The Middle East is doomed by the repetition of history. With the latest escalation of violence between Israel and Lebanon it seems that all that can be done is to despair at the stupidity of it all.
Hezbollah are simply suicidally stupid. They have effectively dragged Lebanon to the precipice of another war that the Lebanese people do not want by declaring that if Israel wants open war then Hezbollah will oblige. Hezbollah cannot hope to win a war against Israel and it is unlikely that they even care. Suggestions have been that Hezbollah are acting as proxies for Syria and Iran. This may be so but this suggestion is speculation at the moment. It does seem that Hezbollah launched the incursion into Israel as a show of support for Hamas. Supporting Palestinians obviously goes over well in Arab politics. An interesting analysis in the Jerusalem Post reveals Hezbollah, while happy to use the Palestinian cause for their own ends, has not done much to ease the plight of Palestinians in Lebanon. A recent Amnesty International report reveals how poorly Palestinian refugees are treated by the Lebanese government and how the treatment is justified by the notion of return to Palestine.
The question now is what effect the Israeli attacks on Lebanon will have on the Lebanese people? While Israel has the right to protect itself (especially since Hezbollah has escalated rocket attacks aimed at the Israeli city of Haifa), the Israeli response seems aimed to punish all of Lebanon not just Hezbollah militants. The Lebanese government is a fragile coalition of Sunni, Shiite, Druze and Christian Lebanese. Israel’s use of force may be a heavy-handed effort to force a divide between Hezbollah and the rest of Lebanon. However it is possible that any political or religious divisions could be put aside to unite Lebanon against Israel. Unfortunately this question cannot be answered for now. If Israel is correct then Hezbollah may lose though the price may be terrible for Lebanon. If Israel has miscalculated then the situation has the potential to be a disaster for all involved.
The same approach is more likely to backfire in Gaza. An opinion piece in Haarretz by Gideon Samet makes the important point that there is a distinction between Gaza and Lebanon (and at the same time is an interesting insight into the divisions (Palestine) and unity (Lebanon) in Israeli politics – often overlooked in discussions on Israeli policy). Israel seems to be trying to make life miserable for the Palestinians so that they will turn against Hamas. Hamas is the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people and Israel seems intent on destroying the Hamas government. Which is at odds with the United States declarations of wanting to promote democracy in the Middle East. This will lead to a deeper distrust by Arab nations regarding the real intent of United States Middle East policy (which itself seems largely one of inaction such a rejecting calls for a cease fire).
While the actions of Hamas’ militant groups are at the expense of the Palestinians, Israel does itself no favours by engaging disproportionate response against the Palestinians. The destruction of their infrastructure will only deepen the humanitarian crisis and likely solidify support for Hamas.
Israel deserves peace. But so do the Palestinians and the Lebanese. It is not a matter of who started it. It is the matter of who has the courage to break this senseless cycle of violence.
Update:Armaniac asks What Could Israel Have Done?
Don’t necessarily agree about the proportionality question, Shaun, but this was another great post. Very interesting.
Yes, great post, Shaun.
Shaun Cronin:
Hezbollah may be suicidal but they are certainly not stupid; anything but.
And so we enter Stage Three of the Third World War or The Forty Years War …..
btw, I think I read today that Russia has missed out on WTO membership; if this is so I wonder what effect this could have on the conflict?
Thoroughly agree with the conclusion, Shaun, and a good analysis.
Olmert’s political weakness needs to be taken into account here. His coalition is more disparate than he might have liked, Labour stronger, and he hasn’t the legitimacy Sharon had (or the ability to tread lightly while still being seen as strong). It’s here that some good diplomacy from the US - from someone like Condi Rice could exercise some considerable influence.
I’d also be very surprised if the US is prepared to see this situation continue for too long given their other strategic interests and the economic imperatives (markets, oil price) at stake. Sharon had Bush captive to his direction. One would hope the more pragmatic players in the administration could reverse that.
Shimon Peres is now on Cable saying its really an Iranian operation.
He says that it is not a matter of geography it’s all a matter of defending Israel.
IRAN is the Israeli focus here.
I should probably add less of my drunken ramblings in favour of more considered and informed words of others.
Billmon has a few posts on the usefulness (or not) of Olmert’s bombing campaign
While the Head Heeb doesn’t hold out much hope about negotiations - too many actors, not enough authority and (apparently) no political will on the US’s part.
Billmon link
Leinad et al
It’s too late to lay blame ( or too early as I don’t know which) but Israel has now chjoice but to elimiate the real threat or reduce the threat, that only leads to Iran.
Joe, you’ve been rambling on about this Iranapocalypse for the better part of a year now. Every bang, peep and whisper you hear from the middle east seems to lead to Tehran and Teh Evil Persians.
Has fear taken over your life? Do you look in your tea leaves for omens of Iranian doom? Freecall the Leinad Institute on 1800-FORGET-ABOUT-IRAN-FOR-ONE-SEC-WILL-YOU?. The benefits - a clear head, relaxed and healthy attitude to world affairs and no more Mullahs in your nightmares - will really make your day.
LeinadCare: call it direct, call it collect but call it today!
Leinad
Have i been wrong in warning about Iran so far?
Israel’s position is powerfully put by its representative to the UN here.
Uh. Lessee.
1) Joe: Ahmedinejad is crazy!!11 and will bomb israel!!111 (paraphrased)
Hasn’t happened.
2) Joe: OMG Iran has nukes!!!
Nup. They’ve got a basic fuel cycle. They’re decade away from producing anything like weapons grade uranium.
3) Joe: Teh NOrth KoreAns are selling Iran nukes and Iran willll nuke Israel!
Yet to see any evidence for this, aside from Joe’s ouija board.
0/3 ain’t good. Stick to monetarist crankery at catallaxy.
Whatever Iran has done or not done, is doing or isn’t doing …. I myself am simply wondering about nuts-and-bolts transport and other logistics problems the Iranian army might face if they went outside the borders of Iran itself in force.
1) Joe: Ahmedinejad is crazy!!11 and will bomb israel!!111 (paraphrased)
1 You diagree he’s crazy? Has Iran bombed israel? Well an Israeli ship just took an iranian missile and so did Haifa. H now has missils that can hit any part of Israel. Unless I’m mistaken Iran has donated those weapons to H. So yes, you can say the Iranian crazy has bombed Israel.
2. 2) Joe: OMG Iran has nukes!!!
Nup. They’ve got a basic fuel cycle. They’re decade away from producing anything like weapons grade uranium.
Well Israel has said last year they were 12 months away from nukes. What do you know we don’t?
3) Joe: Teh NOrth KoreAns are selling Iran nukes and Iran willll nuke Israel!
that was speculation. I said , we dont know if they have. Would it really surprise you?
” 0/3 ain’t good. Stick to monetarist crankery at catallaxy.”
Let’s not start that here.
Mark on 16 July 2006 at 11:00 pm
Yes. We should have left unwell enough alone. In the ME there are no good polities, only various forms of lesser evil. SH on a leash was better than his people unleashed, both for the world and Iraq.
Saddam was never anyones “man”, least of all the US. Remember OPEC in 1973? Kuwait in 1990?
Of course democracy is a radical form of “social construction”. It was, as Burke noted, a profoundly destabilising force in Northern jurisdictions. It is now a radically destabilising force in Southern Hemipsheric jurisdictions.
Obviously it would be nice if democracy could spread throughout the whole wide world with no problems. Unfortunately this is not the case.
It does not work very well in Middle Eastern-type states at this moment. Democracy is very much a GIGO process. These places provide an electorl input of grass roots sectarian elements. So the governmental output will not be good.
It requires majority rule and minority rights granted to “dissenters” within, and adjacent, to the state. Does this sound like a typical ME state?
What the ME needs is moderate dictatorships that grant some space for their civil societys to evolve in a civilised direction. The state should concentrate on building a self-sufficient monocultural nation rather than a roiling collection of warring tribes and sects. Members of civil society should concentrate on making money, rather than settling scores with their neighbours.
And our domestic Wets and Hawks should take note of the potential for harm caused when ideologues, whether infatuated with the weekend travel supplements or grand strategic doctrines, try to turn a mish-mash of alien and barbaric cultures into a functioning democracy, or vice-versa.
Rob, from the Israeli ambassador’s speech:
Doesn’t this bit:
which points out that up until very recently (March 2005) the Lebanese government has been at best a Syrian puppet and at worst one of Downer’s proverbial BACs…
…contradict this:
which imputes to the Lebanese government a much greater degree of control and hence responsibility than was admitted to above?
How can Lebanon be both a civil war ravaged Syrian puppet and powerful enough to disarm Hezbollah at the same time?
Joe:
1) learn some history. Iran’s been selling Hizbollah weapons since they co-founded the venture in ‘82. This ain’t news.
2) The Israelis said that twelve months ago. Iran still hasn’t nuked ‘em. Maybe perhaps they were being a bit loose with the truth?
3) so you were talking out your proverbial. That;s ok then.
” 1) learn some history. Iran’s been selling Hizbollah weapons since they co-founded the venture in ‘82. This ain’t news.”
Except the old weapons weren’t capable of hitting major Israeli cities. now they are.
you see a difference and if so does that make the issue a little more dramatic.
” 2) The Israelis said that twelve months ago. Iran still hasn’t nuked ‘em. Maybe perhaps they were being a bit loose with the truth?”
It doesn’t matter what we think or what Lainad intel thinks, it’s what Israeli intel thinks. You don’t know more than what they said last year.
Jack Strocchi at 1:14am:
Well, not quite. Depending on what you’re looking for, some are probably a lot better than others …. but I do take your point.
The old saying “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread” would apply to a lot of The West’s involvement in the Middle East.
Your last paragraph will surely get you crossed off some Christmas card lists in Canberra; that won’t worry you though.
Leinad, I think Gillerman was saying, ‘We put it back on you to fix it and you couldn’t. Now we have to sort it out for you all over again’.
The body language between the israeli and Lebanese representatives during the debate was very interesting.
Indeed Joe - the last thing we need is 457 comments from GMB about a topic virtually no one can understand.
Just a reminder to play nice on this thread, avoid stereotyping others, and remember the seriousness of the issues.
Conservative blogger, Michael Totten is part of the Pajama Media collective. He also lives in the Middle East, and has some interesting comments.
He also has this to say about Hezbollah’s stubborn presence within Lebanon.
Now this fellow is a staunch pro-Israel, Pro-War on terror supporter. It sounds to me as if Israel has made a huge error of judgment that could have devastating consequences for the entire world.
The fact that the US and Israel are now blaming Syria and Iran leaves us in no doubt where this is potentially heading.
Alex, there’s no doubt at all that Israel is putting it hard back on the Lebanese. They’re saying, It’s your country, your territory, and Hizbollah is part of your government. Over to you - or over to us. It’s a merciless diktat, because Israel knows Lebanon’s government is weak, and powerless in the south.
Israel hasn’t made any error. It’s read the situation on the ground very well. It’s struck hard at terrorist strongholds in Beirut — I would have more faith in Israeli intelligence about where and what it’s hitting than in Totten. It’s dropped flyers to tell people to get out of the way — good for humanitarian reasons, bad for military ones, since it allows their targets to decamp as well.
And there is no doubt who is behind Hizbollah: Syria and Iran. It was an Iranian missile that Hizbollah fired at the Israeli warship the other day, and Iranian troops are currently deployed to Lebanon to train and assist them.
The situation is dire, there’s no doubt of it. But Hizbollah — not Israel, not Lebanon — brought this about.
Rob,
The latest reports state that 106 people have been killed, and all but four are civilians. That’s not intelligent precise bombing - it’s clearly indiscriminate.
The new Lebanese Government has not been given a chance to control Hezbollah. The country showed great fortitude by overthrowing the pro-Syrian government. Neocons worldwide have spoken of the Lebanese government as being the model for the region. So what happens? Israel bombs the living shit out of the place, which will clearly result in Hezbollah gaining more power as regular Lebanese watch their country destroyed by a hostile neighbour.
Hezbollah operates in a very specific part of the country Yet Israel bombed parts of Beirut including vital infrastructure. This is indefensible.
The death toll in Israel from Katyusha rocket strikes is also rising, Alex. This isn’t a police action: it’s a war.
And Hizbollah militants are civilians. They are not soldiers. Who’s to determine the real nature of the dead?
The strikes against infrastructure are intended to prevent the re-supply and reinforcement of Hizbollah from Syria, and to stop the captured soldiers being spirited to a safe haven.
It’s horrible, and it’s bloody, but it’s a war. And Hizbollah started it.
The AFP is running with a story that Israel is using ‘phosphorous weapons’ on Lebanon’s civilians.
Quots and photos up here :
http://www.yournewreality.blogspot.com
The photos resemble the ones out of Fallujah when the US was accused of using the very same weapons on hundreds of civilians.
————————-
There seems little discussion on whether the US is truly backing Israel all the way here.
From what I’ve read in Bush and Condi Rice quotes, they’ve laid down the law, in a low-key way, to Israel and now they’re standing back to see what happens next.
As far as the war spreading wider, I wrote in a post here months ago (which made Mark L laugh), that Russia will not tolerate any attacks on Iran or Syria, and neither will China. Both Russia and China have more money invested in Syria/Iran than Israel, and they’ll protect their “national interests” just like Howard Corp. did when the Iraq War was being blue-skyed.
Iran and Syria know this, of course, but no doubt Russia has warned them not to get involved as well.
But here’s the prob : Hizbullah surely know what Russia and China will and will not allow, so they can provoke Israel with Haifa and perhaps Tel Aviv strikes knowing Israel will only go so far in hitting back.
It seems Israel’s options are far more limited than Hizbullah’s.
Plenty of US, Australia, Russia, China, UK money has been invested in Beirut in the past few years, and there’s going to be a lot of very pissed off people looking Israel’s way for compensation if this ends before it truly ends.
How quickly we forget that Lebanon was the star pupil in the US Democracy Rollout across the Middle East less than a month ago, with or without Hizbullah.
The true winners so far?
The arms makers and traders who will be resupplying Israel and Hizbullah with hundreds of millions of dollars worth of new weapons, tanks, shells, bullets, assorted killbot accesories and necessities, in the coming months.
Then again, the arms merchants are always the winners, in every war.
While people argue endlessly about the moral high ground and who was right and who was wrong, who started this war, who fired up this confrontatio,n and whether or it was illegal or not to slaughter however many civilians, the arms merchants slink away to palatial Dubai hotels filled with re-virgined hookers where they get Bolivian flake cocaine blown up their arses and laugh themselves stupid until dawn about just how much a good old Righteous Fight is still worth in US dollars.
“Suggestions have been that Hezbollah are acting as proxies for Syria and Iran. This may be so but this suggestion is speculation at the moment.”
What????
You jest surely. What do you mean by this? Do you mean simply that they make some day to day decisions on their own? Or do you mean that Iran and Syria are not responsible for them.
Our main problem is how do we keep Israel re-supplied and fighting until the regimes that sponsor terrorism and incite hate are no longer alive.
“The latest reports state that 106 people have been killed, and all but four are civilians. That’s not intelligent precise bombing - it’s clearly indiscriminate.”
Why can’t we call people like this names Mark?
So how is THAT part of Israels war aims fella?
“….which will clearly result in Hezbollah gaining more power as regular Lebanese watch their country destroyed by a hostile neighbour.”
Not if they are all dead and imprisoned and the Sauds, Iranians and Syrians are too frightened to re-establish any networks.
There’s never been an effective network of dead terrorists without funding yet.
If Russia acts to limit Israeli actions then Israels back will be pressed more firmly into a corner - not a good position to put a well armed, trained and motivated adversary.
If Russia has invested heavily in Syria and Iran….what role do they play in the formation and support of Hizbollah and Hamas?
Clearly Russia has no stomach for a direct confrontation.
With respect, Rob, who has faith in intelligence after Saddam’s WMD?
I’m afraid I don’t think there will be any peace in the ME as long as the Zionist state exists and also think that eventually there will have be a one-state solution in Palestine.
Gaza is nothing but a huge atrocity/prison camp and it seems the Olmert gov’t wants to inflict same on Lebanon
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14006.htm
So many of the so far 100 civilians killed are children, it’s just appalling. As if that such actions could win the release of the soldiers captured by Hizbollah (or Hamas)
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,,1821576,00.html
Uri Avnery argues that the soldiers’ plight is but a pretext for something much bigger http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14004.htm
The Amnesty report is interesting - they confirm what Israelis have argued for some time, that the Arabs have no sympathy for their own kind.
It would appear public opinion is slowly changing - only a little while ago the Left were only too keen to carry the flag for the Muslims, support for terrorist groups is now dwindling.
All due respects, Kim, but I for one would never, ever misunderestimate Mossad. Using a Bushism.
Seriously though, about Mossad.
From a former head of the American Jewish Congress:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/israel-must-beware-the-cost/2006/07/16/1152988409591.html
Even so, Another Kim, what about Michael’s point?
I have lost a child and know what is happening in the hearts of those who lost a child today. If they are still alive themselves.
I am almost dumbstruck.
Kinda like this…
“Crying in the street and can not be comforted, because her children are lost.”
The Bible.
Being appalled or dumbstruck does not help to understand the situation. I am appalled by those parents who volunteer their children for suicide bombing.
If you think that it is all down to Zionism then what is the connection with Lashkar-e-Taiba?
Rog..I can be dumbstruck and still support the destruction of terrorists. I hold both positions at once.
Inconvenient and uncomfortable position.
fair enough AK.
On the contrary Another Kim, I have extreme confidence in Mossad to get its hands on accurate intel… just not to share it with us.
which may or may not be for the best!
Au contraire, Michael G.
Perhaps we do not want to know.
Shorter Rog: If you’re not with us you’re with the terrists and teh leftists.
Rob re
Photos from Lebanon of many dead women and children do have a tendency to tell us the “real nature”
The reasons for Hizbollah’s creation from June 1982 would be the more pertinent discussion.
Hezbollah today = Syrian and Iranian terrorists.
Sorry, but I believe you’ve fallen into the trap of mincing and hand wringing in an effort to demonstrate impartiality.
The left needs to do so. Often we fail to acknowledge terrorist acts for what they are, or to accept Israel’s need to defend itself.
But this is wholesale slaughter, pure reprisal.
You say:
=”Israeli response seems aimed to punish all of Lebanon not just Hezbollah militants. “=
You think? Over 120 dead in Lebanon, over 50 dead in Gaza, nearly all civilians?
What this is making me wonder is what exactly would be enough to make those who always defend Israel actually stand back and say- now they are going too far?
What WOULD they say if for example a nuclear device was used on Tyre?
“OH but it’s all Hizbollah’s fault, so it’s fine to seek brutal reprisal against civilan populations and destroy Lebanon once again.”
Kim’s quote above get’s to the nub of the issue- it is not that Israel was not justified taking a hard response, it is the response they’ve taken that is the problem.
It is a blundering admission of defeat, because clearly Israel, widely acknowledged as having the world’s most competent (head for head) commandos and fighter pilots, clearly felt incapable of isolating and attacking Hizbollah strongholds.
For what it’s worth I will have a stab at doing a post on what would have been legit Israeli action, to demonstrate the difference between defensive measures and pure reprisal.
If Hezbollah chose different hiding spaces other then civilian areas then perhaps it would go different.
Civilian shields are NOT the way to play it.
Orwell, naturally, on war stories:
I’m impressed myself that we’re even getting into the realm of speculative atrocity. Nuking Tyre? Eh?
Alex, has your typing freed up a bit of rigor in your fingers?
So there were Hezbollah fighters ‘hiding’ on the runways of Beiruit Airport?
‘Hiding’ bang in the middle of every bridge in the south?
This isn’t Hezbollah using human shields. This is Israel deliberately attacking civillian infrastructure. They’ve admitted as much.
Leinad…damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
Taking out targets that will assist in further strikes should other choose to use the airport.
If we must decend into the blame game, probably the Brits should cop the most approbrium, for creating the “twice promised land”–ie. promising to give Palestine to the Arabs and to the Jews simultaneously. But while speaking of “terrorism” some history is being repeated here, somewhat ironically, which the knee jerk “terrorist” labellers should bear in mind.
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy/display_acts.php?year1=1945&year2=1949
Now while Israel was created by the UN, there’s a lot of history that Palestinians can’t quite forget, not the least of it being the Brits spitting the colonial dummy, they:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan
Ultimately, if anyone is to blame for this whole bloody mess, it’s the Brits. Pointing the finger and accusing non-state actors as being automatically “terrorist” in attempts to occupy the high moral ground are futile and not at all conducive to resolving the world’s most intractable FUBAR.
AK: they didn’t have to do that. It wasn’t damned if you do. Read the Michael Totten piece Alex posed above.
They could have bombed Hezbollah targets in the South (where they, y’know, are?), and been perfectly justified in retaliation. Instead they ranged all over the north, bombing anti-Hezbollah districts and general civilian infrastructure, indiscriminately.
It’s a stupid, bloody, callously vengeful policy that does Israel no favours.
Leinad, have you got a link to that ‘admission’ ?
Ah, yes. Irgun and the King David.
Argue with dead people.
Alex, has your typing freed up a bit of rigor in your fingers?
??
mG: They don’t even have to admit it, what else could bombing Beirut airport first up be? It was not a Hizbollah target. The fuel reserves the Israelis torched on Day 2 weren’t terrorist avgas.
From the horse’s mouth:
Hizbollah is launching the rockets. All of Lebanon is getting bombed.
Few readers of a British newspaper would have noticed the story. In the Observer of 25 June, it merited a mere paragraph hidden in the “World in brief� section, revealing that the previous day a team of Israeli commandos had entered the Gaza Strip to “detain� two Palestinians Israel claims are members of Hamas.
The significance of the mission was alluded to in a final phrase describing this as “the first arrest raid in the territory since Israel pulled out of the area a year ago�. More precisely, it was the first time the Israeli army had re-entered the Gaza Strip, directly violating Palestinian control of the territory, since it supposedly left in August last year.
As the Observer landed on doorsteps around the UK, however, another daring mission was being launched in Gaza that would attract far more attention from the British media – and prompt far more concern.
Shortly before dawn, armed Palestinians slipped past Israeli military defences to launch an attack on an army post close by Gaza called Kerem Shalom. They sneaked through a half-mile underground tunnel dug under an Israeli-built electronic fence that surrounds the Strip and threw grenades at a tank, killing two soldiers inside. Seizing another, wounded soldier the gunmen then disappeared back into Gaza.
Whereas the Israeli “arrest raid� had passed with barely a murmur, the Palestinian attack a day later received very different coverage. The BBC’s correspondent in Gaza, Alan Johnstone, started the ball rolling later the same day in broadcasts in which he referred to the Palestinian attack as “a major escalation in cross-border tensions�. (BBC World news, 10am GMT, 25 June 2006)
Done, now don’t go calling me anti-semitic:
What COULD Israel have done?
Alex’s 17 July 2006 at 2:18 am point about
Conservative blogger, Michael Totten’s conclusion that Israel has made a huge error of judgment is welcome point of light amidst much polemical heat.
Israel has bitten off more than they can chew. They have behaved as if Hezbollah were capable of driving the state of Israel into the sea. And instead of seeking to build a pro-Israeli consensus in Lebanon, their actions have alienated potential supporters. Israel is now committed to rooting out Hezbollah from Lebanon. This is a task they are incapable of achieving.
In the meantime, as if the profile of the COW weren’t wretched enough already in the Islamic world, their association with Israeli disproportionality and adventurism has provided fresh impetus for radical Islamism. This will play very badly in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Indonesia…
If one believes that the power and patience of the COW are inexhaustible, then this consequence of Israel’s adventurism is not important.
But it is clear that the steadfastness of the COW is very questionable. Therefore, Israel’s adventurism is manna from heaven, so far as radical Islamists are concerned.
And to forestall any suggestion that I’m an apologist for Islamist fanaticism, I am not. Like the Conservative Totten cited by Alex I want them defeated.
But I’m appalled by the idiocy of the Bush Clique and their minions. Pandering to Israel’s adventurism is just one more example of this stupidity. For it is certain that Bush knew and was told by Olmert Israel’s intentions. Bush then signed off on it.
Another well-informed analysis:
Whatever may be the fate of the captive soldier Gilad Shalit, the Israeli armyÃs war in Gaza is not about him. As senior security analyst Alex Fishman widely reported, the army was preparing for an attack months earlier and was constantly pushing for it, with the goal of destroying the Hamas infrastructure and its government. The army initiated an escalation on 8 June when it assassinated Abu Samhadana, a senior appointee of the Hamas government, and intensified its shelling of civilians in the Gaza Strip. Governmental authorization for action on a larger scale was already given by 12 June, but it was postponed in the wake of the global reverberation caused by the killing of civilians in the air force b! ombing the next day. The abduction of the soldier released the safety-catch, and the operation began on 28 June with the destruction of infrastructure in Gaza and the mass detention of the Hamas leadership in the West Bank, which was also planned weeks in advance.
A brief timeline of recent events
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/7/16/165555/760
Kos, eh? Should one post something just as far to the right?
A timeline of future events:
IDF bombings extend to Syria
Iran retaliates against Israel
IDF bombs Iranian nuclear sites
Iran invades Iraq (attacks USA)
or:
IDF bombings extend to Iran, especially nuclear sites
Iran ivades Iraq (attacks USA) or Iran militias attack with Iranian support
Either way the Americans want Iran bombed so the war can only escalate. At the moment world opininion is being tested and things are looking goog for the NEOCONS.
Actually Flute, I think I just worked out that you called me extremely boring. That’s a little harsh!
Nice comment, Katz, and I agree.
Roight..
Americans want the world to explode in f’ing nuclear fury.
We wait in breathless anticipation of that.
I just can’t wait. Really. None of us can. Escalate now!
“Israel deserves peace. But so do the Palestinians and the Lebanese. It is not a matter of who started it. It is the matter of who has the courage to break this senseless cycle of violence.”
Well I’m sorry but this is glib and meaningless. There is no point in one side breaking the cycle if the other side sees it as weakness and attempts to take advantage of the situation.
A similar argument would be that the Americans should have had the courage after Pearl Harbour to not intervene in WWII. Now where would that have left us? In deep shit I suspect.
It is all so very easy to make “all we need is love” type comments from the safety of an ergonomic desk chair in the sleepy land of Oz.
Israel cannot seriously be expected to break the cycle of violence while the Palestinians support a Government that is dedicated to its annihilation and refuses to negotiate. Similarly, Israel cannot be expected to do nothing decisive when Hezbollah, which is likewise dedicated its destruction, takes pot shots at it from southern Lebanon.
Israel has no choice other than to break the back of those who seek to destroy it via some very serious shock and awe.
Once the Palestinians are resigned to the fact that they must reach a negotiated settlement with Israel then both sides can return to the negotiating table and some progress may be made.
Peter Kemp seems to be intent on some type of “Fabrication of Middle Eastern History” ala Keith Windschuttle. It is absurd to pick out one thing in the enigmatic history of the Palestine/Israel conflict and label it definitive and then apportion blame accordingly.
A prophesy in December last year on Israel’s attitude to Iran’s nuclear program. It appears that Condi may have seen sanctions as the best option, and hence the exact date mentioned did not come to pass. His analysis shows that the IDF plans are fixed in place so Iran will be bombed on this analysis:
Never has an imminent war been so loudly and publicly advertised as Israel’s forthcoming military attack against Iran. When the Israeli Military Chief of Staff, Daniel Halutz, was asked how far Israel was ready to go to stop Iran’s nuclear energy program, he said “Two thousand kilometers” Â the distance of an air assault.
More specifically Israeli military sources reveal that Israel’s current and probably next Prime Minister Ariel Sharon ordered Israel’s armed forces to prepare for air strikes on uranium enrichment sites in Iran According to the London Times the order to prepare for attack went through the Israeli defense ministry to the Chief of Staff. During the first week in December, “sources inside the special forces command confirmed that ‘G’ readiness  the highest state  for an operation was announced” (Times, December 11, 2005).
On December 9, Israeli Minister of Defense, Shaul Mofaz, affirmed that in view of Teheran’s nuclear plans, Tel Aviv should “not count on diplomatic negotiations but prepare other solutions”. In early December, Ahron Zoevi Farkash, the Israeli military intelligence chief told the Israeli parliament (Knesset) that “if by the end of March, the international community is unable to refer the Iranian issue to the United Nations Security Council, then we can say that the international effort has run its course”.
In other words, if international diplomatic negotiations fail to comply with Israel’s timetable, Israel will unilaterally, militarily attack Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the Likud Party and candidate for Prime Minister, stated that if Sharon did not act against Iran, “then when I form the new Israeli government (after the March 2006 elections) we’ll do what we did in the past against Saddam’s reactor.” In June 1981 Israel bombed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq.
Even the pro-Labor newspaper, Haaretz, while disagreeing with the time and place of Netanyahu’s pronouncements, agreed with its substance. Haaretz criticized “(those who) publicly recommend an Israeli military option” because it “presents Israel as pushing (via powerful pro-Israel organizations in the US) the United States into a major war.” However, Haaretz adds “Israel must go about making its preparations quietly and securely  not at election rallies.” (Haaretz, December 6, 2005). Haaretz’s position, like that of the Labor Party, is that Israel not advocate war against Iran before multi-lateral negotiations are over and the International Atomic Energy Agency makes a decision.
Israeli public opinion apparently does not share the political elite’s plans for a military strike against Iran’s nuclear program. A survey in the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth, reported by Reuters (December 16, 2005) shows that 58 per cent of the Israelis polled believed the dispute over Iran’s nuclear program should be handled diplomatically while only 36 per cent said its reactors should be destroyed in a military strike.
All top Israeli officials have pronounced the end of March, 2006, as the deadline for launching a military assault on Iran. The thinking behind this date is to heighten the pressure on the US to force the sanctions issue in the Security Council. The tactic is to blackmail Washington with the “war or else” threat, into pressuring Europe (namely Great Britain, France, Germany and Russia) into approving sanctions. Israel knows that its acts of war will endanger thousands of American soldiers in Iraq, and it knows that Washington (and Europe) cannot afford a third war at this time.
The end of March date also coincides with the IAEA report to the UN on Iran’s nuclear energy program. Israeli policymakers believe that their threats may influence the report, or at least force the kind of ambiguities, which can be exploited by its overseas supporters to promote Security Council sanctions or justify Israeli military action.
Interesting discussion so far.
Steve,
Yes, it is all so very easy to make “all we need is loveâ€? type comments from the safety of an ergonomic desk chair in the sleepy land of Oz. and it is just as easy from the same comforts to say Israel has no choice other than to break the back of those who seek to destroy it via some very serious shock and awe. especially when you don’t have to deal with the consequences.
The Israeli ’shock and awe’ is likley to only further violence in the Middle East. The Palestinians already have nothing to lose. The Israeli tactics are only going to reinforce support for Hamas. Israel do have choices and they have made the wrong one in Gaza. It is too early to tell what will happen in Lebanon.
Good post Armaniac. Have added a link from the OP.
In the six years since Israel pulled out of Lebanon, Hizbollah has amassed an arsenal of 13,000 missiles, sourced from Syria and Iran. The missile that struck the Israeli warship off the coast of Lebanon was from Iran.
Hizbollah hosts many of these weapons in civilian houses. If Israel takes these weapons out, tragically there will be loss of civilian life — but it’s Hizbollah that positions them there deliberately to provide them with permanent human shields.
So far Israel has targeted:
-10 Lebanese military radar stations along the coast
- Hezbollah’s main headquarters in Beirut
- Hezbollah’s broadcasting compound - its major outlet for propaganda and incitement
- Structures for storing weapons including Katyusha missiles
- Katyusha launching grounds
- Some 20 Hezbollah operational centers in Baalbek and Beirut
- Several bridges and other Hezbollah infrastructure points across Lebanon.
That response doesn’t strike me as indiscriminate or excessive.
And what steve munn said.
The big losers in all this?
The Palestinian nonterrorists.
Deserted (as always) when not being used as pawns by major Arab players.
Thanks Leinad. Are you suggesting that the airport has no strategic significance for Hezbollah or are you suspicious of the fact that it was the first target?
I think your analogy is misleading Steve; the argument is not ‘all we need is love.’ It is more like, this seemingly interminable situation has been going on for decades and is fueled by the mutual animosity of both parties and quite often by the tactical wonts of outside parties. So let’s try and break the circuit.
I agree that at the moment it is not fair to ask the Israelis to renounce violence, both defensive and offensive (A few years ago it was different - How did Hamas come to be elected again?) but it is fair to ask them to keep their response proportionate. Not to mention, well actually Shaun did mention, thata disproportionate response is highly likely to prove counterproductive. If everything goes up, then I s’pose all bets are off, but this’ll probably seem like small fry.
Shorter Steve Munn: History that records Irgun’s Monachem Begin as a terrorist is the perfidious British armband version.
Bartleby:
This is an instructive piece from Ynet
Look who’s been kidnapped!
Hundreds of Palestinian ’suspects’ have been kidnapped from their homes and will never stand trial
Arik Diamant
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3271505,00.html
Israel exists, deserves the the right to continued existence and to defend itself against terrorists.