Archive for politics
August 5, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
Chibli Mallat (a professor of law at Saint-Joseph University in Beirut and former candidate for president of Lebanon) is blogging on the NY Times website.
he published the following post earlier today (requires timeselect, so i copy/pasted):
Three weeks into the war between Israel and Hezbollah, some patterns have emerged. In the first week, Israeli security officials declared that they wanted to bomb Lebanon back 50 years, and indeed destroyed over 40 bridges across the country in the first few days, as well as a large number of factories, over 30 according to the Association of Lebanese Industrialists. Then the targets changed radically.
Clearly prompted by the United States, the Israeli government announced an objective alliance with the Lebanese government on the latter’s exclusive sovereignty over its territory and borders. Israel then acted accordingly in its warfare. On a handful of occasions, which have puzzled the observers, Lebanese army points were targeted, but non-Hezbollah areas were rarely hit. The map of destruction was characteristically Shiite; only few missiles were fired in other areas. In Beirut, destruction was limited to a perimeter of about one and half square kilometer, now known as the security quadrangle, which consists of a small, poorer section in the Shiite suburbs, where Hezbollah’s sway has been historically dominant.
I went on Tuesday to see for myself that area of Beirut where I had been a guest on the Manar TV station a few times before 2004. Some of the neighborhoods have been bombed to Ground-Zero-like lunar places, with ten-story buildings reduced to rubble. It is hard not to feel sad at the sites.
Much destruction can also be found in the south of the country — from Tyre to the Blue Line, and various parts of the western Bekaa, close to the border, and in the historic city of Baalbeck, which lies much further north.
This is a Hezbollah-Israel war, but sociologically it is a Lebanese Shiite-Israeli Jewish war. Probably 90 percent of the people who fled their homes in Lebanon — some 800,000 people by United Nations accounts — are Shiite. This represents nearly a quarter of the Lebanese people. I suspect close to 95 percent of the more than 800 Lebanese killed so far are Shiite. Camp Palestinians also have remained outside the main war zone. So have Syria and Iran.
Consequences of this glaring split on the domestic Lebanese situation are difficult to fathom, and all politicians have rightly endeavored to manifest a patriotic sympathy for the plight of Shiite Lebanese. Politically, such contradictions will in time be more difficult to paper over.
For my part, I do not find it healthy to carry on with a dual language, which is deafening in most Lebanese political circles — wishing wholeheartedly for Hezbollah’s military defeat, while professing in grand speeches a desire for unity. I feel strongly about the suffering of my Lebanese compatriots, as I do about Israelis’ suffering by-and-large. And I take pride in non-Shiites opening their homes and offering hospitality to the refugees. I prefer, however, to voice my open disagreement with Hezbollah over the start of the war and the way it is being prosecuted. I think that candidness in times of violence and death on such a scale is needed, and that the narrowing of the gap between private and public talk in politics will yield a far healthier result in due course, and will help accelerate a workable cease-fire.
On Friday morning, Lebanon awoke to the destruction of one power plant four bridges north of Beirut, all outside the Shiite areas, cutting the capital off from the north. Concern will grow high: is a new pattern emerging?
this is in my opinion a rare candid description of the conflict. it is natural for non-shiite lebanese to fill frustrated, angry at israel, humiliated. but once they let their emotions settle and look at the situation rationally i hope many of them will reach the same conclusions as mallat.
mainly that the conflict is not between israel and lebanon, bur rather between israel and the hezbollah. i also hope israel will remember who the enemy is and will keep its targeted attacks.
August 4, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
i am reading opinion columns from the NY Times, Haaretz, Salon, Slate, Washington Post and much more blogs than i would like to admit. my head is starting to hurt.
i think we are in a classic "fog of war" situation. the lack of knowledge of the public, the contradictory press releases of both sides, the "experts" and monday morning quarterbacks (me included) voicing opposing views, all lead to a situation where i don't think it is clear to anyone what is really going on.
is israel wining? is hezbollah winning? does the israeli campaign makes any strategic sense? were the hezbollah surprised by the israeli response? were the israelis surprised by the hezbollah's response to the response? how much did israel damage hezbollah's infrastructure? is israel/hezbollah achieving its goals? what are these goals?
i guess it is just too early to answer most of these questions, and to distinguish between news and propaganda.
hopefully the mess will be over soon, so historians can start their work and generate their contradictory accounts and analysis..
August 4, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
maskit sent me this link to the NY Times website showing the "destruction in southern beirut" (i believe it is similar to a previous link sent by itai).
it shows the "before" and "after" of a hezbollah neighborhood in beirut. i think this is a good example of the extreme measures israel is taking to pinpoint its bombing on hezbollah targets. israel also provided warnings (by dropping leaflets, radio messages, SMS messages, voicemails) to the people living in this neighborhood to leave. it is an area of 1sq Km. it is also clear to see that israel took extra care not bomb a school and a church.
August 3, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics, religion
after a long and thoughtful analysis iran's president, ahmadinejad, came up with a solution to the middle-east crisis.
the solution: destroy israel.
it has a very sound logic behind it. if israel is destroyed it will immediately resolve the the israeli-palestinian conflict, as well as the current conflict with the hezbollah. this is the type of ideas that when you hear it you say "how come i didn't think of it earlier", so simple, so elegant, so obvious.
ahmadinejad acknowledged that his solution can no be applied immediately, so in the meantime he suggested a cease-fire, so iran and its friends (syria, hezbollah, hamas) can have some more time to put together the means to destroy israel.
it is rare these days to see a politician who is both a visionary and a realist.
let me suggest another solution. topple the iranian regime. hezbollah and hamas will lose a major funding source, iraq will have an easier path towards stabilization, syria will remain isolated and weak. and the arab world may come to the realization that the path to regain their lost pride is found through investment in education and industry rather than in nuclear weapons and terrorism.
August 2, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
the news media and blogsphere is filled with misinformation regarding israel's holding of lebanese "hostages" in its jails. some claim 9,000 prisoners (but this is actually counting the Palestinian prisoners that has nothing to do with lebanon), others just say that israel is holding lebanese prisoners "without trial", which is according to their logic similar to the kidnapped soldiers held by the hezbollah.
the most coveted lebanese prisoer is Samir Kuntar. nasrallah almost blew up the 2004 prisoner exchange deal (israel released the remaining 400 lebanese prisoners it has in its jails in return for a kidnapped ex-colonel and the bodies of 3 soldiers), because israel was not willing to release Kuntar.
so who is samir kuntar and how did end up in the israeli jail. here is a short summary:
On April 22, 1979, Samir Kuntar was the leader of a group of four terrorists who entered israel from lebanon by boat. Just after midnight they arrived to Nahariya not far from the lebanese border. the four murdered a policeman they came across and broke into an apartment of the Haran family. The took 28-year-old danny haran hostage along with his four-year-old daughter einat. The mother, smadar haran, was able to hide in a crawl space above the bedroom with her two-year-old daughter yael. Kuntar's men understood that there were more people in the house and went around looking for them, shooting and throwing hand grenades.
After holding to the hostages, a shootout with israeli police and soldiers erupted. samir kuntar shot and killed the father at close range in front of his daughter, and then murdered the four-year-old girl by smashing her head with the butt of his rifle against a rock, crushing her skull.
Tragically, the two-year-old girl was accidentally suffocated to death, when her mother desperately tried to keep her quiet. A policeman and two of Samir Kuntar's unit were also killed. Kuntar and the fourth participant in the shootout were captured. the latter, ahmed abarrass, was freed by israel in the 1986 prisoner deal in return for three israeli soldiers.
kuntar was tried and convicted for the murders of danny and einat haran. he has also admitted his complicity many times and expressed pride about the killings.
samir is a hero in lebanon. his pictures can be found in many villages. he is portrayed as a hero of the great lebanese "resistance" movement.
a true hostage held without a trial, right? if you are a hezbollah supporter and want to show your support you can find ways to do so in samir's site. if you want to read an account of that night by the mother you can find it here.
August 2, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
there is a story in salon.com with the title: the "hiding among civilians" myth
it is written by mitch prothero a journalist that has been covering several conflicts in the past few years. he makes a big statement by labeling the hezbollah activity from within civilian population a myth, since this is the rational for the israeli bombing of cities and villages. if it is a myth it means that israel is targeting civilians for the sake of targeting civilians. not different from the hezbollah.
beside making the big statement he does little in his article in terms of backing up that claim. he provides anecdotal evidence from his personal experience, which is a common and effective method to make a point but it does not do much in terms of proving the point.
israel claims they trace where the rockets are fired from, and that in many cases they indeed come from within the cities and villages.
now you can claim israel is lying and they are just killing civilians for some unknown purpose (for sure it does not serve their interst), but to buy into that theory you need to believe there is a wide spread conspiracy. thousands of soldiers and government officials are involved. which is obviously ridiculous. but it's hard to argue with conspiracy theories.
August 2, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
in the middle east flag burning is a popular way to spend a few hours when there is a nice day outside (most days), it is usually accompanied by chanting "death to israel, death to america". in what are very challenging times for businesses in lebanon, gaza and the west-bank, flag makers must be making a killing.
here is a great piece from bill maher about flag burning.
August 2, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
this article from the herald sun (a rupert murdoch owned newspaper) in australia had the title of this post sans the question mark.
they article claims it demonstrates the immorality of the hezbollah, fighting from withing the civilian population. i saw this picture in other newspapers and on TV.
i don't see how this specific picture proves anything. this is not an offensive weapon (like a katyusha rocket launcher), but rather a defensive anti-aircraft gun. since israel is conducting air raids on civilian neighborhoods i think it is legitimate for the hezbollah to deploy anti-aircraft guns among civilians.
July 31, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
another news item brought to my attention by tom.
the french foreign minister visited lebanon to show france's solidarity with lebanon. from the sound bites quoted in the media he made remarks regarding iran's role in the region. he said that "iran is a key player in the Middle East and plays an important stabilizing role in the region" and "We think more than ever than the Iranians are an important and respected actor".
maybe he meant to use "could", "should" and "would" and just forgot. maybe it was lost in translation. maybe he is just trying to fill the vacuum left by the incompetent US foreign policy and crisis handling. maybe he believes what he says.
iran could play a stabilizing role. but it is currently doing the opposite. sending money to extremists fueling violence. encouraging provocations. i can think of more stabilizing actions.
iran should be an important and respected actor. iran has the history, size, scale and aspirations to lead the muslim world. they could send money to build schools and universities in lebanon, rather than build bunkers and terrorist training camps. it could invest in infrastructure and health care, rather than invest in rockets and missiles. it could invest in growing its own economy and culture, rather than invest in building nuclear weapons.
my guess is that the french foreign minister has read the "clash of civilizations", and is trying to apply its logic to the present situation. i think his logic is flawed, or just ahead of its time. maybe once the current radical is out of office, maybe when the ayatollahs are out of power, maybe when the muslim world will stop pitying itself and blaming the west, maybe then.
July 31, 2006 at · Filed under middle east, politics
tom sent me this link to a blog that is going into excruciating detail analyzing the abuse of the Qana tragedy (i refuse to call it a massacre) for PR purposes.
he also sent me a couple of links to blogs that are putting together a conspiracy theory, claiming the hezbollah is responsible for making the building collapse. i don't believe these conspiracy theories have any merit, but i don't doubt that the hezbollah is doing its best to gain as much as possible from this event.
like many things in this conflict this is done on both sides (abusing tragedies for PR purposes), and also like many other things the hezbollah is taking it to the extreme and is acting according to a completely different moral code. israel would publish photos of death and destruction, but would never parade bodies of children and pose to cameras trying to generate the most dramatic scene possible.
the palestinians did similar things in jenin a few years back. they actually spread bodies of animals in the debris, letting them rot, and then taking reporters on a "horror tour" with the unbearable smell as an extra spice to the drama.
these things are unbelievable, but true. it goes beyond cynicism. it is just disgusting.
« Previous entries ·
Next entries »
