It’s Lebanon’s Problem, Too

The politically correct term for the new war is the Israel-Hezbollah War, but it’s much more than that.  Lee Smith, writing from the heart of Lebanon, sees a populace that thinks this war is about anything but them – and they’re wrong:

Israel’s Lebanon campaign is a serious escalation of a regional conflict that involves, among others, Iran, the United States, Syria, Israel, Shiite militias, and Sunni extremists. Some believe that the U.S.-Iran standoff represents a Middle East Cold War, which is also a way for many Lebanese to say that this is not really about Lebanon, or that Lebanon is only a venue for Washington and the Islamic republic to vent their issues. So, some Lebanese think it is about everyone else besides them, as though there were decisions made so far over their heads that they can barely guess at the machinations and deals that have been made without their consent.

And yet the international community—especially the United States and France—has, over the last year, explained quite clearly that Hezbollah is a serious problem. Several U.N. resolutions, as well as almost every Western diplomatic initiative here, have emphasized the urgent need for the Lebanese government to disarm what the U.S. State Department calls a terrorist organization. Instead, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora and other national leaders have insisted that Hezbollah is neither a terrorist group nor a militia, but is rather “the resistance” and nothing but “the resistance.” In other words, we side with the Party of God and agree that their arms benefit all of Lebanon! And then, this week, the democratically elected government disclaimed responsibility for the actions of Hezbollah, which is part of the government. The Lebanese are not innocent bystanders; they did not tempt their fate, they ignored it.

It’s worth repeating the Israeli strategy; it seems highly unlikely that a ceasefire will come until Lebanon disarms Hezbollah, or at the very least, occupies southern Lebanon with government troops.  One thing is crystal clear: one way or another, Hezbollah will leave southern Lebanon…

4 comments to It’s Lebanon’s Problem, Too

  • dmac

    It’s always the same old song – you never win by appeasement. You just succeed in kicking the can further down the road – looks like they just ran out of road over there.

  • Melissa In Texas

    It appears to me, that Israel is finally standing up and setting an example for the world to see.
    Israel is indeed a force to be reckoned with.
    Hesbollah and Hamas, I do believe are close to extinction.
    Would that our own country (As Israel is doing) could say to the rest of the world – “We are taking care of those that threaten and attack us! Diplomacy with these people has failed – if you do not like it – stay out of the way and let us finish the job”
    The world should applaud them for it!

  • Sean P

    I guess this is a case where I agree with most of my political colleauges in principle but have serious reservations about the specific application of that principle.

    I agree that there should be no distinction between terrorists and the countries that harbor them, but there should be a distinction between a country that HARBORS terrorists and one which has been insufficiently vigilent in rooting them out. It is Syria that armed Hezbolla (with a major assist from Iran) and Syria that is using Hezbolla as their proxies to exert de facto control over Southern Lebanon, in violation of the demand made by Lebanon, the US and the international community to leave Lebanon alone. Lebanon is not a terrorist state, and its people are not terrorist sympathizers, it is a country that has been torn apart by outside jihadists and forced under Syria’s boot for a generation, and that desparately wants to return to normalcy. I believe that it was this desire that deluded Lebanon to believe that they could live with the terrorists.

    I understand Mark’s point — that Isreal’s goal is to force Lebanon to do what it has been reluctant to do so far (since disarming Hezbolla could spark a civil war), but I still believe a strike directly on Syria, if effective, could have accompished the same goal, as it would have distracted Syria and given the Lebanese people the opportunity to do what they already wanted to do.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>