Just a little light fun, the International Crisis Group's latest policy report on Lebanon "Hizbollah’s Weapons Turn Inward."
« Revised Predictions | Main | Health Care Finance Versus Health »
Weekend Reading
17 May 2008 11:39 am
Comments (5)
The ICG thinks the crisis hurt Hezbollah politically with ethnic groups other than Shiites. I'm skeptical until I see a poll. Westerners are always quick to believe the relatively pro-Zionist factions in the Middle East are more popular than they are.
The ICG's "solutions" do not include one-person one-vote electoral reforms. The tenacity with with western analysts oppose this emininently reasonable Hezbollah demand is notable. Not surprising but notable.
So the ICG says that Hezbollah should not be disarmed "for now". Not surprising but notable. If it was up to the will of the Lebanese people, Hezbollah would not be disarmed, ever.
So while this is presented as a proxy fight between Iran and the United States, the US is the side that is trying to distort Lebanese politics into preventing an outcome that would bother Israel a lot more than it would bother anyone in Lebanon.
And a reminder, before the most recent events, there were three Lebanese who supported Hezbollah most for every one who supported Siniora's government most.
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2008/0414_middle_east/0414_middle_east_telhami.pdf
(pp58-59) Maybe that has changed, probably it has not changed much. We'll know when we next see a poll.
ICG: "Pressure on the heads of the Future Movement to bolster its military capacity will grow;"
This was in fact the origin of their problems. They hired a bunch of mercenaries, who promptly ran like hell when faced with the committed Hizballah troops. This has been covered by numerous commentaries on the situation in the press. Look it up.
Trying to hire more mercenaries isn't going to help.
"simultaneously, some militants will be drawn to more radical, possibly jihadi movements."
It was George Bush who signed a finding authorizing the CIA to try to set up such movements as a counterweight to Hizballah. First, that resulted in the shootout in the refugee camp, and now the Bush pressure on Siniora to crack down on Hizballah for the benefit of Israel. So far it would seem the CIA is losing badly against Hizballah, which is no surprise.
"Its other allies, notably Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader, appear demoralised and defeated."
Ditto.
"The army, too, has been damaged, unable to restrain the opposition and harshly criticised by the ruling March 14 coalition as well as many ordinary Sunnis."
It is well known that the Army is composed of mostly Shiites. It is also clear from the observed behavior of the Army vis-a-vis the Hizballah checkpoints - Hizballah easily turned them over to the Army when they were done demonstrating their capabilities - that the Army basically thought the entire Siniora initiative was stupid and counter-productive - which it was.
The Army knows full well it cannot resist Israeli aggression against Lebanon. That task falls to Hizballah and this will not change. Therefore the Army has no motivation to take on Hizballah, even if it could - which it can't. If the Israeli army, which is vastly more powerful than the Lebanese Army, can't destroy Hizballah, how is the Lebanese Army going to do so - especially when half its troops are Shia who support Hizballah?
This is truly stupid commentary.
"The risks of an escalating sectarian conflict are real and dangerous."
The problem is quite simply Israel. Israel conducted a series of assassinations in Lebanon which it then blamed on Syria, in order to force Syrian troops to withdraw, thus opening the way for its 2006 attack on Lebanon. This was intended to destroy Hizballah, and thus allow Israel to drive the Palestinians out of Israel into Lebanon, and at the same time seize much of Lebanese territory especially the Litani River water rights. It was a plan of naked imperialist aggression.
This effort failed miserably when Hizballah handed Israel it's ass, having correctly divined Israel's intentions for years and having correctly and professionally prepared to resist them.
Now Israel is planning a major attempt to destroy Hamas as soon as Bush leaves. This is likely to be followed up by another attempt to destroy Hizballah, and probably Syria as well, in concert with US attacks on Iran. Israel will probably try to get the US to join in on attacks on Syria - as an ally of Iran - and possibly Hizballah as well.
All these efforts will be massive failures. Israel will end up fighting Hizballah on one front, the remnants of Syria's forces in their rear, and Hamas in Gaza bleeding Israel's occupation forces, while Iran bloodies the US in Iraq and elsewhere.
One more attack on Lebanon and the Lebanese government will fall because it is rightly considered a lackey of the US and Israel, and Hizballah and its allies will then take control of it.
When Bush attacks Iran, Iran and Iraq's Shia will join together to destroy the US military forces in Iraq, stop all ship movement in the Gulf, and conduct terrorist attacks throughout the world on US and Israeli assets.
Fourth Gen War is in the cards, and the US and Israel cannot win such a war. Of course, that doesn't matter to the oil companies and military-industrial complex war profiteers for whom the war itself is the thing.
The only losers will be the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian, Iranian, Iraqi, Lebanese and Syrian - and some US - civilian dead, the US and Israeli military dead (serves them right for being stupid anyway), and the US and Israeli taxpayers.
It looks like a useful report, one that gives the lie to Matt's claim that Hezbollah is growing more powerful.
Hizbollah clearly prevailed in the military showdown, demonstrating its ability to overrun any opponent. Politically, however, the balance sheet is far different. Outside its own constituency, it is seen more than ever as a Shiite militia brutally defending its parochial interests rather than those of a self-proclaimed national resistance.
Global Research now says that the US and Israel intended to launch air strikes on Beirut in support of a coup by anti-Hizballah forces, but Hizballah learned of it beforehand and moved more quickly than expected. The plan was canceled when it became apparent it couldn't work.
Apparently the Bush-Israeli plan was identical to their actions in Gaza - get a bunch of thugs to take over the government in support of "democracy". But just like in Gaza, where Hamas moved first and defeated the Fatah thugs, Hizballah was able to defeat the hired mercenaries of the other side.
Did Hezbollah Thwart a Bush/Olmert Attack on Beirut
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9006
Money Quotes:
But what Intelligence Chief Yadlin did not reveal to the Israeli public was just how 'significant' but also 'immediate' the Hezbollah threat was on May 11. Nor was he willing to divulge the fact that he received information via US and French channels that if the planned attack on Lebanon's capitol went forward that Tel Aviv was subject, in the view of the US intelligence community to 'approximately 600 Hezbollah rockets in the first 24 hours in retaliation and at least that number on the following day'.
The Israeli Intel Chief also declined to reveal that despite Israel's recent psyche-war camping about various claimed missile shields 'the State of Israel is perfecting', that this claim is being ridiculed at the Pentagon. 'Israel will not achieve an effective shield against the current generation of rockets, even assuming no technological improvements in the current rockets aimed at it, for another 20 years. And that assumes the US will continue to fund their research and development for the hoped for shields' according to Pentagon, US Senate Intelligence Committee, and very well informed Lebanese sources.
The planned attack on Beirut
According to US Senate Intelligence Committee sources, the Bush administration initially green lighted the intended May 11 Israel 'demonstration of solidarity with the pro-Bush administration militias, some with which Israel has maintained ties since the days of Bashir Gemayal and Ariel Sharon.
In the end, 'the Bush administration got cold feet', a Congressional source revealed. So did Israel.
Israel was not willing to proceed with the original Bush Administration idea which was to have Bush attend the May 15 Israel anniversary celebrations following the Israeli attack meant to hit Hezbollah hard, and give Bush the credit for coming to the dangerous region. The message was to be that Bush comes to the rescue 'on horseback and leads the US Calvary charge straight out of a B western movie where the bugle would sound and flag would be unfurled and the white hat good guys would show their stuff before riding into the sunset and back to Texas, leaving the results to the likely Obama administration to sort out.
The plan involved Israeli air strikes on South and West Beirut in support of forces it was assured would be able to surprise and resist Hezbollah and sustain a powerful offensive for 48 hours.
Also presumably disturbing to Israel was the report it received that Hezbollah 'had once again in all probability hacked its 'secure' military intelligence communications and the fear that the information would be shared with others.
The Hezbollah rout of the militias in West Beirut plus the fear of retaliation on Tel Aviv, ruining 60th anniversary celebrations, forced cancellation of the supportive attack.
The Bush administration, also disappointed, switched tactics and is opting for domination of the narrative of the fairly complicated events of the past week and using their media and confessional allies to launch a media blitz (minus Future TV for a few days} to flood the airways with:
· Hezbollah staged a coup d'état. Even Israel, if not the Bush administration, concedes Hezbollah has no interest in taking over the Government. (One observer, paraphrasing Winston Churchill's comment, deadpanned, 'Some Hezbollah Coup! Some Hezbollah Etat!')
· Hezbollah brought its forces from the South and occupied West Beirut: Hezbollah not only did not bring their forces from the South to Beirut (rather they remained on alert for an Israel attack down South)
· Hezbollah broke its pledge not to use Resistance arms against Lebanese militias and shot up West Beirut.
The facts are very different when viewed close up on the streets here.
When the Lebanese Resistance took the decision during the early hours of Friday morning to engage in civil disobedience, it delayed its actions so as not to preempt the Labor movement strike for higher wages which it supported. When the marching Strikers were prevented from moving into West Beirut the Opposition extended its civil disobedience manifestation.
Various militias, including the smartly outfitted Hariri 'Secure Plus' with its distinctive maroon tee-shirts and beige trousers, (now know locally by some as 'Secure Minus') a hoped for future Blackwater operation in Lebanon disintegrated surprisingly quickly because many of its green recruits brought down from Tripoli felt misled and betrayed regarding their job description as they were handed weapons an instructed to fight Hezbollah. Snipers from anti-Opposition factions killed civilians from rooftops in Beirut trying to ignite a civil war.
Hezbollah, acting in self defense, according to various officials, quickly clamped down on the trouble makers, took control of the streets, within hours handed them over to the army, and virtually evacuated West Beirut, retaining one position near Bay Rocks manned by unarmed representatives.
Meanwhile the Hariri influence has been greatly weekend in Akkar near the Palestinian Refugee camp of Nahr al Bared and in the Tripoli area. According to some political analysts, including, Fida'a Ittani, a regular columnist for the independent pro-opposition newspaper Al-Akhbar, wrote on May 14, the Future Movement, defeated in Beirut, no longer has any serious influence in the north.
Several Salafi al Qaeda admiring movements are present in Lebanon and like Fatah Islam's declaration this week that they will fight for the Sunnis, they vary in their attitudes from silent opposition to Future leader Saad Al-Hariri to fully supporting him as the leader of the Sunnis. These groups are valued by certain 'leaders' in Lebanon because are the only ones with coherent structures at the ideological, political, technical, and field levels.
Comments closed May 31, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
An excellent summary: until this proxy war is brought to close the Lebanese will continue to suffer. Fisk's reports are well worth reading too.
Posted by Chris Dornan | May 17, 2008 1:48 PM