|
I've supported Hizballah's actions in the Southern part of Lebanon until Israel's withdrawl in May of 2000. From 1982 until then, Israel was clearly occupying Lebanese territory and Hizballah was rightly viewed as a Lebanese resistance movement by a large majority of Lebanese, whether they be Christian or Muslim, and/or left or right-leaning.
Ever since then, however, I've been ambivalent about their role in Lebanese politics and society in general, but tolerated their actions in the South because they generally acted as a deterrent to potential Israeli threats/attacks on Lebanon and have done and continue to do enormous amounts of social and humanitarian work in the formely occupied areas, unlike the Lebanese government that clearly wasn't/isn't capable or interested in investing any significant amount of resources in the affected areas. I did, however, view the Shebaa farms pretext that is usually given to justify their continued presence there as rather unbelievable, considering the fact that none of the maps ever drafted by the Lebanese government included the farms on the Lebanese side of the border. The Wikipedia article on this is rather fair and balanced. This, coupled with clear support for Hizballah from Syria and Iran, who clearly have their own agenda with Israel, and Nasrallah's claims that Hizballah intended to widen their scope of operations to support Palestinian resistance against Israel, though noble in intent, left me torn as to my position via-a-vis their actions, and worried about a potential slip-up that may cost Lebanon dearly in the long run.
Fast forward to yesterday's actions and this slip-up may have just occured. Although I admire Nasrallah for all he's done for Lebanon, and consider him to be quite astute as a military strategist, I fear that he may have committed a massive blunder. It is rather clear that Hizballah is strongly influenced by its external funders and donors (see Syria and Iran), but Nasrallah has always toed that line between defending Lebanon first and foremost and executing orders from Syria rather marvellously until recently. His vociferous support for Syria's continued presence in Lebanon during the Hariri saga was damaging enough, but Hizballah's current actions that have put the entirety of Lebanon at risk are even more so. The kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers was a move in solidarity with Hamas and the Palestinian struggle in Gaza and their kidnapped soldier situation (and Nasrallah has admitted as much), and it also occured in the aftermath of IDF fighter jets violating Syria's sovereign airspace on June 30th with Syria vowing retribution. Click here Although I do believe that this operation was planned by Hizballah a while back to secure the release of 3 Lebanese fighters still in Israeli hands that were not let go in the 2004 prisoner exchange between the two parties (click here), it's clear to me that Hizballah, through orders from Syria, was waiting for the right opportunity to unleash this.
Because of this, I cannot justify supporting Hizballah in their actions yesterday. Although I strongly support Palestinian resistance against Israeli aggression, and usually laud any debilitating action against Israel, Hizballah cannot claim any moral or ethical mandate on behalf of all Lebanese vis a vis the Palestinian situation or any other situation external to Lebanon, which is what would be required since all of Lebanon is at risk now. Hizballah is alienating a large portion of the Lebanese population (see non Shias) with their current actions, and I only hope that Nasrallah wakes up soon enough to realize this.
As for Israel, they have officially lost their marbles. Their actions, causing massive civilian casualties (already in the 40s) and infrastructural damage is absolutely, positively, beyond disproportionate. The entirety of Lebanon is being punished for the actions of a militant organization that does nor represent a majority of them or their views (or at the very least, a very large minority of them). Olmert's government is going to plunge Israel into a real mess if they decide to sustain their Lebanese offensive and bring in ground forces as planned. We all know what happened to Israel last time they tried to occupy Lebanese territory. Furthermore, their continued insistence on blaming the Lebanese government for Hizballah's actions reeks of ignorance or pretext. Surely they know that the Lebanese parliament is dominated by Anti-Syrian members that would have never given the "ok" for this operation, and that they are completely powerless to do anything vis a vis Hizballah, save begin a new civil war in Lebanon. Either way, if they really think they can recover their kidnapped soldiers and eliminate Hizballah by attacking/invading Lebanon, they will be sorely disappointed.
|
. I know exactly where tathi stands. I know he doesn't approve of any attrocities and injustices suffered by eigther side. What pissed me off was the wording, "how does Israel expect to maintain the moral high ground when it's actions are as bad as Hamas?" I know he doesn't think Israel is or was on any type of moral high ground. It's the kind of language used in political discourse, specifically in this conflict, that makes me sick. And I'm not attributing that to tathi at all. Which is why I said:
How legitimate.
