Can Israel win?
There has, in the past days, been no shortage of experts telling us that it is enough for Hezbollah to stand up to Israel and survive in order for it to achieve victory. This is based on the assumption that a victory lies in the eyes of the beholder and that the relevant beholder is the Arab street. An Associated Press article published today carries a quote from retired Lebanese General Elias Hanna that sums it up: "Hezbollah wins if it doesn't lose. And Israel loses if it doesn't win".
My definition of an Israeli victory in this conflict, and I think that this is also the definition of the Israeli government, would be for the Lebanese front to go permanently quiet. Whether Hezbollah is destroyed or not is, in itself, of little interest to Israel, although it is certainly important for Lebanon’s internal balance. Of course, if they survive as a military force, Hezbollah might be able to sell the whole episode to the Arab public as a victory. At the end of the day, however, what the Arab street thinks is probably not as important as some journalists and observers seem to think. Arab leaders are not known for being particularly democratic and are for the most part fairly rational (where their own survival is concerned). None of them will rush into a guaranteed military disaster simply because the Arab street gets the false impression that Israel is weak and that it can be defeated.
The question remains, will Israel actually manage to achieve long-term quiet on the Northern Front? This blogger is of the humble opinion that it will. If Hezbollah ends up having to accept a demilitarized zone in Southern Lebanon it will lose the most important means it has of keeping the front open – cross-border raids. The rockets, which it would still be able to fire from anywhere in Lebanon, have in fact proven to be quite a flop. Two weeks of daily Katyusha barrages have led to the death of less than 20 Israeli civilians (not much more than a single suicide bombing would have achieved) and no appreciable softening of Israeli public opinion. The rest of Lebanon has paid a high-enough price for this meagre result that they will probably make it extremely difficult for Hezbollah to use its rockets to provoke further conflict in future.
My definition of an Israeli victory in this conflict, and I think that this is also the definition of the Israeli government, would be for the Lebanese front to go permanently quiet. Whether Hezbollah is destroyed or not is, in itself, of little interest to Israel, although it is certainly important for Lebanon’s internal balance. Of course, if they survive as a military force, Hezbollah might be able to sell the whole episode to the Arab public as a victory. At the end of the day, however, what the Arab street thinks is probably not as important as some journalists and observers seem to think. Arab leaders are not known for being particularly democratic and are for the most part fairly rational (where their own survival is concerned). None of them will rush into a guaranteed military disaster simply because the Arab street gets the false impression that Israel is weak and that it can be defeated.
The question remains, will Israel actually manage to achieve long-term quiet on the Northern Front? This blogger is of the humble opinion that it will. If Hezbollah ends up having to accept a demilitarized zone in Southern Lebanon it will lose the most important means it has of keeping the front open – cross-border raids. The rockets, which it would still be able to fire from anywhere in Lebanon, have in fact proven to be quite a flop. Two weeks of daily Katyusha barrages have led to the death of less than 20 Israeli civilians (not much more than a single suicide bombing would have achieved) and no appreciable softening of Israeli public opinion. The rest of Lebanon has paid a high-enough price for this meagre result that they will probably make it extremely difficult for Hezbollah to use its rockets to provoke further conflict in future.
Still, I would maintain that the achievement of long-term quiet in the North should be but an intermediate goal. As long as full peace is not achieved with Syria, the potential for mischief in the North and on the Palestinian front will remain. Peace between Israel and Syria would terminate Hezbollah, end the maximalist dreams of Hamas and deal a severe blow to Iran's growing power in the region. That is why I think that it is a great pity that Syrian-Israeli peace talks remain off the agenda for the foreseeable future.
4 Comments:
Coincidentally there was a relevant article on today's Times. It was about the Arab military mind and deals with some issues you raise: http://www.timesofmalta.com/core/article.php?id=232668
I think that the best outcome would be for the liberation of Lebanon from the malevolent influence of Syria together with the destruction of Hizbullah's ability to intimidate and blackmail Lebanese society.
If so Lebanon might become the first real western-style Arab democracy which would provide a counterpoint for anti-semitic and anti-western prejudices in the region. It might even become a key Israeli ally.
We can but hope.
It's an interesting article but I'm not sure it does justice to the complexity of the subject. It seems to describe the behaviour of non-state actors more than that of the existing arab regimes. Most current Arab leaders do not actually engage in such self-destructive behaviour. Those who did, like Saddam, are no longer around precisely for that reason.
I agree 100% with his conclusion, however, and I think he does provide a very accurate description of the general Arab mentality.
... and I certainly join you in your hope for Lebanon! I really do think we shall see that in our lifetimes, although maybe not just yet
Well, we certainly won't see it if an "immediate ceasefire" is put into place - as hoped for by many local opponents of Israel.
This "immediate ceasefire" will allow Hezbolah to claim a victory - and further stregnthen it in the eyes of the shia population. Lets hope that a ceasefire will only be put into place once hezbollah is severely damaged - then, and only then will we be able to see some sort of long term solution for Lebanon's problems.
Post a Comment
<< Home