Friday, March 11, 2005

Lebanon On The Edge

The Jerusalem Post's Caroline Glick tackles the tenuous situation in Lebanon as her topic in this Friday's Column One: Don't wobble, Mr. President. Terror group Hizbullah is attempting to position itself as a "local" organization but that's complete folly:

If Hizbullah were interested in simply dominating Lebanese politics, then its best bet would have been to hop onto the anti-Syrian bandwagon. Under no danger of being viewed as an American or Israeli stooge, Hizbullah could have easily won the hearts and minds of Lebanese. The fact that Hizbullah is willing to endanger its local popularity in order to protect Lebanon's unpopular overlord in Damascus shows that while it may have local political attributes and aspirations, Hizbullah's position as a key member of the Iran-Syria alliance is central to its identity.

As long as Hizbullah is still around, armed, calling the shots -- there will never be fair elections in Lebanon. Of course, that's how Syria and Iran want it -- for various reasons. If they're to lose Lebanon, they lose their portal to launch terrorist attacks against Israel in the north, plus it could light a match of unrest in Syria, possibly toppling Bashar Assad's government. Now Assad owes Hizbullah, so the power they had over them isn't as strong. And this could spell out even more trouble.

The fact that young Assad now owes Nasrallah, coupled with the fact that Syria, Iran and Hizbullah are deeply enmeshed both together and separately in fueling the Palestinian terror war against Israel, means that Israel today faces a different situation on its northern border than it faced a month ago.

You would think the international community would be very wary of this, right? No, not our morally bankrupt band of bandits. Kofi Annan has said that the UN should recognize Hizbullah! Can you believe that?! He let loose this idiotic humdinger:

"Even Hizbullah [is] talking about non-interference by outsiders... which is not entirely at odds with the Security Council resolution, that there should be withdrawal of Syrian troops."

The EU is no better, but that's not a surprise. The kick in the teeth though came from my own government:

Most disturbingly, Thursday's New York Times reported that the Bush administration is about to follow both the UN and France's lead in accepting Hizbullah as a legitimate political force in Lebanon. According to the report, which sources in Washington claim was leaked by the State Department, "the Bush administration is grudgingly going along with efforts by France and the United Nations to steer the party into the Lebanese political mainstream."

IF THIS report is true, it would indicate that the White House is allowing its Lebanon policy to be taken over by the UN, Europe and the State Department in much the same fashion as its policy toward the Palestinians was hijacked two years ago.

With this, she talks about how originally the Palestinian state was supposed to be dependent on the PA reforming by stopping terror and turning into an economically transparent democracy. Instead, the US has foolishly (my word, not hers) allowed Palestinian anti-terror and democratic reform to be held hostage to Israeli concessions. A hideous outcome if you ask me.

And rather than force the PA to stop using its militias to terrorize and intimidate all democratic – yet unarmed – forces into silence, the road map regime has ignored such voices in Palestinian society and has said nothing as Mahmoud Abbas has signed the execution orders of dozens of Palestinians accused of working with Israel against terrorists.

And now we're in danger of having some similar foolishness happen in Lebanon. If that happens and freedom is deterred, Bush's doctrine is going to be in big trouble.

As it has joined the accomodationist camp in its treatment of the PA, the Bush administration has ignored the fact that Hizbullah, like Syria and Iran, sees all areas transferred to the PA's security control as bases of operation for the forces of global jihad. Rather than accept that Israel's presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza – both military and civilian – is the only obstacle preventing these areas from becoming terror bases, the Bush administration, under the influence of the same voices calling for acceptance of Hizbullah in Lebanon, has accepted as truth the red herring that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria are somehow antithetical to peace and security.

We could be in trouble here, folks.


At 9:49 PM, Blogger Esther said...

Just wanted to say that it looks like Blogger is working again.

At 10:55 PM, Blogger patrickafir said...

Caroline is right, I'd say. Plus, your analysis is impressive as well, Esther.

I think ultimately Hizbollah is beholden to Syria. If Syria wanted to wipe them out (which, of course, it doesn't), the world wouldn't care, for the most part. Iran takes care of Syria because Syria takes care of Hizbollah, because they are its arm in Lebanon and beyond.

Watching Hizbollah's increased involvement in the PA through funding and logistically supporting Palestinian Arab terror groups over the last year has convinced me of their long-term aspirations there. I also happen to think that larger Salafi groups like al-Qaeda will be looking to do the same.

This is why I think Sharon is going ahead with the disengagement. I think that he wants to be divested of any and all responsibility for security in the PA. Then when a cataclysmic terror attack comes, on the scale that Hizbollah or al-Qaeda are capable of, he will be free to put the lights out for good.

It's a frightening time to only be able to stand by and watch.

At 6:06 AM, Blogger American On Line said...

I do not see the power center here as Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah, etc. Those labels are more and more locations, while the power center is the Shi'a themselves.

We now have the Shi'a controlling Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon and we know their view of Israel. It is from that vantage point that I see a greater danger to Israel than does Caroline Glick.

At 8:04 AM, Blogger Sergeant America said...


One can neither ... take the arab out of "religion," nor take "religion" out of the arab ... or so it seems!

I personally hope when Armageddon arrives ... these politicians who hide behind the garments of mullahs burn in HELL for all eternity! :(


I am also extremely tired of ME names for these blaggards! I offer that they be numbered... 7734 is what I favor for Hizbollah. (...for all I know{?}, "Hizbollah" means "Those who sodomize goats while waiting for the traffic signal to change and fondle little boys from behind in a celebration to allah!") ;) (no reference to Michael Jackson intended)

At 9:00 AM, Blogger Gindy said...

I don't know if it is true, but I read a lot of the protestors in the 500,000 person protest were from Syria.

I will have to look into it further. And yes, it does seem like blogger is working again.

At 10:39 AM, Blogger Esther said...

Thanks patrick for your kind words. I believe Hizbollah is bad news, no matter how you slice it. They need to be disarmed before the ME has any hope of moving forward, imo. Your thoughts on Sharon's reasoning is shared in my household.

Marty, not sure I agree. You've got Sunnis in Saudi Arabia and Arafat was Sunni....

SA, I feel your anger and identify with it...

Gindy, i read that too. Syria's going to pull out all the stops -- their survival in power depends on it.

At 11:39 AM, Blogger American On Line said...

Esther, that is why I did not mention either Saudi Arabia or Arafat's gang. It is the Shi'a gang that I refer to. I have always believed that the Shi'a gang sponsored, financed and trained many of the terrorists or their controllers that attack Israelis. Today, that gang now has huge footholds in Iraq, Syria, Iran, and Lebanon, and I dare say willing proxies in the West Bank and Gaza. Hezbollah's recent rise in stock value now has greater leverage on Israel's Nothern Border. The Lebenese protest shoving match last week placed Hezbollah and Syria in a significant power position as evidenced by Lebanon's reinstatement of pro-Syrian premier Omar Karami.

At 11:43 AM, Blogger Esther said...

I was referring to your statement of Shi'a as power center. To me, a major source of power lies with the Saudis and therefore the Sunnis. While I admit your list is rather powerful, I didn't think it was as simple as Shi'a. Sunnis are no slouches.

At 12:57 PM, Blogger American On Line said...

No, they are not Esther.

At 4:35 PM, Blogger patrickafir said...

Marty, my Lebanese-American friend agrees. He says that the Shi'a are the most dangerous group in the region. It seems to me that Salafist groups like Hamas and al-Qaeda are, at least for temporary gain, able to put their hatred of the Shi'a mushrikeen aside in the interest of fighting Israel. Bashar's regime has the Alawhites in control. They're all Muslims, and jihad is just part of Islam. The piles of cash and arms from Syria and Iran sure do keep the wheels of jihad greased, though.

At 5:24 PM, Blogger Esther said...

The only thing the different factions in that part of the world have ever been able to agree on is their hatred of Israel. It's the only unifying force.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home