Yourish.com

06/11/2009

The Obama administration’s contribution to the election in Lebanon

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

I expressed some skepticism towards the claim that President Obama’s Cairo speech helped boost the prospects of the March 14 coalition. I also offered my own suggestion that perhaps the speech scared Christians into voting for the coaltion.

Max Boot writes that the speech was largely inconsequential as a factor in the election. Boot argues (echoing a sentiment expressed by Robert Satloff):

Kudos to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vice President Joe Biden for visiting Beirut and reaffirming their support for Lebanese independence. The Obama administration, as Michael Totten noted, has made clear that it will not sell out Lebanon to reach a deal with Syria or Hezbollah. The Obama administration deserves credit for that stance, which is a continuation of the previous Bush policy which made possible the 2005 Cedar Revolution that forced Syrian troops out of the country.

American support perhaps emboldened some Christian voters to vote for anti-Syrian, anti-Hezbollah candidates.

If the administration deserves credit, there’s no reason to ignore that it got Lebanon right. Michael Totten in his must-read analysis of the election writes:

I was slightly worried myself about other potential aspects of the president’s Lebanon policy before it developed, but he deserves support here from conservatives as well as from Democrats who understand that the United States can’t support a terrorist army that says, “Death to America is a policy, a strategy, and a vision.”

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

06/10/2009

The morning after the morning after three years later

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

Snoopy noted a Bradley Burston column in the wake of Israel’s war with Hezbollah in 2006 in which Burston wrote (the link to Ha’aretz has expired):

When this war is over and Israel’s troops are gone from Lebanon, and when the rage at Israel begins to subside, it will be Nasrallah’s turn - like Nasser’s four decades ago - to answer to fellow Arabs for his actions.

I was dismissive, as it appeared that Hezbollah had no intention of keeping its side of the deal - and it didn’t. I was also dismissive because Thomas Friedman had made a very similar point in “The morning after the morning after.”

On the morning after the morning after, Lebanese war refugees, who had real jobs and homes, will start streaming back by the hundreds of thousands, many of them Shiites. Tragically, they will find their homes or businesses badly damaged or obliterated. Yes, they will curse Israel. But they and other Arabs will also start asking Nasrallah publicly what many are already asking privately:

“What was this war all about? What did we get from this and at what price? Israel has some roofs to repair and some dead to bury. But its economy and state are fully intact, and it will recover quickly. We Lebanese have been set back by a decade. Our economy and our democracy lie in ruins, like our homes. For what? For a one-week boost in ‘Arab honor?’ So that Iran could distract the world’s attention from its nuclear program? You did all this to us for another country?”

(Not a surprising sentiment since Hezbollah wasn’t founded to fight Israel as much as it was to create an Islamic state in Lebanon.)

Frankly, I thought that Friedman was trying to be too cute, but he seems to be somewhat on target in this case. As the Washington Post reported the other day.

But the events of the past few years, voters said, made the campaign a broad referendum on Hezbollah. The group’s militia in 2008 briefly seized control of downtown Beirut in a bid to boost Hezbollah’s political power, a move reminiscent of the country’s 15-year civil war. And Hezbollah’s 2006 war with Israel was cited by some voters as showing the danger of allowing the group to keep its arms stockpiles.

What are some of the other factors leading to Hezbollah’s defeat? Now, Thomas Friedman even gives some credit to ex-President Bush.

While the Lebanese deserve 95 percent of the credit for this election, 5 percent goes to two U.S. presidents. As more than one Lebanese whispered to me: Without George Bush standing up to the Syrians in 2005 — and forcing them to get out of Lebanon after the Hariri killing — this free election would not have happened. Mr. Bush helped create the space. Power matters. Mr. Obama helped stir the hope. Words also matter.

“People in this region have become so jaded by the ability of their states to dominate everything and hold sham elections,” said Paul Salem, analyst of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “And mostly the world never cared. And then here came this man [Obama], who came to them with respect, speaking these deep values about their identity and dignity and economic progress and education, and this person indicated that this little prison that people are living in here was not the whole world. That change was possible.”

As I mentioned before I wonder if President Obama’s speech spurred Christians to vote in greater numbers, realizing that he was reaching out too much to the likes of Hezbollah. (I was happy to see that Michael Ledeen feels the same way.

My thinking is more along the lines of the editors of the Wall Street Journal:

This being Lebanon, talks on building a governing coalition are bound to be difficult. But in the bigger picture, this election marks a step forward since the 2005 Cedar Revolution ended the Syrian occupation. And it’s a vindication of America’s policy of democracy promotion. In Pakistan, Turkey, Iraq and now Lebanon, extremist Muslim parties didn’t fare as well as feared at reasonably free polls, and often lost ground. The outcome in Lebanon is another good reason for the Obama Administration to make democracy a priority of its so-called new relationship with the Muslim world — even if George W. Bush also happened to think it was a good idea.

Democracy promotion was decidedly not a part of President Obama’s Cairo speech.

The usually frivolous Dion Nissenbaum recalls another incident that may have hurt Hezbollah.

At the end of the day, in the battle between the pro-Western March 14 coalition and the Iran-backed March 8 rivals, the date that may have mattered more was May 7th.

That was the day last year when Hezbollah fighters easily stormed through West Beirut in a military takeover that Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah later called “a glorious day.”

What Nasrallah touted as a great day many Lebanese voters saw as a betrayal.

While Sunday’s election doesn’t signal an end to the Hezbollah threat, it is a welcome development.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

06/08/2009

Hezbollah loses (for now)

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 9:00 am

Tony Badran has a complete roundup of the results of the Lebanese election. It features of names that I’m unfamiliar with, but will be of interest with those who have a detailed knowledge of Lebanese politics. This is from his conclusion:

This balance of power will now be transferred to the battle over the cabinet formation. M14 has a clear victory, and so will pick the Prime Minister. The battle, however, will be over the heresy of the “veto third” — which has no existence in the constitution or the Taef Accord. Hariri has been consistently rejecting its continuation in the future cabinet, and he got support today from Jumblat as well, who called it a “fallacy.” M14 will agree to a national unity government, though its principled position now is that it rejects the “veto third” formula. They are making plenty of noise about giving a boost to Suleiman, and how that will materialize remains to be seen. M8 is almost certainly going to reject it and will cite the relatively weak performance of the so-called independents/centrists as support for their position.

via Barry Rubin who writes:

Whatever the result, Hizballah and its allies, including Iran and Syria, will keep up the pressure on the moderate regime, and this could mean crises ahead. One result could be that an attack on Israel from Lebanon is less likely, at least over the next year, as Hizballah and its allies don’t want to disrupt their efforts to bring Lebanon closer to their control. I hate to say this but political assassination–or at least attempts–and other terrorism could continue to be a method of intimidation.

The West is going to be challenged to provide support for the March 14 coalition government.

Legal Insurrection posts some pictures (via Instapundit).

The New York Times reports:

The tentative victory may have been aided by nearly unprecedented turnout. The preliminary results showed that about 55 percent of the 3.26 million registered voters cast ballots. Lebanese television reported that the March 14 coalition, a predominantly Sunni, Christian and Druze alliance, held at least 67 seats out of 128 in Parliament.

The Washington Post reports:

Heavy turnout in Christian districts returned to power a Western-backed coalition in the Lebanese parliament on Sunday, thwarting a bid by the Islamist Hezbollah party to increase its influence.

and

But the events of the past few years, voters said, made the campaign a broad referendum on Hezbollah. The group’s militia in 2008 briefly seized control of downtown Beirut in a bid to boost Hezbollah’s political power, a move reminiscent of the country’s 15-year civil war. And Hezbollah’s 2006 war with Israel was cited by some voters as showing the danger of allowing the group to keep its arms stockpiles.

In a statement to Agence France-Presse, Hezbollah member of parliament Hassan Fadlallah did not acknowledge the group’s defeat, but said it was important that Lebanon “turn a new page, one based on partnership, cooperation and understanding.”

I noted the emphasis on the heavy voting by Christians and wonder if it’s possible that President Obama’s Cairo speech had anything to do with the result. President Obama made it clear that he was reaching out to the Muslim/Arab world; did Lebanese Christians worry more about their future after that and thus vote in greater numbers than projected?

While this victory is good, in that it’s a setback for Iran and Syria, Hezbollah still remains a force.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

06/05/2009

Experts know best

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 9:30 am

Barry Rubin has some fun critiquing credulous reporting on the upcoming Lebanes elections.

More seriously, Amir Taheri considers the possibility of a Hezbollah victory:

If Lebanon comes under Iranian control it could become one arm of a pincer — the other being Hamas-controlled Gaza — designed to subject Israel to low-intensity warfare that would, in time, sap its will to resist. With the completion of the Israeli security fence along the West Bank within the next few months, suicide attacks would become increasingly difficult to organize. The fight, therefore, would shift to the skies with “an endless storm of rockets and missiles raining on Israel from Lebanon and Gaza,” as Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said in an election campaign message last month.

With its clients in control of Lebanon, Iran would build a naval presence in the Mediterranean for the first time since the seventh century. Experts from the Revolutionary Guards have visited the port of Beirut and prepared plans for a visit by an Iranian flotilla before the end of the summer. Six Iranian warships are already on their way to the Red Sea, ostensibly to help combat pirates operating from the Somali coast. In Tehran, there is also talk of helping Hezbollah to develop its own naval units for “resistance operations” against Israel.

And that’s not even considering how Iran would act if it would develop nuclear weapons that President Obama is anxious to convince them not to build with lots of nice words.

Crossposted on Yourish.

05/27/2009

Der Spiegel, Zionist tool

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 9:00 am

In case you’re wondering why Nasrallah’s response to the charge in Der Spiegel that Hezbollah was responsible for Rafiq Hariri’s murder, is that Der Spiegel is a Zionist tool, read Michael Totten’s take.

“[I]f (the majority) uses the report against Hezbollah,” said former Carnegie Endowment scholar and Hezbollah expert Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, “then of course we’re going to see instability in Lebanon, and that’s putting it mildly.” “One word,” said Fadia Kiwan at Saint Joseph University, “could set the streets on fire.” “If the Special Tribunal for Lebanon comes out and confirms the report,” Carnegie Middle East Center Director Paul Salem said, “we could be facing an all-out civil war.” “If these rumors are true,” my own source in Lebanon added, “expect some extremely dark times ahead in Lebanon. After all, the Sunni street hates Hezbollah enough to begin with. Once Hezbollah is officially accused of assassinating Hariri, all bets are off.”

All this raises the question: if Lebanon could plunge into war should “March 14” cite an unsourced report prematurely, what might happen if the UN officially indicts Hezbollah later?

Totten doesn’t seem convinced that the rumors are true. There does seem to be an element of whitewashing Syria’s role in the assassination attached to the rumor. (Of course, given that both Hezbollah and Syria are clients of Iran, would proof of Hezbollah’s involvement necessarily exonerate Syria?)

It does seem that Hezbollah is scared. That’s why Der Spiegel’s credibility must be undermined.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

05/23/2009

U.S. arming Hezbullah for next war with Israel

Filed under: Lebanon — Tags: , — Meryl Yourish @ 10:46 am

America has apparently learned nothing since training and arming the PLO, which then used that training and those weapons to murder Israelis. Now, we’re going to send some pretty intense weaponry that will end up in the hands of Hezbullah.

US Vice President Joe Biden promised that Washington will provide the Lebanese army with 42 fighter jets, helicopters, UAVs and tanks, Arab media outlets reported on Saturday.

On Friday Biden concluded a brief one-day visit to Lebanon, during which he met mostly with leaders affiliated with the anti-Syrian camp, including Defense Minister Elias Murr.

Murr said tat the American vice president pledged to have the said weapons delivered to Lebanon, and that the aid package would be given to the country unconditionally, although Biden on Friday said that the aid hinges on the outcome of the upcoming general elections.

How do we know this will end up in Hezbullah’s hands? This is how:

The sources attribute the recent arrests to improved cooperation between Lebanon’s many security agencies, saying that with the help of better-trained personnel and access to more sophisticated equipment, the Internal Security Forces have been intensifying their efforts to uncover espionage networks as part of an attempt to develop a pan-Lebanese image.

[...] The United States has provided $1 billion in aid since 2006, including $410 million in security assistance to the Lebanese military and police.

So yes, great idea, let’s give Lebanon advanced tanks, fighter jets, and military equipment. Because it’s not like they’re going to go to war with Israel again, or are a pawn of the Iranians and Syrians.

Words fail.

05/22/2009

Nasrallah blames Israel for all the ills of the region

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon — Tags: , , — Meryl Yourish @ 11:00 am

These are the words of the man who, in the coming months, you can expect the EU, UN, and left-leaning US crowd to call for Israel to negotiate with. Because Hezbollah, they will say, is moderating. Or because Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government, and it can no longer be ignored.

These are his words:

In a speech on occasion of the 61st anniversary of the occupation of Palestine broadcast on Monday, Secretary General of Hezbollah Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said the Israeli entity which is based on usurpation, massacres, displacement and occupation isn’t a legitimate entity and cannot be legitimate in any way.

Nasrallah affirmed that the Israeli entity is the cause of all wars, disasters and crises in the region, forcing the past, current and future generations to bear the repercussions and effects of this tumor festering in the region.

He stressed that the wars that happened in the region were imposed by this entity, and that the actions of the region’s governments, peoples, armies and resistance movements were reactions to the occupation of Palestine, which is the source of conflict in the Middle East, with the enemy counting on the Palestinian cause being forgotten and on forcing the Palestinian people to despair and abandon their land and rights.

If someone can explain to me how you can reach an agreement with the man who spoke those words, I’d appreciate it. Because from where I’m sitting, the only agreement you can reach with Nasrallah is the business end of a hellfire missile.

05/01/2009

I’m kinda fonda Jane, I’ll missa

Filed under: Anti-Semitism, Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome, Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

Earlier this month delegates from all over the world got together in Geneva for a conference on xenophobia, racial discrimination and racism.

When the United States and some European nations boycotted the proceedings, Representative Barbara Lee objected:

Those who supported the Obama administration’s attending the conference said their attitude was not altered by Mr. Ahmadinejad’s remarks. “It is unfortunate that the inappropriate and out-of-line remarks of Ahmadinejad would obscure the only international forum to address racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia,” Representative Barbara Lee, Democrat of California, said in a statement by the Congressional Black Caucus.

So the question is, left to their own devices, did the delegates, dedicated to their essential work, look into this at all?

A professor at the American University here recently ordered copies of “The Diary of Anne Frank” for his classes, only to learn that the book is banned. Inquiring further, he discovered a long list of prohibited books, films and music.

This is perplexing — and deeply ironic — because Beirut has been named UNESCO’s 2009 “World Book Capital City.” Just last week “World Book and Copyright Day” was kicked off with a variety of readings and exhibits that honor “conformity to the principles of freedom of expression [and] freedom to publish,” as stated by the UNESCO Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the UNESCO’s “Florence Agreement.” The catch is that Lebanon has not signed the Florence Agreement, which focuses on the free circulation of print and audio-visual material.

Even a partial list of books banned in Lebanon gives pause: William Styron’s “Sophie’s Choice”; Thomas Keneally’s “Schindler’s List”; Thomas Friedman’s “From Beirut to Jerusalem”; books by Philip Roth, Saul Bellow and Isaac Bashevis Singer. In fact, all books that portray Jews, Israel or Zionism favorably are banned.

And you can’t even get a Jane Fonda movie. Why not? Because she visited Israel once in 1982!

Interestingly, Samir Kuntar visited Israel and is quite a celebrity in Lebanon. But that’s different because he went to Israel to kill Jews.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

04/30/2009

Hariri suspects freed

Filed under: Lebanon, Syria — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

The BBC reported yeterday that the UN’s special tribunal investigating the assassination of Rafiq Hariri has released four Lebanese generals it had been holding as suspects in the assassination.

The UN court was set up to investigate the bomb attack which killed Mr Hariri and 22 others in February 2005.

The decision to free the generals comes less than two months before a finely-balanced legislative election that pits the pro-Syrian bloc against their pro-Western rivals, including Mr Hariri’s own political movement now led by his son.

While the BBC observes that this will likely help Hezbollah in the upcoming Lebanese elections, it claims that according to its sources the tribunal is making progress on other fronts.

The New York Times gives some more background.

The first prosecutor in the case, Detlev Mehlis, released a report in 2005 that said that the assassination had been planned by high-level Syrian and Lebanese officials, including some in the inner circle of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad. At the time, the tribunal was seen by many as a vehicle for the widespread anger here and in the West over Syria’s role in Lebanon. A string of other political assassinations took place in the following years, and they could still be included as part of the tribunal’s work if they are proved to be related to the attack on Rafik Hariri, in which 22 others also died.

The tribunal has always been controversial in Lebanon. Many supporters have seen it as a way to punish Syria and its proxies here, which they tend to blame for all the assassinations since 2005. By contrast, those in the political opposition, including Hezbollah, see it more as a political weapon aimed at their Syrian ally. They also ask why such a tribunal is warranted for the death of a billionaire politician, Mr. Hariri, and not for the deaths in the many massacres and other assassinations that have taken place here in recent decades.

One question is whether the new judge, Daniel Fransen is as scrupulous and incorruptible as Mehlis had been. The key event leading to the release of the suspects was the recanting of the witness who had accused them. Still it was reported that Mehlis had developed a pretty strong case.

Hariri’s son, Saad seemed untroubled (according to the news reports) by the turn of events, however not everyone was.

But many Lebanese seemed to view the officers’ release as a sign that the tribunal might never bring Mr. Hariri’s killers to justice.

“It is a shock,” said Samir Frangieh, one of Saad Hariri’s parliamentary allies. “Everyone knows who these men were and what they did.”

Is Saad scared to be too vocal about how he really feels? I can’t say that I’d blame him.

In a book review about Syria, Fouad Ajami writes:

The very dynasticism of the succession was a rebuke to all that the Baathists had once thought about themselves. The succession would stick, but the son, a pampered child of privilege, lacked his father’s touch. His coming-out, the defining act by which the outside world came to know him and his style, was the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, in February 2005. In the days leading up to Hariri’s brazen murder, which happened in broad daylight, outside Beirut’s seafront hotels, Bashar and his principal lieutenants had openly bullied and threatened Hariri.

Bashar himself had warned that he would “break Lebanon” over Hariri’s head if Hariri ran afoul of his wishes. The Syrians did not even bother with a convincing cover-up; an early United Nations investigation, led by a meticulous German prosecutor, Detlev Mehlis, made official and public the involvement of both the Syrian regime and its closest Lebanese satraps. (An unedited version of the report named Bashar’s younger brother Maher, his brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat, and high functionaries of the Syrian intelligence services.) Hafez, it was understood, would have gotten his way without outright murder. The father had secured hegemony over Lebanon in a meticulous, deliberate drive that took well over a quarter century. The son lost that dominion in the blink of an eye. He had misjudged the world around him. Pax Americana was right next door, in Iraq, determined to punish the Syrian regime for its subversion of the Iraqi-Syrian border, and Hariri was a friend of powers beyond — France and Saudi Arabia.

Five years earlier, there had been hopes that the young man, who had had some exposure to the West, would open up his country: U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who had turned up for the father’s funeral, returned from Damascus with praise for Bashar — he was a “modernizing reformer,” part of the Internet generation, she and her advisers said. The inquiries into Hariri’s murder shone a floodlight on the workings of the Syrian regime. This was less an organized government than a huge criminal and financial enterprise held together by a security apparatus built around the children and in-laws of Hafez al-Assad and the intelligence barons. In Damascus, it is the rule of the Sopranos.

The Daily Star has many more details and an editorial supportive of the tribunal’s decision. I’m curious what Michael Young and Michael Totten will write. Assad apologist, Helena Cobban is absolutely delighted.

I can’t help thinking that this is a revolting development.

UPDATE: A few months ago there was a report that members of Hezbollah were photographing the site at the Hague where the tribunal would be meeting. Though that report was subsequently denied there was this incident too.

UN chief prosecutor of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) Daniel Bellemare met Hezbollah officials in Beirut before heading to the Hague for launching the tribunal, local As-Safier daily reported Tuesday.

The STL was launched Sunday in Hague to try suspects in the murder of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, who was killed in a car bomb along with 22 others on Feb. 14, 2005 in Beirut.

Sources from the UN investigation committee were quoted describing the meeting between Bellemare and the Shiite armed group Hezbollah, as “fruitful and very positive,” the daily said.

Something about the release doesn’t smell right.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

04/13/2009

You look like a monkey…

Filed under: Juvenile Scorn, Lebanon — Meryl Yourish @ 7:00 am

Egypt’s war of words with Hassan Nasrallah is escalating, and the laughs just keep on coming.

An Egyptian state-controlled newspaper escalated Egypt’s dispute with Hizbullah on Sunday by calling its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, a “Monkey sheikh.”

The state-owned al-Gomhouria newspaper said: “We do not allow you, monkey sheikh, to mock our judiciary, for you are a bandit and veteran criminal who killed your countrymen, but we will not allow you to threaten the security and safety of Egypt …and if you threaten its sovereignty, you will burn!”

If they start singing “And you smell like one, too,” I want the audio.

03/14/2009

Israel and the media: Tunnel vision, blindness, or outright bias?

Filed under: Lebanon, Media Bias — Meryl Yourish @ 9:56 am

Yesterday, the Israeli press carried Hassan Nasrallah’s recorded speech released on Mohammed’s birthday. It’s a pretty important speech, you would think, since Britain has recently announced that it is seeking to establish ties to Hizbullah. And it’s a very important speech in light of that fact, since the head of Hizbullah had this to say:

“I’m telling you that today, tomorrow, even in 1,000 years, we, our children and our offspring will never be able to recognize Israel. We are capable of defeating this entity (Israel) and can make it disappear, if we join forces and work together.”

This quote, doubtless, will not find its way into the next AP article about how the U.K. is seeking to talk with Hizbullah’s “political wing.” Because I can’t find it anywhere in any current AP article. Here’s what the AP finds more important in Israel news:

American wounded by Israeli troops has surgery
An American activist struck in the head by a tear gas canister fired by Israeli troops in the West Bank was in serious condition Saturday after undergoing surgery, hospital officials said.

And this:

Israeli police fatally shoot Palestinian
Israeli police say an officer in Jerusalem has fatally shot a Palestinian man who allegedly tried to harm police with his car.

The fatal shooting occurred during a botched robbery. But it comes after a string of attacks against Israelis by Palestinians who have used bulldozers to try to run them over.

Clearly, the AP has its priorities over what gets reported regarding Israel. And the fact that the leader of a group that is set to take an even bigger role in the Lebanese government stated explicitly that it will never recognize the Jewish State is not as high a priority as reporting on the latest ISM tool to get hurt at an anti-barrier protest, or an internal police matter that would otherwise not require any mention.

The BBC reported Nasrallah’s speech. The Canadian press had it (because the AFP had it). An Australian paper had the BBC clip. Sturdy, anti-Israel Xinhua had it. Reuters didn’t. Except for the AFP, no major wire service felt that this statement by the leader of Hizbullah was important enough to send out on the wires.

Now, you might say that the news services have a ton of things to consider before deciding what is newsworthy and what is not. But let me repeat that Hizbullah is setting itself up to increase its presence in the Lebanese government this spring. The U.K. is currently initiating “low-level” contacts with Hizbullah’s “political wing.” And there have been many who think that talking to Hizbullah is a good idea—that it could move the terrorist organization towards a more moderate viewpoint. (These are the same people who think that Hamas will moderate as well.)

Let me put paid to those theories with the words of Hizbullah’s leader:

“The U.S. condition of acknowledging Israel to open dialogue with us is rejected,” Nasrallah told crowds of Shiite Moslems gathered in the southern suburbs of Beirut this evening to mark the birthday of Prophet Mohammed.

“As long as Hezbollah exists, the generations of our people could never acknowledge the state of Israel which is a hostile terrorist entity,” Nasrallah vowed.

He said that the U.S. set two conditions to start talks with Hezbollah, “acknowledging Israel and abandoning violence,” and what they meant by abandoning violence is giving up the resistance.

“The resistance is our dignity, our honor and our existence,” he stressed.

Gordon Brown needs to read the translation of the speech. Hizbullah will never accept Israel. It will never moderate. Britain’s low-level talks are a waste of time and effort.

And so I wonder—why is this speech not important enough to be broadcast around the world by the world’s major wire services?

02/21/2009

Your weekend AP anti-Israel bias

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon, Media Bias — Meryl Yourish @ 12:55 pm

A headline is worth a thousand words. See if you can find the AP headline without using your mouse. Second prize for anti-Israel media bias goes to CNN.

2 rockets fired from Lebanon towards Israel

Rocket from Lebanon wounds three Israelis: medics

Katyusha hits Galilee community; 3 lightly hurt


Israel claims woman hurt in rocket attack

That last is CNN. That’s the headline going around on the main and international websites. Yes, Israel “claims” that a woman was hurt. Palestinians state; Israel claims. That’s one of the biggest anti-Israel biases in the media—questioning everything that Israel says, buying every Palestinian “medic” or “witness” as the truth. Witness lies like the one about the UN school (which was never hit, and which did not have 42 people killed in the strike.)

This is why I read the Israeli papers regularly. To find out what really happened.

02/12/2009

Briefly

Filed under: Hamas, Israel, Lebanon, Terrorism — Meryl Yourish @ 9:00 am

Hamas feeling the PR pinch, 1: Hamas gave back the aid it stole from the UN, mostly because for the first time ever, the UN complained about it. Oh, and UNRWA stopped all aid going into Gaza because of the theft. Of course, they’re starting up again. If they didn’t supply the Palestinians, what use would there be for the organization?

Hamas feeling the PR pinch, 2: The world is finally starting to publicly admit that Hamas is a terrorist organization that cares nothing for the Palestinians. No, not really. But the world is starting to realize that if it continues to ignore Hamas’ egregious human rights violations, people are going to notice that it only blames Israel and not, say, the group that fires rockets at civilians on a regular basis. So Amnesty Intl. finally accused Hamas of war crimes (but not against Israel) and Hamas is complaining about Amnesty. Elder notes that Amnesty has not issued a statement condemning Hamas’ war crimes against Israel, but only against Palestinians. That would suggest that Amnesty still has no real problems with the constant rocket fire by the “resistance.” I used to have such respect for Amnesty, back in the day. Then again, I voted for Jimmy Carter when I had that respect. And look at them both now.

Egypt cracks down on the wrong kind of smuggling: Egypt stopped some 40 trucks filled with goods going into Gaza. But none of the trucks were carrying weapons, so who cares? (Unless the goods were bomb-making materials, which I doubt.) Call me when Egypt stops arms and weapons from going through the tunnels.

Tuna for terrorists: The IDF is on high alert today, which happens to be the anniversary of the assassination of Imad Mugniyah. Last month, a Hezbollah terrorist attack in Europe was thwarted by Israeli intelligence. Scuttlebutt is that Hezbollah is too terrified of the Israeli response to leave a trail to Lebanon. Although the 2006 Lebanon War was not a success, I’m starting to think it wasn’t a failure, either. Not if deterrence has been achieved. And oh yeah—Chipmunk Cheeks is still in his secure, undisclosed location. Because he’s not afraid of the IDF.

Okay, now you’re just being stupid: The JPost says Avigdor Lieberman may recommend himself for PM. Can you say, “Believing his own PR?” I knew you could. Now can you say, “Not a chance in hell?” I knew you could.

Israel hits the jackpot: The natural gas field off the coast of Israel is even larger than they first thought. It’s big enough to supply Israel for over 20 years—and still have enough left over to sell to Europe. Or maybe Ukraine. By the way, Hamas already tried to say that Israel was stealing the gas from the one off the coast of Gaza. Perhaps they should look at a map. The Tamar gas field is off the coast of northern Israel.

01/08/2009

Iran opens a second front?

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon, Terrorism — Tags: , — Meryl Yourish @ 2:00 am

Did Iran order Hezbullah to shell northern Israel yesterday?

A Katyusha barrage was fired Thursday at the Nahariya area in the Western Galilee. Police reported that two people were lightly wounded and evacuated to the local hospital. Several residents were treated for shock.

[...] Residents rushed to take cover in shelters and fortified areas, as children throughout the town were making their way to school.

It’s a typical terrorist tactic. They deliberately aim to kill as many children as possible.

Israel returned fire.

The IDF shelled the areas in southern Lebanon from which Katyusha rockets were fired at Israel’s north Thursday morning. There were no initial reports of injuries.

Military sources estimated that the attack was carried out by a Palestinian organization and not by Hizbullah, in light of the type of rockets used.

It could easily have been Iran’s orders. Hezbullah doesn’t sneeze without asking the mullahs’ permission. And Iranian orders were given yesterday.

A senior Iranian politician met Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in Damascus on Wednesday as the Palestinian Islamist group considered an Egyptian proposal for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Ali Larijani, speaker of parliament and one of the major figures in the Islamic Republic, met Mashaal and several high level officials from Hamas at the Iranian embassy in the Syrian capital, witnesses said.

The meeting stretched into the early hours of Thursday, with no details emerging from the deliberations. Larijani earlier met leaders of Islamic Jihad, a smaller Palestinian group with close links to Iran.

Iran thinks it’s time to up the ante for Israel, since Hamas hasn’t been able to do much against the IDF. It’s not too difficult to make the rocket attack look like it isn’t Hezbullah. But both UNIFIL and the Lebanese army increased border patrols. Yes, there was that incident in December where the Lebanese army defused eight rockets ready to launch at Israel. But I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find out that this is Hezbullah.

Time will tell.

12/31/2008

Is the price of oil keeping Hezbullah peaceful?

Filed under: Iran, Israel, Lebanon — Tags: , , — Meryl Yourish @ 8:00 am

Oil is sticking around $40 a barrel (it closed at $39 and change today). Iran is in trouble.

Iran’s president presented parliament with a sweeping economic package Tuesday that calls for scrapping costly state subsidies for fuel, water and electricity and raising taxes to make up for the steep slide in world oil prices.

The move is a risky one for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who already is facing public disenchantment over Iran’s economic problems as he heads into June elections. Economists have warned that his plan will push up prices, worsening inflation now running at 28 percent.

But it’s even better (or worse) than that.

Iran relies on oil for 60% of its budget, half of which is spent on welfare. Starved for money, Mr. Ahmadinejad proposes to free some consumer prices and cut spending. Corruption, mismanagement (inflation at 25%) and unmet populist promises already made Mr. Ahmadinejad unpopular at home. Now the austerity talk is raising the domestic temperature. In October, a strike by bazaar merchants forced the government to delay a sales tax. The universities are restive again (see “Iran’s YouTube Generation,” Dec. 15) and the government wants to push through a hated gasoline rationing plan.

Apparently, Iran’s budget has oil pegged at $60/bbl. Ouch. Sucks to be you, Mad Mullahs. And will the Mullahs loosen the pursestrings of their Swiss bank accounts? Of course not. Let the peasants eat—um. What’s an Iranian delicacy?

Here’s what I find most satisfying right now: The price of oil went up a dollar or two since the start of Israel’s war on Hamas. Then it pretty much went back down again on the news that demand is going nowhere. When you have a land awash in a commodity that isn’t as desirable today as it was a mere six months ago, well, you either have to utilize other parts of your economy, or you have to just suck up the $100/bbl difference. But when oil revenues make up 60% of your budget—well, then you don’t get to do the things you really want to do.

Is the price of oil stopping the mullahs from ordering Hezbullah to open a second front against Israel? Perhaps. It could also be that they’re keeping Hezbullah in reserve for a possible attack on their nuclear facilities. Omri says it’s because the IDF flat-out stated not long ago that the next time Hezbullah attacks Israel, the IDF will flatten Lebanon. Not just the Hezbullah sections of Beirut. The entire country. Here’s the article he cited:

In any future conflict with Hizbullah, Israel will likely cite the Shi’ite group’s increasing influence within the Lebanese cabinet as a legitimate reason to target Lebanon’s entire infrastructure, government sources have told The Jerusalem Post.

So. Is the price of oil affecting Iran’s decision? Is it the desire to hold Hezbullah in reserve in case Hamas does get totally chewed up and spit out by the IDF? Or is it because the Lebanese know that Israel isn’t making idle threats about infrastructure?

Once again, Omri:

Evaluating Hezbollah - The consensus seem to be that they won’t attack lest the IAF flatten southern Lebanon. There were several mentions about the noticeable lack of activity in the south.

I’ll go with the Israeli sources on this one. They’re better informed. The fact that Iran is going to be facing probable riots in the near future because the price of oil has dropped? Well, that’s just a nice little extra.

12/30/2008

Egypt and Turkey work out Israel’s surrender terms

Filed under: Gaza, Lebanon — Tags: , , , — Meryl Yourish @ 10:00 am

Israel’s helpful Arab and Muslim “allies” have come up with a brilliant plan, and a warning: Take it, or you’ll be facing a second front.

Turkey and Egypt plan to warn Israel that if a ground operation is launched in the Gaza Strip, Hizbullah might open another front in south Lebanon, Turkish sources told al-Hayat newspaper.

The report, published on Tuesday, said Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit visited Ankara on Monday and presented his Turkish counterpart Ali Babacan with a document detailing a four-point plan aimed at restoring order and ending the Israeli operation in Gaza.

The plan includes a ceasefire, the opening of Gaza crossings the removal of the blockade on the Strip, and the creation of regional and international guarantees that will keep the crossings open and the agreement honored.

So they’re going to urge Israel to give Hamas exactly what it wants. Yeah, that’s exactly why Israel is currently bombing targets in Gaza. So they can surrender to Hamas.

And Egypt, ever the hypocrite, refuses to let Palestinians out of Gaza into Egypt.

Sounds to me like Egypt and Turkey are brandishing a load of bull at Israel. Iran controls Hizbullah’s reaction, and it looks like Iran is keeping Lebanon in check for a future strike on Israel. If Hezbullah were to open a second front, you’d think they’d have done it by now.

Despite reports of a possible attack from the north, recent speeches by Hizbullah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah indicate he is not headed for war with Israel.

Since Israel launched its Operation Cast Lead in Gaza on Saturday, Nasrallah spoke out mainly against Egypt and almost completely avoided mentioning Israel.

It seems the Hizbullah leader will settle for mass rallies in support of Gaza and against Israel and the US, and a PR campaign against Egypt.

I suspect Egypt and Turkey will be given their walking papers over this proposal.

11/24/2008

Hezbullah stronger than ever

Filed under: Israeli Double Standard Time, Lebanon, United Nations — Tags: , — Meryl Yourish @ 8:00 am

It’s good to know that the UN is enforcing UNSC resolution 1701, calling for the disarmament of Hezbullah. Because otherwise, Hezbullah might be three times stronger now than it was during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war.

Hizbullah has grown three times stronger than at the end of the Second Lebanon War, Defense Minister Ehud Barak told the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Monday.

“They have 42,000 missiles now, which could also reach Ashkelon, Beersheba and Dimona. The radical axis of Iran, Syria and Hizbullah is becoming stronger compared to the axis of the more moderate countries,” he added.

If we didn’t have UN Peacekeepers in Lebanon, turning a blind eye to the rearmament (and the truckloads of weapons coming in from Syria), things might be even worse than they were two and a half years ago.

As for Hizbullah’s recent exercises in southern Lebanon, Barak said this proves that UN Resolution 1701 is not working.

“Hizbullah’s involvement in the state of Lebanon, this identity, exposes Lebanon and its infrastructures to deeper damage in case of a future conflict,” he noted.

I’m so happy that UN is concentrating on the important things, like a day of mourning for the Palestinians to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the UN partition of the British Mandate. It’s great that Nobel Peace Prize winners are calling for the expulsion of Israel from the UN, but not a nation that has taken an armed terrorist group, responsible for the deaths of Americans and Israelis the world over, into their government and made them legitimate—even as they regularly threaten to use their weapons to destroy Israel.

Yes, just another day in Israeli Double Standard Time.

11/21/2008

Madly for Mahdi

Filed under: Anti-Semitism, Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

The NYT reports on the extent of Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon in Generation Faithful.

There is a network of schools– some of them run by Hezbollah, others affiliated with or controlled by it — largely shielded from outsiders. There is a nationwide network of clerics who provide weekly religious lessons to young people on a neighborhood basis. There is a group for students at unaffiliated schools and colleges that presents Hezbollah to a wider audience. The party organizes non-Scout-related summer camps and field trips, and during Muslim religious holidays it arranges events to encourage young people to express their devotion in public and to perform charity work.

“It’s like a complete system, from primary school to university,” said Talal Atrissi, a political analyst at Lebanese University who has been studying Hezbollah for decades. “The goal is to prepare a generation that has deep religious faith and is also close to Hezbollah.”

Young women are taught their place:

Again and again, the girls were told that the hijab was an all-important emblem of Islamic virtue and that it was the secret power that allowed Hezbollah to liberate southern Lebanon. The struggle with Israel, they were told, is the same as the struggle of Shiite Islam’s founding figures, Ali and Hussein, against unjust rulers in their time.

Through it all, Ms. Halawi was the presiding figure on the stage, introducing each section of the evening and reciting Koranic verses and her own poetic homages to the veil.

“Our veil is a jewel-encrusted crown, dignified and lofty, that God made to make us blossom,” she said at one point, gazing out into the darkness with a look of passionate intensity. “He opened the door of obedience and contentment for us.”

Everyone is taught how to understand Jews.

Another difference from most scout groups lies in the program. Religious and moral instruction — rather than physical activity — occupy the vast bulk of the Mahdi Scouts’ curriculum, and the scout leaders adhere strictly to lessons outlined in books for each age group.

Those books, copies of which were provided to this reporter by a Hezbollah official, show an extraordinary focus on religious themes and a full-time preoccupation with Hezbollah’s military struggle against Israel. The chapter titles, for the 12- to 14-year-old age group, include “Love and Hate in God,” “Know Your Enemy,” “Loyalty to the Leader” and “Facts About Jews.” Jews are described as cruel, corrupt, cowardly and deceitful, and they are called the killers of prophets. The chapter on Jews states that “their Talmud says those outside the Jewish religion are animals.”

(I’d point out that “sons of pigs and monkeys” is not Talmudic in origin.)

And the main point of this illustrative article.

In the West, the image of Hezbollah is often that of its bearded, young guerrilla fighters, dressed in military camouflage and clutching AK-47s. But Hezbollah’s inner core of fighters and employees — its full-time members — is a far smaller group than its supporters. This broader category, covering the better part of Lebanon’s roughly one million Shiites, includes reservists, who will fight if needed; doctors and engineers, who contribute their skills; and mere sympathizers.

To read the article is very disillusioning. It would suggest that there is little Israel can do to make peace with its northern neighbor. The influence of Hezbollah seems pretty extensive. However,

Hezbollah’s influence on Lebanese youth is very difficult to quantify because of the party’s extreme secrecy and the general absence of reliable statistics in the country. It is clear that the Shiite religious schools, in which Hezbollah exercises a dominant influence, have grown over the past two decades from a mere handful into a major national network. Other, less visible avenues may be equally important, like the growing number of clerics associated with the movement.

And Hezbollah’s influence is presented at once as somewhat tolerant but pervasive:

But there is a limit to Hezbollah’s flexibility. All young members and supporters are encouraged to develop a hiss amni, or security sense, and are warned to beware of curious outsiders, who may be spies.

After Mr. Sayyed had been talking to a foreign journalist in the coffee shop for more than an hour, a hard-looking young man at a neighboring table began staring at him. Suddenly looking nervous, Mr. Sayyed agreed to continue the conversation on the cafe’s second floor. But he seemed agitated, and later he repeatedly postponed another meeting planned for the next week.

Finally, he sent an apologetic e-mail message explaining that he would not be able to meet again.

So what does this mean for the future of Lebanon and the Middle East. Is the Arab country that was once the most Western being inexorably drawn deeper into Iran’s orbit? Or are there countervailing forces resisting Hezbollah’s (and Iran’s) creeping annexation of Lebanese society?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

11/07/2008

Hezbullah rules

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon — Meryl Yourish @ 11:00 am

Israel is changing its gameplan regarding responding to attacks from Hizbullah, and the world is not going to like it. But the rules have changed, since Hizbullah is now officially part of the Lebanese state.

In any future conflict with Hizbullah, Israel will likely cite the Shi’ite group’s increasing influence within the Lebanese cabinet as a legitimate reason to target Lebanon’s entire infrastructure, government sources have told The Jerusalem Post.

In the Second Lebanon War, the IAF did target some of Lebanon’s infrastructure but was asked to stop by the US and others.

According to assessments in Israel, Hizbullah’s influence over Lebanese politics is expected to grow, and it is set to gain at least two more cabinet posts in elections next spring - likely the Interior Ministry and, as a remote possibility, the defense portfolio.

Hizbullah already has a veto on cabinet decisions. There are no major diplomatic and security decisions taken by Lebanon that are not informed by or initiated by Hizbullah, and the Shi’ite group has been given the official title of Liberator of the Shaba Farms (Mount Dov) and the (seven) Shi’ite villages in the Galilee.

Of course, this won’t stop the world from rising up as one and condemning Israel for defending herself. Because this isn’t relevant to the UN:

Hizbullah is four times stronger militarily today than it was at the end of the last Lebanon war. In August 2006 Hizbullah had 14,000 rockets, with Hadera being the southernmost city within their range. Two years after the war, Hizbullah has some 40,000 rockets and Dimona (with its nuclear reactor), Yeroham and Arad, all in the Negev, are at risk, the Post has learned.

Hizbullah has a long-term plan to fortify positions and create strategic depth north of the Litani River, inside Shi’ite villages south of the Litani, and in the Bekaa Valley, its traditional stronghold.

The UN peacekeeping force has argued that it doesn’t see any Hezbollah fortifications and rearming. However, it gets chased out of any areas where Hizbullah is, gee, rearming and fortifying the area. The peacekeepers are utterly useless, except as a barrier between the IDF and Hizbullah. So ultimately, though Israel intends to go after the Lebanese as fiercely as the Lebanese—and let us not forget, Hizbullah are also Lebanese—go after Israel, the world will blame Israel for the use of “disproportionate force.”

So what else is new?

11/05/2008

Netiv haasarah redux

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

As Israel prepared to evacuate all Israelis from Gaza, Mohammed Dahlan, a famous Palestinian “moderate” demanded that Israel also withdraw from Netiv Haasarah, a community just north of Gaza.

PA security chief Mohammad Dahlan publicly voiced the PA demand that Israel withdraw from the town of Netiv Ha’asara, a small residential community south of Ashkelon, in order to complete the planned withdrawal from Gaza.

A similar scenario is replaying itself in the north.

A senior Hezbollah official on Monday said the Lebanese militant organization believes that large swaths of northern Israel belong to Lebanon, far beyond the line Israel pulled back to in 2000.

“The Zionist terror organizations moved the border from that of 1920 to that of 1923, and Lebanon lost seven villages and twenty farms. One must be cautious before moving the border to the Blue Line, because then Lebanon will lose millions of square meters,” said Nawaf Musawi, head of international relations for Hezbollah. …

He branded Blue Line [the UN-approved border between Israel and Lebanon], which runs very close to the 1949 Israel-Lebanon border known as the Green Line, as merely a “withdrawal line.”

In response Noah Pollak observes wryly:

What’s less fun, I suppose, is all the westerners who will use this proclamation to insist that Hezbollah is a reasonable group with limited ambitions and a flexible political agenda.

Emanuele Ottolenghi writes:

Advocates of dialogue with Hezbollah have repeatedly argued that a compromise over the Shebaa Farms would deny Hezbollah any further pretext for continuing “resistance” against Israel. In a textbook move, Hezbollah has just laid out just that–the next pretext.

The ever increasing demands of terrorist organizations on Israel, is a reminder of the aptness of Winston Churchill’s description of appeasement.

It also shows the inadvisability of the President elect Obama’s reported promise to the Palestinians, as that will only encourage them to demand more from Israel.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

10/24/2008

First blood

Filed under: Lebanon, Terrorism — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 9:00 am

Former National Security adviser, Robert MacFarlane wrote about the attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut and its aftermath. Apparently, the United States had a response planned against Hezbollah targets in the Bekaa Valley, but it was aborted.

Cabinet officers often disagree, and rigorous debate and refinement often lead to better policy. What is intolerable, however, is irresolution. In this case the president allowed the refusal by his secretary of defense to carry out a direct order to go by without comment — an event which could have seemed to Mr. Weinberger only a vindication of his judgment. Faced with the persistent refusal of his secretary of defense to countenance a more active role for the marines, the president withdrew them, sending the terrorists a powerful signal of paralysis within our government and missing an early opportunity to counter the Islamist terrorist threat in its infancy.

It’s a pretty strong indictment of Caspar Weinberger and implicitly of President Reagan.

The Donovan lists the 241 servicemen who were killed. Two years ago Ocean Guy related a more personal recollection of the attack.

If the United Stataes had struck, would it have forestalled the growth of radical Islam in the past quarter century?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

10/17/2008

Never the “o” word

Filed under: AP Media Bias, Lebanon, Syria — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 11:00 am

Earlier this week, the AP reported, Syria and Lebanon Set Up Formal Ties:

The initiative by President Bashar al-Assad of Syria ends six decades of nonrecognition and meets a demand by the United States that Syria act to help achieve stability in the region, even as Syria pursued indirect peace talks with Israel. Syria and Lebanon said they planned to open embassies by the end of the year.

Just peachy, right?

And the article concludes:

Syria has dominated Lebanon for decades and long kept a military presence there, regarding it as a Syrian province.

Note that the word “occupation” is never used. Also note the uncertain tense of that sentence. Does Syria still regard Lebanon as its own? The AP won’t tell you that, but Jonathan Spyer will. In An iron fist in a velvet glove, Spyer writes:

Lebanese commentators are expressing cautious optimism. However, the more likely prognosis is that Syria will continue to exercise its will in Lebanon through a combination of diplomacy and other means. Syria apparently expects that the Lebanese opposition will make significant gains in the elections scheduled for March.

Damascus is also understood to expect that a Barack Obama victory in the US presidential election will mark the end of Syrian international isolation.

The independent military capacity wielded by Hizbullah - pointed at Israel and, where necessary, at pro-Western forces in Lebanon - continues to be supplied via Damascus. This capacity holds the final word in Lebanon. Nothing can happen without its consent.

Nothing’s changed. Syria’s making a cosmetic change for international consumption but isn’t giving up its designs on Lebanon.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

The anti-Israel bias, cont’d.

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon — Tags: , , — Meryl Yourish @ 9:30 am

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s report on Israel and Hezbullah illustrates perfectly what is wrong with the way that the world looks at any conflict that involves Israel.

A report released Thursday by United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon described Hezbollah as a threat to Middle East security, and called for both the Lebanese militant group and Israel to stop threatening each other through the media.

The report, sent to the members of the UN Security Council, also criticized Syria for allowing weapons smuggling to Lebanese militias.

Ban’s report indicates that Hezbollah continues to maintain a militia separate from the Lebanese government.

[...] “I therefore reiterate my call on Hezbollah to comply with all relevant Security Council resolutions, and urge all parties which maintain close ties with Hezbollah and have the ability to influence it, in particular Syria and Iran, to support its transformation into a political party proper,” it said.

The report also cited the “the urgency and importance of ensuring that the Government has the monopoly on the use of force in Lebanon.”

This is all well and good. The report calls Hezbollah out for being in violation of two UNSC resolutions (as opposed to Israel, which is in violation of zero UNSC resolutions, in spite of the anti-Israel crowd’s insistence otherwise). But here’s where the logic gets all blown to hell:

Ban also leveled criticism at the remarks made by GOC Northern Command Gadi Eisenkot to the daily Yedioth Ahronoth several weeks ago regarding the Israel Defense Forces’ plans to use “disproportionate force” should war again break out with Lebanon or Hezbollah.

In response, senior Hezbollah figures told the media the organization would respond forcefully to any Israeli attack.

“I am disturbed by the repeated exchanges of threats, through the media, between Israel and Hezbollah. I urge all parties to cease this public discourse, which creates anxiety among civilian populations on both sides,” he said.

Get it? Hezbollah threatens Israel with thousands of missiles, an illegal militia, and has stated quite clearly that it wants to destroy Israel. These are unquestionably threats. Israel says she will defend herself strongly against an attack. This is considered a threat, both by Israel, and by the AP, which wrote this article. Look at the language in bold. Israel was responding to the Hezbollah threat. The AP structures it as a threat by Israel to the Iranian proxy army.

Language matters. This is the sort of thing that gets picked up by the left, swallowed whole, and then repeated—until it becomes conventional wisdom. Israel is exchanging threats, not declaring that she will defend herself strongly in the event that Hezbollah launches another attack on her.

This is one reason why Israel is so hated in the world. The cards are stacked against her from every organization, and every angle.

09/28/2008

A general war?

Filed under: Lebanon, Syria — Soccerdad @ 11:00 am

*Please see disclaimer below*

Last week Syria built up its forces along the Lebanese border. Assad apologist Andrew Lee Butters wrote:

In recent days, anti-Syrian politicians in Beirut have been crying wolf about an increase in Syrian soldiers on the border with northern Lebanon. They worry that the buildup is a prelude to Syrian incursions on the pretext of stamping out radical Islamist fighters there, but really aimed at reasserting Syrian hegemony. On the other hand, the Syrians say that the buildup is part of an attempt to clamp down on smuggling, and there is reason to believe them.

Michael Young didn’t see it in such innocuous terms:

An imminent Syrian invasion of Lebanon is not in the cards. But Assad will continue to see how far he can push the envelope in Lebanon, both politically and militarily. And when he realizes he can push it very far, his confidence will rise, and with it the risk that Syria will use its army in more substantial ways. That’s not good news, and it’s not good news especially when foreign governments seem so utterly without conviction in preventing Syria from reimposing its hegemony over Lebanon.

However the news about yesterday’s car bomb attack in Damascus makes me wonder if the smuggling explanation might be closer to the truth. Now the Jersualem Post is reporting:

A mysterious explosion near Damascus on Saturday claimed the lives of at least 17 people, including a brigadier-general, further destabilizing the Syrian regime.

The article speculates about the identity of the general, but that’s less important than the fact that this attack took place so close to the time that Syria reinforced its troops on the Lebanese border. Is it possible that the redeployment was in reaction to intelligence that there had recently been an infiltration? Or perhaps against a threat of further infiltrations?

Last December a Lebanese Gen. Hajj was killed, presumably by Syria.

Anti-Syrian politicians, however, were quick to blame Damascus, accusing the Syrian regime of seeking to cause instability in Lebanon. “I point an accusing finger directly at the Syrian regime as the scheme has been carried out since three years until today with no one to deter this regime,” said Antoine Andraous, a member of the March 14 bloc.

Then in August a Syrian general with ties to Assad was killed in Lebanon.

General Mohammed Suleiman, one of Mr Assad’s closest confidantes, was shot dead on Friday at his chalet in the prestigious Rimal al-Zahabieh, Arabic for “Golden Sands”, seafront resort, 9 miles north of Tartous on the Mediterranean coast. A sniper, apparently located out at sea, shot him in the head, neck and stomach and he was pronounced dead at a hospital in Tartous.

Even leaving out the death of Imad Mughniyeh, it seems that generals have become targets in the Syria Lebanon war. I’ve been skeptical of the claims that Israel killed Mughniyeh, and nothing I’ve seen so far suggests that Israel was involved in any of these other deaths. Is there, perhaps, a lethal group fighting for Lebanon’s independence operating beneath the radar?

UPDATE: I asked an expert and was told that there’s no basis for this speculation. Please ignore.

Crossposted on Yourish.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

09/07/2008

Hizbullah: We’ll never make peace with Israel

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon — Tags: , , — Meryl Yourish @ 6:00 am

Say, good to see ol’ Chipmunk Cheeks confirming what we’ve known all along: It’s not about Zionism. It’s about Jews. He’ll never make peace with Israel.

In his speech Nasrallah stressed that even if Lebanon receives control of the Shebaa Farms,his organization will continue to battle Israel. “We are not using Shebaa as an excuse to bear weapons. If the area is freed the weapons will remain because we are talking about a defensive strategy against a threatening country such as Israel,” he said.

And of course, there are the threats:

He warned Israel against attacking Lebanon, as the IDF would lose. “All of Israel is saying that in a new war against Lebanon the only way to determine victory will be through terrestrial warfare, that’s why Barak promised us five divisions,” he said.

So, where is Nasrallah making these threats from again? Oh, that’s right. It’s a secure, undisclosed location—because he’s afraid he’s going to get a Hellfire missile enema.

Here’s hoping.

09/04/2008

The banality of terror

Filed under: Israel Derangement Syndrome, Lebanon, Media Bias, Terrorism — Tags: — Soccerdad @ 10:00 am

Without passing judgment the NYT reported on the Hezbollah Shrine to Terrorist Suspect Enthralls Lebanese Children

The dead man being shown such veneration is Imad Mugniyah, the shadowy Hezbollah commander. Until his death in a car bombing in Syria in February he was virtually unknown here, his role in the militant Shiite group clothed in secrecy. But since then Hezbollah has hailed him as one of its great military leaders in the struggle against Israel.

Now, the group has opened an exhibit in this southern town in honor of Mr. Mugniyah, who is widely accused in the West of masterminding devastating bombings, kidnappings and hijackings in the 1980s and ’90s. His stern, bearded face towers over the transformed parking lot where the exhibit is taking place, along with banners exalting him as “the leader of the two victories” — the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 and the 2006 summer war with Israel.

The presentation, which opened Aug. 15, is Hezbollah’s most ambitious multimedia exhibit to date, meant to dramatize the group’s bitter conflict with Israel on the second anniversary of their latest war. Schoolchildren pour in throughout the day, absorbing the carefully honed message of heroic resistance. At night, light and laser shows illuminate the weaponry and tanks, and overflow crowds have been keeping it open until after 1 a.m.

There are two points to note about the article.

It was conceived by the architect Ahmed Tirani and built in just three weeks by a staff of 290 working around the clock. In addition to an extraordinary array of weaponry and martyrs’ paraphernalia, it includes a large indoor room that was remodeled to resemble “what we believe the martyrs’ heaven is like,” according to one of the guides on duty.

“[W]eaponry and martyr’s paraphernalia?” Wouldn’t the word “terrorist” or, at least, “militant” be more appropriate? Or did this article have to pass muster with Hezbollah?

And the article ends with this positive note:

“I came here to teach my kids the culture of resistance,” said a visitor who gave his name only as Ahmed, as he stood with his wife and two children. “I want them to see what the enemy is doing to us, and what we can do to fight them, because this enemy is not merciful.”

Hezbollah’s unmerciful enemy just traded a child killer for the corpses of two soldiers who were kidnapped and killed in violation of international law. The child killer was celebrated by Hezbollah and its supporters. This fellow, whose views go unchallenged has a strange idea of mercy.

The short story:

Here’s what they’re teaching the kiddies in southern Lebanon: Revere terrorist masterminds.

Similarly Elder of Ziyon writes:

A society is truly twisted when it sends hundreds of children to venerate - and emulate - a bloodthirsty killer.

Israel Matzav adds:

Mugniyah was likely the pre-eminent terror tactician of his generation. I don’t know who killed him, but I’m happy he’s gone. For those who are interested, the Times has more pictures and a slide show at the link above. Personally, I found it sickening.

What’s also sickening is the casual way this museum is described without a trace of judgment or outrage. Hezbollah has threatened revenge against Israel and Jewish targets worldwide as revenge for the killing of Mughniyeh, something that needs to be taken seriously in light of yesterday’s arrests in Canada.

Hezbollah isn’t just a bunch of religious eccentrics who have a problem with Israel, but an international terrorist organization targeting Jews all around the world. This article served to distract from that reality.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

08/15/2008

Nasrallah threatens from secure, undisclosed location

Filed under: Israel, Juvenile Scorn, Lebanon — Tags: , , — Meryl Yourish @ 11:30 am

So, when Chipmunk Cheeks Nasrallah makes threats on TV from a hidden location deep in Lebanon, should we do anything more than laugh, loudly and scornfully?

Speaking on Lebanese television in a special broadcast marking two years since the end of the Second Lebanon War, Nasrallah said that the outcome of the war “affected Israel and the entire region.”

[...] Nasrallah accused Israel of planning to assassinate Hizbullah leaders, saying this would not deter Hizbullah from continuing its battle against Israel.

“I tell the Zionists: We don’t fear you. Say whatever you want and do whatever you want. We know that you are planning new assassinations of resistance leaders. But this will not make us retreat,” he said. “We are staying here and standing fast here.”

The Hizbullah leader went on to say that Israel was helpless in dealing with the Iranian Islamic Republic, and that even Israel recognizes its own inability to cope with the rockets fired from the Gaza Strip.

To review: He doesn’t fear Israel or the Zionists, and yet, he’s afraid to show up in public unless surrounded by thousands of civilians, knowing full well that Israel won’t drop bombs on him if there is a risk of killing women and children. He doesn’t fear Israel or the Zionists, yet he has been in hiding for years. He doesn’t fear Israel or the Zionists, and yet, he can’t walk in the open in downtown Beirut, his stomping grounds.

Yeah, “cognitive dissonance” is not a phrase bandied about much in NasrallahLand.

UNIFIL: In Hezbullah’s pocket

Filed under: Israel Derangement Syndrome, Lebanon — Tags: , — Meryl Yourish @ 7:00 am

Get a load of this Bizarro World UNIFIL general:

Commander of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Maj.-Gen. Claudio Graziano on Thursday accused Israel of violating UN Security Council Resolution 1701 that brought an end to the Second Lebanon War.

In contrast, he said that the UN enjoyed excellent cooperation with Hizbullah and with the local Lebanese people.

And he isn’t joking.

During a press conference at the United Nations headquarters n New York, Graziano cited the IAF forays over Lebanon and the dispute over the village of Ghajar.

Graziano asserted that apart from UN troops, Lebanese soldiers and hunters, no one was armed south of the Litani River.

Nope. Not joking, just effing stupid. Blind. And oh yeah—let’s find out exactly why this paragon of asshole-ism thinks that there aren’t any weapons south of the Litani:

He conceded that his soldiers were not trying to prevent weapons smuggling from Syria as demanded by the UNSC because the Lebanese government had not requested such action.

Because he’s not looking for them. Well, gee. If you don’t look for something, of course you won’t find it. By the way, this schmuck has been blaming Israel for months. No wonder, when the Italian FM shills for Hamas, and UNIFIL doesn’t act on incidents like, say, Hezbullah threatening UNIFIL troops at gunpoint.

He’s supposedly on his way out. Buh-bye, moron.

08/03/2008

The myth of land for peace

Filed under: Israel, Lebanon, Syria — Tags: , , , — Meryl Yourish @ 10:00 am

Ehud Olmert insists that the Syrians want peace. Some pundits are claiming that Syria needs only to be torn from its alliance with Iran, given back the Golan Heights, and allowed to continue its domination of Lebanon, and there will be peace between Syria and Israel. But if that’s all it takes, land for peace, well, someone isn’t getting the memo.

Or how do you explain these words by the dictator of Syria?

“The Zionist regime is not strong and the states can obtain their rights through resistance and determination,” he added.

During the meeting Assad stressed that the ongoing indirect talks between Israel and Syria under Turkish mediation would not affect Damascus’ ties to Iran. “Syria is working to embolden its relations with Tehran and is determined to maintain its cooperation and coordination with Iran.”

“Resistance,” of course, is the code-word among Arab regimes for war. And Ehud Olmert’s lack of leadership is what has caused Israel’s enemies to say things like this:

“The liberation of all occupied lands, the return of the Palestinian (refugees), the establishment of a Palestinian state and the collapse of the Zionist regime are not considered by the region’s nations to be goals that are unattainable,” the Iranian president said.

Hamas leaders believe this. Hezbullah leaders believe this. Israel’s deterrence was pretty much destroyed in the 2006 failed Lebanon war. Meantime, Hezbullah is now part of the Lebanese government, and it worked quickly to draft new rules allowing it both to retain its weapons and use the government of Lebanon to legitimize its fight against Israel. Hezbullah’s aims are being codified:

“Lebanon, its army, its people and its resistance [Hezbollah] have the right to take action to liberate lands that have remained occupied at the Shaba Farms, the hills of Shuba village and the northern portion of the village of Ghajar, with all legitimate means possible, and to resist Israeli aggression.”

The Shaba farms were never part of Lebanon. They were part of Syria, but Hezbullah uses this excuse to keep its “resistance” against Israel going. And note that now they’re expanding their territorial claims, so that even if Israel gives Lebanon the Shaba farms, Hezbullah will have another reason to continue fighting. And if Israel cedes that land to Lebanon, Hezbullah will come up with another reason. It isn’t small pieces of territory that is the Muslim grievance against Israel. It is her very existence. When Hamas calls “Palestine” an Islamic Waqf, every Muslim in the world nods his head in agreement, whether they are gun-carrying terrorists of Hamas or educated men discussing the Israel situation on Al Jazeera. It isn’t a matter of ceding territory. There will never be peace as long as Muslims think that Jews do not belong in their historic homeland—and as long as the world insists on calling Israelis “settlers” or “colonials.” I am once again struck by the absolute adherence to The Exception Clause that is so evident in the world: Everyone has the right to return to the lands of their origin—except for Jews.

And this mindset is what allows the very president of Lebanon to call war with Israel “legitimate:”

Suleiman announced Friday, during an address for Army Day, that “the countdown for the restoration of the Shaba farms and the hills of Shuba village has begun … all means are possible and legitimate to this end.”

The drumbeats of war are getting louder. I don’t believe the stories about peace with Syria. Bashar Assad has too much to gain from staying in Iran’s axis. And while it would be extremely valuable to remove the Syrian threat, I don’t think it will be gone. I think that Syria’s army will simply bombard Israel from the Heights again, while Hezbullah and Hamas attack from two sides.

I certainly hope Israel chooses a better leader, and does it soon. She needs one.

07/21/2008

UN Troops salute dead terrorists

Filed under: Lebanon, World — Tags: — Meryl Yourish @ 7:00 am

Way to go, United Nations. What a crop of peacekeepers: Rapists, pedophiles, extortionists, and now—those who salute dead Hezbullah terrorists.

Israel is calling for removal of two United Nations soldiers from Lebanon after photographs surfaced of the soldiers saluting the coffins of Hezbollah terrorists during a prisoner exchange Wednesday.

Associated Press photographer Mohammed Zaatari captured an image of the troops paying homage to fallen Hezbollah fighters as trucks bearing their coffins drove through the city of Tyre in southern Lebanon.

And what does the UN say?

But a UNIFIL spokeswoman said the salute was nothing out of the ordinary.

“It is customary in most armies for military personnel in uniform to salute whenever a coffin passes in a procession,” UNIFIL spokeswoman Yasmina Bouziane said. “They were merely following this customary military tradition and saluted coffins draped in Lebanese national flags at their own initiative.”

The identity of the troops wasn’t certain, but Getty Images reports they were from Italy.

Despicable. These are the jackasses that are not allowed to enter Lebanese towns unless escorted by the Lebanese Army—who tip off Hezbullah to hide their weapons until the inspectors are gone. Enforcer, my ass. Enablers, more like.

The United Nations rejected the suggestion that its troops favored Hezbollah and told FOXNews.com that UNIFIL troops were doing their job and remained an unbiased force.

“They are impartial with regards to the forces on the ground,” Farhan Haq, a U.N. spokesman, said. “(UNIFIL) is an impartial source — it doesn’t show a bias for either side.”

Yeah. That’s why the UN accused Israel of violating UNSC 1701, but has yet to notice the arms buildup in Lebanon right under their noses.

Powered by WordPress