Home
The Chairman's Message
The Politicization of 'Anti-Semitism'
A Salute To Lebanon
Islamic Finance
Wake Up America! Israel Is Not Your Friend
Aston Martin
Freya Stark
From Cane To Sugar
Mesopotamia
Othman, The Third Muslim Caliph
Woman of Distinction
Socotra
Another World Cup Encore Beckons Dubai
Engineering
Habtoor News
About Us
Back Issues

Contact Us

 

 

By Linda S. Heard


  Who would have believed that a country so richly textured with different religions and sects and one that had suffered from years of civil war could have pulled together so seamlessly when faced with a common enemy?

  The Israelis certainly didn’t and it was this miscalculation that led to the failure of their war of choice. Writing in the Jerusalem Post, a former member of the pro-Israel South Lebanon Army (SLA) now exiled in northern Israel said: “All Israel succeeded in doing was to turn the Lebanese people into Hezbollah supporters”.

  This was a war that, according to veteran investigative reporter Seymour Hersh writing in the New Yorker, was planned with Washington last spring as a precursor to a possible preemptive US strike on Iran’s nuclear reactors and uranium enrichment facilities.

  In other words, Hezbollah - said to enjoy the military and financial backing of Tehran - had to be pacified so that Israel could remain safe from Shiite retribution.

  Following Hezbollah’s abduction of two Israeli soldiers and the slaying of eight others on July 12 – initially deemed “reckless” by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - Israel responded by bombing Lebanese power stations and infrastructure. 

  Israel wrought this devastation in the knowledge that the Lebanese government and people had nothing to do with Hezbollah’s actions, eliciting condemnation from the international community with the exception of the usual suspects the US and Britain – the only two powers that shamefully refused to call for an immediate ceasefire.  

  Even as the bodies of toddlers still clutching their teddy bears or with their arms around their mothers’ necks were being pulled from out of the rubble, Israeli spokesmen disingenuously countered they were merely helping the Lebanese government to stamp its authority over the entire country.

  Israel’s Chief of Staff Dan Halutz threatened to turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni warned ominously “the rules of the game have changed”.

  Many analysts found these gung ho statements curious, and even more so when the Christian areas of Ashrafieh and Jounieh were hit, hardly Hezbollah hotbeds. Why punish an entire country for the actions of a sectarian militia operating from the south?

  The novice Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and his former rose-growing sidekick Amir Peretz believed massive destruction would turn the Lebanese people against the Shiite resistance. We can only imagine their surprise when it had the exact opposite effect.

  During the conflict, local polls suggested that up to 87 per cent of all Lebanese supported Hezbollah. Syria generously opened its borders to fleeing refugees where they were greeted with shelter and food.

  Christian families welcomed displaced Shiites into their mountain homes, Palestinian refugee camps took in people whose houses had been destroyed, while church bells rang out throughout the land following a televised speech of Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.  

  Like the Lebanese people, the country’s politicians displayed rare solidarity in support of the resistance. There were a few exceptions; most notably Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, who from his mountain fastness lashed out at Nasrallah as well as the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, openly basked in reflected glory from Hezbollah’s military successes. 

  Speaking on Al-Mustaqbal TV at the height of the conflict on July 29, Jumblatt said:

  “Whatever happens, Hezbollah will emerge victorious. To whom will Hezbollah dedicate this victory? Will it dedicate the victory to the Lebanese state, to the honoring of international resolutions, to the Taif Agreement? Or will it dedicate it to the Syrian regime, the Syrian-Iranian axis, in which case we will become scorched earth, annexed to Syria and Iran?”

  For his part, Nasrallah took great pains to present his militia as Lebanese first and foremost and stressed the need for national unity. On one occasion he counseled the Lebanese people not to take to the streets for anti-Israel protests. His intention was to deprive opportunistic pro-Israel/pro-US agents their chance to light a sectarian fire.

  Then following the cessation of hostilities enshrined in UN Resolution 1701, Nasrallah was careful not to distinguish between religious groups when it came to handing out wads of cash to the dispossessed for rents and furniture.

  Faced with Nasrallah’s growing folk-hero status at home and abroad, Lebanon’s Sunni Prime Minister Fou’ad Siniora – who came to power on the back of the American-inspired “Cedar Revolution” - was wisely conciliatory going as far as to thank the resistance during one of his talks to the nation. 

  President Emile Lahoud, a pro-Syrian Christian, and Speaker of the Lebanese Assembly Nabih Berri leader of the Shiite party Amal were predictably supportive of Hezbollah throughout.

  Saad Hariri, the pro-Western political son and heir of the late former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, diplomatically refrained from turning his ire against Hezbollah, instead reserving his scorn for Damascus.

  Between them Siniora, Lahoud, Berri and Hariri with the cooperation of Nasrallah, managed to keep their disparate nation together; no small feat when people woke up to a new tragedy almost every single day.

  One could only watch with incredulity as newly homeless, sometimes bereaving families smiled, waved Lebanese flags or gave the thumbs-up sign. Mothers of fallen fighters fought back tears to say they were willing to sacrifice their other sons if need be. These selfless attitudes were surely lessons in humility and nobility for all of us.

  Walid Jumblatt was wrong to say Hezbollah would emerge victorious. More than 1,000 Lebanese civilians were deprived of their lives during the conflict, one third of them children. Almost one million were displaced from their villages and towns. Over 15,000 families were left homeless.

  Moreover, Lebanon’s economy has been set back at least a decade with US$3.6 billion needed for reconstruction. There is no doubt that building houses will be an easier task than building a new investor confidence.

  In short, there are no true winners. If we ask ourselves whether Lebanon has benefited from this war, the answer has to be a resounding “no”.

  During an interview on the Lebanese channel New TV several weeks after the implementation of the truce, a contrite Nasrallah admitted that if he knew in advance that Israel would be so barbaric in its targeting of civilians, he would not have sanctioned the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. He says all he wanted was a prisoner exchange of the kind that had occurred several times before.

  He further made it clear that despite repeated Israeli provocations threatening the fragile ceasefire he had no intention of going another round.

  The fact that Hezbollah has voluntarily dismantled its outposts bordering the disputed Shebaa Farms area and stood back as pockets of Israeli troops blew up some of its elaborate underground bunkers probably means he can be taken at his word. 

  With up to 15,000 UNIFIL troops flooding into the country, Lebanon has to some extent lost its precious independence, gained after 23 years when Israel withdrew in 2000 followed by the Syrian pull-out last year.

  Indeed, whatever measure of “victory” Hezbollah was able to achieve was stripped from Lebanon when it signed up to UNSC Resolution 1701, heavily weighted in Israel’s favor. 

  If Israel and the White House have their way, there would be another resolution to follow. This would empower UNIFIL to disarm the resistance and set up posts along the Lebanese-Syrian border to check for illegal arms smuggling, although it’s doubtful it will get off the ground.

  If it did, it would signify yet another disaster for Lebanon, triggering sectarian strife and putting an end to Lebanese-Syrian relations.

  Bashar Al-Assad has already warned he would interpret foreign troops on his border as a “hostile act” and would seal the crossing points, thus cutting off Lebanon’s sole access by land. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has indicated that the inserting of UN troops between friendly nations would be unprecedented.

  In spite of huge losses in terms of life and treasure, the Lebanese people did emerge with a renewed sense of togetherness and national “karama” the Arabic word for pride or honor.  The Israelis, on the other hand, can make no such claim.

  Olmert, Peretz and Halutz, accused of gross incompetence, are fighting for their political lives. The right says they should have used an even more brutal combat strategy. The left is embarrassed at the devastation inflicted on Lebanese civilians. The hawks are itching to have another go. Some 67 per cent of Israelis want all three to step down.

  Some of the angriest Israelis are reservists who say they were sent into battle without the proper intelligence, training, equipment or clear military aims. They say they were left in theatre without food or water forcing them to drink from the troughs of farm animals or the canteens of dead resistance fighters.

  They say their officers told them to expect a primitive rag tag militia when, in reality, they were faced with a highly-trained army equipped with state-of-the-art weapons, including tank-busting missiles. They talk about being sent into wadis like sitting targets; about trees that suddenly walked and the strange ability of the resistance to know their every move in advance.

  One wonders how George Bush managed to keep a straight face as he lauded Israel’s military triumph against “the terrorists” when the world and its wife, including the Israeli public, knows this not to be true.

  Israelis are only too aware of just how much they have lost. For many their biggest loss was their nation’s regional deterrent value. The failure of their military has emboldened their enemies and smashed the myth of Israel’s invincibility, thus leaving it vulnerable.

  Yet others are worried that Israel’s strategic usefulness to its US mentor has been devalued. Americans like winners and the day may come when they won’t be prepared to dig deep into their pockets to feed a dog whose tail can’t wag.

  Whereas Lebanon bravely gets set for yet another period of renewal, Israelis are flaying around looking for scapegoats or indulging in self-flagellation. Israel is a wounded lion but instead of licking its wounds it is turning them into suppurating sores.

  Israel’s former right-wing Prime Minister and head of the Likud party Binyamin Nethanyahu ominously waits in the wings for his chance to get even. Polls suggest the now fearful Israeli public has turned to the right.

  Olmert’s unilateral “convergence plan” that entailed Israel withdrawing from most of the West Bank has been binned. Government voices that tentatively brought up the possibility of talks with Syria have been silenced. So what happens now?

  Will Israel search for a pretext to renew hostilities with the aim of winning at all costs? Or will it cut its losses and realize that the only way forward is a return to the peace table on the lines of the Saudi proposal fielded during a 2002 Arab League Summit held in Beirut?

  Those of us who care about the future of this region can only pray that the peacemakers will eventually prevail. The alternative is too awful to contemplate.

   

| Top | Home | Al Habtoor Group | Habtoor Hotels | Al Habtoor Automobiles |
|
Diamond Leasing | Emirates International School |