|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
|
|
| ||||||
|
"Storm in a teacup"
Dear friends,
Like all of us I am moved by the sad events taking place in our country:
It appears as if in one week we have undone years of painful and slow
recovery from the scars of the war. Our civilian infrastructure is badly hit, our
slowly improving economy is ravaged and might take a very long time to
recover given our reliance on the tourism industry and the trauma that such a
sudden attack has created in people's minds. And last but not least innocent
people are losing life and property
Putting aside, my emotional response, what concerns me the most is the
obvious lack of alignment between stated objectives and ongoing operations
Israel's ambassador to the UN stated today that Israel's objectives are to 1)
destroy Hezbollah's military capability (or at least prevent them from attacking
Israel), 2) get the 2 soldiers safely back to Israel (he didn't mention any
exchange of prisoners) and 3) create a buffer between Israel and Lebanon
controlled by the Lebanese Army (and possibly a UN force)
I am a big proponent of Hezbollah's disarmament and wish it could have been
done earlier. However, the overwhelming belief in Lebanon is that given the
weakness of the Lebanese army and the fragile unity of our population this
cannot be done through a military operation and will likely lead to a civil war
Now, considering the ongoing alternative (i.e., Israel attacking the Hezbollah), I
fail to understand how military airstrikes and surgical land battles can destroy
the military capabilities of an underground organization with strong popular
support (at least among the Shiites): 140 thousands, on the ground, US
soldiers haven't been able to do so in Iraq and the entire Israeli army (also
deployed on the ground) hasn't yet been able to dismantle Hamas military
capability
Furthermore, Israel is carefully avoiding to extend the conflict to the parties
providing Hezbollah with weapons, financing, and safe passage (i.e., Syria
and Iran) in order not to further destabilize the region. So how can a 'storm in a
teacup' that does not materially affect the power of Iran and Syria enable Israel
to clip Hezbollah's wings?
Assuming that objective #1 (dismantling of Hezbollah's military capabilities)
won't be attained through the current campaign, what about the 2 others?
Objective #2 (return of the Israeli captives): I doesn't appear that burning Beirut
to the grounds will provide a strong enough incentive for Hezbollah to return
the 2 Israeli captives ... unless they get a prisoner exchange ... a such, my
guess is that the military campaign won't solve this issue either
So, I am afraid the only objective that can be achieved through this military
campaign is to have the international community mobilized by the suffering of
the civilian populations and have the UN send a peace force to create a buffer
zone between Lebanon and Israel (along with the Lebanese army) .. note: it'd
be interesting to know how deep this buffer zone needs to be given the
increasing range of Hezbollah's missiles
If that is the case, one would think that the situation is ripe enough for such an
action ... yet Western countries are still evacuating their citizens and the Israeli
ambassador to the UN is rejecting the idea of an end to the offensive since
Israel hasn't yet achieved its objectives
My concern is that the current operations even if they were to go on for months
will only result in further suffering, especially for the Lebanese population,
without getting the Israelis closer to their goals than they already are
There might be of course other unstated objectives, for example some
analysts suggest that Israel might benefit from the media coverage created by
the situation in Lebanon as it shifts the public opinion's focus from the
operations in Gaza
I do not know, if there are hidden objectives and what those might be. I just fail
to link actions to objectives .. and can't comprehend the justification for
additional suffering of innocent people on both sides as well as the ongoing
destruction of Lebanon's infrastructure
Philip Farah
Dear friends,
Like all of us I am moved by the sad events taking place in our country:
It appears as if in one week we have undone years of painful and slow
recovery from the scars of the war. Our civilian infrastructure is badly hit, our
slowly improving economy is ravaged and might take a very long time to
recover given our reliance on the tourism industry and the trauma that such a
sudden attack has created in people's minds. And last but not least innocent
people are losing life and property
Putting aside, my emotional response, what concerns me the most is the
obvious lack of alignment between stated objectives and ongoing operations
Israel's ambassador to the UN stated today that Israel's objectives are to 1)
destroy Hezbollah's military capability (or at least prevent them from attacking
Israel), 2) get the 2 soldiers safely back to Israel (he didn't mention any
exchange of prisoners) and 3) create a buffer between Israel and Lebanon
controlled by the Lebanese Army (and possibly a UN force)
I am a big proponent of Hezbollah's disarmament and wish it could have been
done earlier. However, the overwhelming belief in Lebanon is that given the
weakness of the Lebanese army and the fragile unity of our population this
cannot be done through a military operation and will likely lead to a civil war
Now, considering the ongoing alternative (i.e., Israel attacking the Hezbollah), I
fail to understand how military airstrikes and surgical land battles can destroy
the military capabilities of an underground organization with strong popular
support (at least among the Shiites): 140 thousands, on the ground, US
soldiers haven't been able to do so in Iraq and the entire Israeli army (also
deployed on the ground) hasn't yet been able to dismantle Hamas military
capability
Furthermore, Israel is carefully avoiding to extend the conflict to the parties
providing Hezbollah with weapons, financing, and safe passage (i.e., Syria
and Iran) in order not to further destabilize the region. So how can a 'storm in a
teacup' that does not materially affect the power of Iran and Syria enable Israel
to clip Hezbollah's wings?
Assuming that objective #1 (dismantling of Hezbollah's military capabilities)
won't be attained through the current campaign, what about the 2 others?
Objective #2 (return of the Israeli captives): I doesn't appear that burning Beirut
to the grounds will provide a strong enough incentive for Hezbollah to return
the 2 Israeli captives ... unless they get a prisoner exchange ... a such, my
guess is that the military campaign won't solve this issue either
So, I am afraid the only objective that can be achieved through this military
campaign is to have the international community mobilized by the suffering of
the civilian populations and have the UN send a peace force to create a buffer
zone between Lebanon and Israel (along with the Lebanese army) .. note: it'd
be interesting to know how deep this buffer zone needs to be given the
increasing range of Hezbollah's missiles
If that is the case, one would think that the situation is ripe enough for such an
action ... yet Western countries are still evacuating their citizens and the Israeli
ambassador to the UN is rejecting the idea of an end to the offensive since
Israel hasn't yet achieved its objectives
My concern is that the current operations even if they were to go on for months
will only result in further suffering, especially for the Lebanese population,
without getting the Israelis closer to their goals than they already are
There might be of course other unstated objectives, for example some
analysts suggest that Israel might benefit from the media coverage created by
the situation in Lebanon as it shifts the public opinion's focus from the
operations in Gaza
I do not know, if there are hidden objectives and what those might be. I just fail
to link actions to objectives .. and can't comprehend the justification for
additional suffering of innocent people on both sides as well as the ongoing
destruction of Lebanon's infrastructure
Philip Farah