem Post, "[t]he IDF wrapped up its operations in the southern Lebanese village of Bint Jbail on Saturday and withdrew most of its troops from the area". But the offensive will continue: "At the same time, the army [is] gearing up for a new ground incursion into Lebanon." Also, "the IAF struck a road along the Lebanese border with Syria that the IDF said was being used by Damascus to smuggle weapons to Hizbullah".

So where does that leave things?

At Whiskey Bar, Billmon (a critic of the Israeli offensive who nonetheless continues to provide some solid commentary on the conflict) asks whether the withdrawal from Bint Jbail is the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning. It's an interesting post, though I strongly disagree with his claim that "the Anglo-Israeli alliance has committed both a crime and a mistake".

Which brings me to an excellent op-ed on the conflict in Haaretz by the former leader of Germany's Green Party (and former German foreign minister in the Schroeder government), Joschka Fischer:

The current war in Lebanon is not a war by the Arab world against Israel; rather, it is a war orchestrated by the region's radical forces -- Hamas and Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria and Iran -- which fundamentally reject any settlement with Israel...

Moderate Arab governments understand full well the issue at stake in this war: It is about regional hegemony in the case of Syria with Lebanon and Palestine and, on a wider level, Iran's hegemonic claim to the entire Middle East. Yet the war in Lebanon and Gaza could prove to be a miscalculation for the radicals. By firing missiles on Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, a boundary has been crossed. From now on, the issue is no longer primarily one of territory, restitution or occupation. Instead, the main issue is the strategic threat to Israel's existence.

Precisely. This conflict is primarily about Israel's right to defend itself as a sovereign state. Even more fundamentally, it is about Israel's right to exist. With Hezbollah's arsenal of rockets that can hit targets deep in Israeli territory, and with Hezbollah itself supported by Iran and Syria, one of which is developing a nuclear arsenal, Israel's existence may be more profoundly threatened than ever before.

This is not to excuse some of what Israel has done in the past, nor some of what it continues to do, nor even the military conduct of its current offensive in Lebanon, some of which is questionable, nor to suggest that Israel couldn't do more to promote a healthy, sustainable Palestianian state. It is, however, to emphasize the existential nature of this conflict and its roots.

For Israel, what could possibly be more important than its own existence? It may not always defend itself effectively -- and the offensive in Lebanon may in part have been conducted poorly -- but defend itself it must.

Bookmark and Share

7 Comments:

  • Bravo, Michael. Well said.

    By Blogger cakreiz, at 6:03 AM  

  • The problem is michael,that it is inevitable that these radical forces will sooner or later obtain these bombs.

    The more destruction and carnage there is in Lebanon, the more recruits Hizbollah gains... Don't you see that this strategy isn't viable in the long term?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:19 PM  

  • Iran forces urged to prepare to hit Israel

    54 minutes ago

    TEHRAN (Reuters) -
    Iran's hardline forces should get ready to take revenge on
    Israel and the United States for the offensive on Lebanon, the head of the Revolutionary Guards was quoted as saying on Sunday.
    ADVERTISEMENT

    "The Basij and Revolutionary Guards should prepare to get even with the Zionists and Americans," Yahya Rahim-Safavi was quoted as telling Islamic militiamen by the conservative Fars news agency.

    The Basij are volunteer Islamic militiamen.

    "The timing of the this will be announced by the leader," he added.

    An Israeli air strike killed 54 civilians, including 37 children in the southern Lebanese village of Qana on Sunday, the bloodiest single attack since Israel's 19-day-old war on Lebanese Hizbollah guerrillas began.

    Iran's Revolutionary Guards are historically close to Hizbollah and were deployed in south Lebanon during the 1980s. Mostafa Chamran, spiritual father of the Guards, forged his reputation fighting in Lebanon.

    The Basij and Revolutionary Guards are directly answerable to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

    Although Iran funded and armed Hizbollah in the 1980s, it has insisted recently its support is mainly moral and political.

    However, many sources have said Iranian arms are being used against Israeli civilian and military targets.

    An Israeli military source has said an Iranian-made C802 radar-guided land-to-sea missile with a range of 60 miles (95 km) hit and badly damaged a ship during Israel's offensive against Lebanon.

    Hizbollah said it fired "Raad (Thunder) 2" and "Raad 3" rockets at a rail depot in Haifa. Raad missiles are Iranian.

    Israel's army said it destroyed an Iranian-made Zelzal missile with range of between 74 and 99 miles before it was launched.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:27 PM  

  • In case you did not know ...

    Hamas was born out of group of Palestinians that Israel kicked out of their homes and left them on the Israeli-Lebanese border

    Hezboallah was born by people who lost loved ones the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982

    You are right ... Israel is creating more enemies (not terrorist) than it is killing

    Try seeing your kids, brothers, sisters, parents or any loved one killed infront of your own eyes and you will know where hate is made!

    Finally, Israel says it has the right to defend itself, isn't Israel an occupying force that has total control over Palestinian land, and part of Lebanon's land ... so by the same token, Palestinians and Lebanses have the right to defend themselves! Don't take my word for it, ask the United Nations, ask History ... but if you are still in doubt, ask God! The bible says Jesus was born in Palestine and not Israel ... so sorry guys, to me it is Palestine and will be that way forever!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:47 PM  

  • Clearly the Israelis have not achieved their objective. In fact, if you take into account the negative publicity resulting from the horrific bombing in Qana, the Israelis are the big losers. Which means the bloodshed will only escalate. Already there has been a worldwide reaction to the massacre. And America will pay the price along with Israel and a even more radicalized Islamic populace. Gingrich is right - it is the beginning of World War III.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:17 PM  

  • Hi Michael, I really enjoy your blog. However, I do have to ask about this:

    Billmon (a critic of the Israeli offensive who nonetheless continues to provide some solid commentary on the conflict)

    nonetheless?

    Your assumption seems to be that thinking Israel might not want to overplay its hand would generally render one's analysis 'unsolid'. I mean, I get from your blog that you're fairly "Go Israel! Boooo Lebanon", but this doesn't really seem fair.

    From my perspective Billmon's analyses have been among the most even-handed and lucid. He gives credit where credit is due, and doles out the brickbats where appropriate - on both sides of the conflict. He's been almost overly sensitive to continuing to condone Hizbollah's actions every time he mentions the reality of what he thinks may happen next, and the corner(s) into which each of the parties have painted themselves.

    Personally, I wish any and all bloggers that opine about the Lebanon/Israel conflict could refer to a boilerplate condemnation somewhere, stipulating that Hezbollah is really, really bad, so that we wouldn't have to read the same caveat every time someone takes a stab at assessing the region and trying to figure out what might happen next.

    It may seem a small point to bring up, but I noticed it because it seemed like a bit of a cheap shot at a writer I really respect from a writer I really respect.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:53 AM  

  • By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:56 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home