Tuesday, July 25, 2006

The worst case scenario

Lebanon, the sacrificial lamb. I think that should be our national motto. Anyways, Edward N Luttwak, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic International Studies, wrote an Op Ed piece for the Wall Street Journal that called for a return of Syria to Lebanon. After articulating what he saw as unfeasible solutions to the crisis in Lebanon, he presented what he perceives as the most feasible way out of this crisis. "Enjoy":

...there is the horrible-to-contemplate but irresistibly seductive diplomatic option: to invite the Syrians to disarm Hezbollah and persuade it to follow the political path. Hezbollah already has two ministers in the Lebanese cabinet and might claim more.

Naturally that would imply the recognition of Syrian suzerainty over Lebanon, and of course the thoroughly unworthy Bashar Assad would have to be treated as a leader of regional importance. Only that could tempt Mr. Assad to abandon his alliance with Iran -- along with the important rewards that would come his way more or less spontaneously. These rewards would include gifts from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, all three of which now fear Iran as the most dangerous threat they face; they would also include the approval -- or at least the diminished hostility -- of Syria's Sunni majority, which vehemently dislikes the alliance with Shiite Iran, especially now that the Iranians are supporting Iraq's Shiites in their bloody fight with the Sunnis.

For France, the U.S. and the U.K., it would, of course, be tremendously embarrassing to recognize that they made a gigantic error in expelling Syria without having put anything its place, thus leaving a vacuum of power in Lebanon that Hezbollah has exploited. (A new principle of statecraft thus emerges: It is a mistake to follow the French even when they are right.) But unlike the military option, which is simply impossible, the diplomatic option is merely humiliating. Having massacred their own Islamists very efficiently, the Syrians can do the job again, if sufficiently rewarded.

30 comments:

Bad Vilbel said...

Let me the first (ok, 4th, i guess) to say that this is one of the worst ideas ever.

I would suggest Mr. Luttwak stick to writing about partisan politics in the US and stay out of the business of inviting one sovereign country back into another.

And on a less "irritable" note: If anyone really thinks having the Syrians back in would actually end the Hezbollah problem, they are sadly sadly mistaken.

Anonymous said...

Wrong. A period of turbulence is actually the best time to clean the system out; the Hariri file will never be closed as long as certain people remain in the government. Thinking that a faux but well-intentioned "stability" would fix Lebanon's problems is but fantasy; rather, trying to protect the remnants of this fantasy is what got you guys here in the first place.

Bad Vilbel said...

Jaeger,

If other countries would leave us in peace, Lebanon CAN and WILL govern itself just fine.

The problem has been that "someone else" that's constantly undermining us to show the rest of the world that we can't govern ourselves. Take them out of the equation and I guarantee you we'll govern ourselves just fine.

Amon Ra said...

Four United Nations peacekeepers have been killed in an Israeli air strike on an observation post in southern Lebanon, the UN has said.
A bomb struck the post occupied by the peacekeepers of the Unifil force in the Khiam area, it said.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he was "shocked" at the "apparently deliberate targeting" of the post.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5215366.stm

Well... i prefer not to make any comments... Just for the record...

Amon Ra said...

Nasbined;

I would not like to interpret Iran quotes but if you make a connection of the above statement with the follwing one ...

"The UN's Jan Egeland has condemned the devastation caused by Israeli air strikes in Beirut, saying it is a violation of humanitarian law.
Mr Egeland, the UN's emergency relief chief, described the destruction as "horrific" as he toured the city. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5207478.stm

... Then maybe you will be able to produce various conclusions, either valid or baseless...

There is only one fact,

The situation is absolutely out of control

Bad Vilbel said...

Poul,

A YEAR? ONE YEAR? That's enough?
Go tell that to President Bush, who's been in Iraq for 3 years and hasn't been able to declare success just yet.

If you really think that one year is enough to build a strong nation...heh...

Israel has been trying to "disengage" from the Palestinians for well over a year now. I guess by your "one year" standards, that's a total failure too, huh?

These things take time.

Bad Vilbel said...

haustat,

Enough with the antiquated rethoric and jargon. Do you even know what "Crusader" really means or is it just a word you throw around because it makes your posts look more important than they really are?

Amon Ra said...

Ron;

The answer of the "Civilized" world to the "Islamic Terror", as you call it, should not be a different kind of terror...

Forgive me but your approach sounds to me rather unilateral. I am not providing any analysis because i can not count how many previous posts have similar discussions.

However, if you think that Israel has the control then this happens only because of the US and the weakness of European countries and UN to encounter them in the diplomatic field. I wonder whether Israel has the resources for a prolonged war, even against Syria for example???

Silly question... Even if they dont it will be very easy to find cheerful suppliers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/world/middleeast/22military.html?ref=middleeast

Why it looks to me strange that US express concerns for humanitarian issues while continue supplying Israel with weapons ??? Well maybe i should remember that the leaders of the "Islamic Terror", as you call it, had been supplied with weapons by the US during 80s...

International Politics... I am ready to puke.

Amon Ra said...

ron;

If you feel ready even for WW3 allow me to say that i dont share your optimism...

I prefer to live.

In any case, I recommend you watching in DVD "The rise and the fall of the Roman Empire".

Maybe people in White House should watch it too. The sooner they do it, the better for all of us.

Marion Delgado said...

Just to quickly clear something up that doesn't belong here anyway. This "dhimmi as a term of abuse" thing is very bigoted. For its time and place the status of non-Moslems in the Caliphates and Moslem empires was very high. The reason they were taxed and not Moslems was that Moslems were already required by sharia (and really, just by faith too) to tithe what the "dhimmis" were paying. the alternative would have been to have Christians, Jews, etc. paying to mosques, or to have people living in a society paying no taxes whatsoever. I realize most people who use this term now are in favor of the overclass paying no taxes, so that must be the real problem. Suffice it to say, everyone was paying roughly the same "flat tax," moslem and non-moslem alike.

All your use of the term shows is that you don't know anything about history.

Amon Ra said...

gsh;

nice to see you too. Our previous discussions was rather informative for me

Bad Vilbel said...

Poul,

Yes we started and didn't succeed. Go check your facts please.
There were calls for HA to disarm from the likes of Jumblatt, and various other factions.
Then Michel Aoun allied himself with HA and made it real difficult on the March 14 movement to get much accomplished.
Even after that, they still managed to initiate the "National Dialogue".

Granted, it was failing miserably. But we had indeed STARTED.

Historical accuracy, please...

Anonymous said...

Fighting Sullivan,

Marion omits a great deal in his whitewash of dhimmitude. Dhimmis are literally, legally second-class citizens. They generally must wear identifying garments (yellow stars, perhaps?) and live in specified areas. They cannot testify against or sue a Muslim. In the 'Golden Age' of Islam, sometimes their children were stolen, forcibly converted, and made into slave soldiers such as the Mameluks and Janissaries. It is definitely not a 'separate but equal' arrangement.

Anonymous said...

i'm sure we can still find memos and publications from before 1948 that proof the presence of muslim, jews ,christian and Druze in the same land of palestine or israel (this land exchanged these 2 names god knows how many times) all conducting a normal peacful presence.

1920 - Three days of Arab riots indulging in robbery, rape, and murder in Jerusalem. 5 Jews and 4 Arabs killed.

1921 - Arab riots begin in Jaffa spread throughout the region, killing 45 Jews. 48 Arabs killed by British restoring order.

1929 - Another Arab riot in Jerusalem. 133 Jews killed by Arabs. 116 Arabs killed by British restoring order.

1936-1939 - An Arab revolt against Jewish immigration leads to three years of sporadic violence. 400 Jews and 5000+ Arabs are killed.

I'm afraid Mandate Palestine was far from a multiculti paradise. The only place in the ME you find Arabs and Jews living together in peace is Israel.

Anonymous said...

Israel would have launched its own offensive anyway within 2 months

Sheer, self-serving mendacity. It's absurd. I'm sure Lebanon is a wonderful place, but c'mon. Israel's got enough to do without trying to conquer her neighbors. And for what? Pissing off the UN -- worse, pissing off the US -- just to have the dubious fun of trying to oppress 4 million people? But, let's say the Knesset had been secretly replaced by alien pod people crazed with a lust for Lebanese falafel. Nasrallah's cunning plan to deal with an unprovoked invasion that would've brought worldwide opprobrium down on Israel's head was to hand Israel casus belli on a silver platter?!

Lirun said...

many of my closest friends overseas are muslim and christian arabs.. i'm not much of a "positive" discriminator but they were simply the people i connected with.. obviously i had non middle eastern friends as well..

the fact is whether we like it or not we are living side by side.. albeit in separate countries.. but no one is really going anywhere.. and even if we do - we're still on the some bloody and polluted planet..

saying that we cant live together is denial.. because we do.. whether peacefully or otherwise..

this is why the fighting seems to aimless to me.. because at the end of the day.. we're all one big fat juicey neighbourhood anyway..

i dont think bringing in the syrians is a good idea.. i think that would be a step back..

its a tough call though.. i cant help dreading the fear of another country spiralling down into iraqation..

wishing peace to all sides internally and across our borders..

lirun
tel-aviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
lets give the east mediterranean a break from all the violence

Baroon said...

Dear "american with questions"

If u like leave ur email address or any messenger ID i might be able to answer some of your quastions and we might be able to exchange ideas
Regrads

Unknown said...

I think this is a seductive alternative because it is a) articulate, b) the way the old style, TOP dictating what the bottom will follow, since the age of nationalism began in the 19th century. ANY BRITISH diplomat of the 19th century would be proud to author the article presented here.

BUT can we truly return to a time when people were pushed around like pawns on a chessboard?

OF COURSE NOT. It can't happen like that any more. The wish for Syria, regardless of whether they would/could come, should come or not is a fantasy.

Lebanon has a Shiite majority, the new
state of affairs will be that the country has to get used to a government formed by Shiite politicians, if the votes are there. If the Shiite majority had not been treated as second class citizens....but we can't look at the past. The future is enfranchizing the voters of the Shiite South in new elections after this war.

Amon Ra said...

"UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon contacted Israel 10 times before an Israeli bomb killed four UN personnel, sources familiar with a UN report say.

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile after six hours of shelling nearby, diplomats familiar with the initial probe into the deaths say"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5217176.stm

It gets better and better the way Israel respects international law and UN. What about a new term???

"Civilized Terrorism"

Mr. S said...

Nasbined....

The fact that you refer to them as Jews, and not Israelis, further reinforces that anti-Israel rhetoric is simply Jew-hatred.

We do not live in tanks. We do not want to. We would prefer peace. Until terror is destroyed and the Arab/Muslim world admits that there is Jewish history in Israel, and until there is a revolution of democratic VALUES and not simply elections, we will need our tanks.

Signed,

A Jew who would like peace, but will fight if necessary
Jerusalem, Israel

www.exitthecave.blogspot.com

Solomon2 said...

If the Syrians are "invited" back in, how could Lebaon be sure that Hezbollah would really be disarmed? That would be more humiliating than ever...

Is it not a far less humiliating option for Lebanon to ally with Israel and the U.N. to disarm Hezbollah instead? At least then you'll know it will happen, and that the Israelis will depart once their mandate is completed.

Mr. S said...

nasbined,

you're filled with emotion, mostly hatred. you're also a bit inaccurate in your history. the united states only started helping israel seriously in the 1970s - your french friends helped us before that.

if you'd like to read some intellectual material and post thought-out responses, i invite you to post on my blog. Please keep it respectful, nasbinend. maybe you'll learn something.

shmuel
jerusalem, israel
www.exitthecave.blogspot.com

Mr. S said...

i recommend all see this interview with Dr. Wafa Sultan. The link appears in the article: Video that Must be Seen! Amazing Rebuke of Islamic Terror by Arab-American on Aljazeera, at www.exitthecave.blogspot.com. 3rd or 4th article down.

She's from lebanon and speaks out against the terrorists on aljazeera!!!
it's in arabic with english subtitles.

Solomon2 said...

nasbined, you just pointed out that negotiations didn't work. How can you then claim that only negotiations will work?

Mr. S said...

nasbined....listen to what the doctor has to say

she may enlighten you

Mr. S said...

nasbined,

until you start thinking a bit more rationaly you will be bitter with hatred. It's important to know that we are not going anywhere. No one is preparing ovens for us, us much as you may hope for that. If anyone were to do so, we would take care of them.

I'm glad you went to the site to watch the video. If you enjoy getting angry you should come back often...its updated quite regularly.

Bad Vilbel said...

dougjnn,

I was referring to Syria and Iran when i said "other countries leaving us in peace".

My point is that if Lebanon were to be given full sovereignty over it's territory, and have no interference from its neighbours, propping up proxy militias, i am confident the Lebanese can govern themselves.

It doesn't happen overnight, but it can be done.

I seriously cannot believe some people are now convinced that Lebanon needs to be governed by the baathist regime in Syria to be peaceful. Are you people nuts?

You have to ask yourself "Who ok'ed the kidnapping of the 2 soldiers? Who's been providing Hezbollah with weapons and money? Who's been encouraging them to poke at Israel? Who's been helping out Hamas and Islamic Jihad? Who's been assassinating Lebanese leaders who speak out against Hezbollah?"

And then you have to ask yourself "Do I really want those guys back in Lebanon? Do i truely believe them when they say they can stabilize it?"

Give me a break.

Lirun said...

nasbind.. you're not very persuasive.. its always interesting to listen to people who assert that their rights are paramount but those of others do not exist.. you speak often of israeli crimes and ill treatment of populations and your right to life and you blend a vicious cocktail of puritan values with spurious hypocracy.. you blatantly deny that i too may deserve to live in peace or safely.. only your safety counts and mine can be compromised to no end and this does not matter to you.. yet you scream and yell that i need to worry about yours.. this does not nothing to promote your interests - nor does it do much to impact the interests of those you claim to hate.. the fact is i do worry about yours.. as much as i deplore the violence - even my warring country worries about you.. it would be so much simpler to carpet bomb lebanon.. instead however we watch our friends and family get sent into the depths of your terrorist incubators so that they canuse their very best efforts to avoid a single civilian death.. naturally you demonise us and call us the enemy of all of lebanon.. but if you were true to yourself you would consider that as tragic as the outcome may be.. there is in fact no intention to harm lebanon as a people..

anyway an interesting evolution in israeli politics hits the news.. olmert seeks a clear view of how soon this is going to end.. this indicates tension between our government and our military.. i hope this will challenge our government to enhance and refine and accelerate its political efforts to achieve a solution that does not involve tragic means.. whether or not such are justifiable..

wishing peace to our region and a special prayer of peace to nasbind..

lirun
tel-aviv
www.emspeace.blogspot.com
i believe peace is achievable

Solomon2 said...

I think nasbined may have missed a dose or two of his medication. He's not making sense, not even to his ideological allies.

sparkle hayter said...

Oddly enough though, it appears most of the PEOPLE of Iran do not want war. Not sure about the Syrians, but the reports from Lebanese refugees in Syria indicat the Syrian people have opened their homes and been very kind and generous.

How come people can be so good and fair, and their governments can be such a-holes? What's wrong with this picture?