Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 120

Thread: Hezbollah Israeli Conflict:

  1. #1
    achaaban
    Guest

    Hezbolla-Israeli Conflict:

    Why did the Israelis invade Lebanon?

    Israel invaded South Lebanon so that it could stop the Palestinian attacks at the Israeli Northern borders. The Shiites of the South were as dissatisfied as the Israelis and the Christian Lebanese with the Palestinians operations from South Lebanon. The Palestinians had almost controlled the South of Lebanon, making the Shiites life in their villages subject to continuous attacks by Israel. This was a result of the Cairo Agreement that allowed the Palestinians to operate in Lebanon as a militia launching attacks on Israel from South Lebanon. The Shiites were threatened by the Arab Nationalists movements which were mainly Palestinians and Lebanese Sunnis, where both wanted Lebanon to be part of a Pan-Arab state. The Arab Nationalists demand for Lebanon to join the United Arab Republic in 1958 caused Lebanon to go through a civil strife, which led the US to send its Marines to Lebanon.

    The Lebanese-Palestinian Civil War 1975-1990

    • The beginning of 1975-76 war was a result of a fight between the Palestinians and the Phalanges Party related to the PLO freedom fighters operations from Lebanon.
    • The civil war was precipitated by the Lebanese National Movement (the left) support of the Palestinians, which brought about the collapse of the Government.
    • In 1976 some of the Maronite groups sought the help of the Syrians against the ascendant Palestinian-leftists coalition.
    • The Syrian support of the Christians was not altruistic and was due to several factors:
    o The Palestinians armed presence in Lebanon decreased Syrian influence on the Lebanese political scene.
    o Syria feared a potential Israeli intervention to protect Israel’s northern borders.
    o Syria preferred a balance of power among Lebanese contending groups so that it could control them all.
    • In 1978 Camp David Accords purported to give the Palestinians autonomy rather than self-determination. Palestinians were not even direct participants in the talks the decision was made on behalf of them without their consent.
    • Israel was closely watching the situation in Lebanon, following a Palestinian attack inside Israel in March 11, 1978, Israel launched operation Litani. The invasion was designed to insulate the area between the Israeli border and the Litani River from further Palestinian attacks, forming six miles deep security belt on Lebanese territory along Israeli border.
    • There were multiple outcomes of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon;

    o A more enduring alliance between Israel and the Lebanese Christians
    o Christian opposition to Palestinian armed presence and the demand to dissolve the Cairo and the Riyadh agreements

    • The Syrian deployment in Lebanon negotiated with intermediaries with Israel was not to include surface to air missiles. Five years after Syria entered Lebanon it deployed SAM in the Beka’a valley during battles with the Lebanese forces in Zahleh, by controlling the Bekaa valley Syria multiplied its options in threatening Israel’s northern borders and it made it extremely difficult for Israel to cross Lebanon and attack Syria.

    • Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982, controlling the whole costal region.

    o The Israeli invasion of Lebanon was the main cause of the radicalization of the Shiites in Lebanon.
    o Shiites resistance from Amal Movement and Hezbollah was the main force for driving Israel out of Lebanon and the impetus behind the annulment of the Israeli Lebanese Accords 1983.
    o When Israel invaded Lebanon, the Shiites were assisting the Israelis as they were determined on getting the PLO out of the south.
    o The turning point was when Israel sided with its Christian ally the South Lebanese Armey, instead of dealing with Amal. Israel failed in recruiting Shiites in amongst the SLA, where the Shiites did not exceed 10% of the total South Lebanese militia.
    o Israel’s iron fist towards the Shiites, alienated them and provoked resistance that took form of boycott of Israeli goods, protest meetings and finally armed resistance.


    Looking at this sequence of events I would like to view the Israeli invasion of Lebanon from the perspective of a Lebanese Shiite. It was the Shiites in the South who were alienated by the Israeli alliance with the Lebanese Christian Militias in the South. Syria decided to allow the Shiite Islamist revolutionary government in Iran to dispatch around 1,000 Pasdaran (members of the Revolutionary Guards) to the Beqaa Valley of eastern Lebanon, an area occupied by Syrian forces, so that Iran could mobilize the Lebanese Shiites of the South to Liberate Lebanon from the Israeli occupation and not to liberate the Palestinians in Palestine. The Palestinians just like the Israelis sought the alienation of the Shiites with the Palestinians alliance with the Arab Nationalists, who sought to overthrow existing governments. However, in today’s realities Iran is fighting its war against the US and against Israel, by mobilizing the Shiites in Lebanon to argue the Palestinians question, since there are approximately 400,000 Palestinians in Lebanon that the Shiites are unanimous on refusing to nationalize them as Lebanese citizens, this position is shared by a majority of Christians. Nationalizing the Palestinians will artificially increase the Sunni population of Lebanon giving them a majority over the Christians and the Shiites. The Lebanese Shiites problem has nothing to do with the Palestinians and the liberation of Palestine. The Shiites have been historically politically and economically marginalized by the Lebanese government. This on its own makes Hezbollah’s achievements in the south very significant.

    Hezbollah Structure

    Unlike Islamist organizations, Hezbollah has an organizational structure with visible political and military head-staff. This point has evident consequences on the way the party functions. Hezbollah has a judiciary council, a trade unions and social desk, education and institutions department a political council and a defense military operations.

    Hezbollah services:


    In year 2000 they had 56 hospitals with a total number of beneficiaries of 409,281 around the Biq'a Beirut and South Lebanon, between 2000-01 they provided 10582 students with education aide, between token, financial and scholarships, and 10 schools, between South Lebanon, Beq'a and Beirut. They have a TV station a Radio station and News papers and Journals. Hezbollah has a social structure of a welfare government that could not just disappear the next day. The question of disarmament of Hezbollah is a more complex issue than the Lebanese government restoring its sovereignty over all the Lebanese territories as per the directions of Resolution 1559, since it involves the Shiites self-defence against two threats their internal possible marginalization and an aggression by Israel.

    The Shiites, however, want a solution to the Palestinians refugee problem and that solution could not be nationalizing them as Lebanese citizens.

    Hezbollah has a popular support shared by Lebanese Shiites as well as Sunnis and Christians as the resistance that made the liberation of the South possible. From the Shiites perspective, Hezbollah is the welfare government that maintained their survival for the past 20 years almost. Hezbollah helped giving back to the Shiites of South Lebanon and the Beka’a valley their social cultural and territorial independence from two threats that historically sought their alienation and assimilation. The first is the Christian government in Lebanon, and the second is Israel in its possible alliance with the Christians against them, both a perceived threat to the Lebanese Shiites.

    So how could Israel presume that a peace with Lebanon is possible while alienating the Lebanese Shiite population, who claim being the largest minority in the State of Lebanon, a state composed of religious minorities?


    Sources consulted:

    Kobani, Agnes 1991, G. U.S. Intervention in Lebanon, 1958 and 1982, Presidential Decision Making, Library on Congress: 53-77
    Salem Paul, Super Powers and Small States: An Overview of American Lebanese Relations http://www.lcps-lebanon.org/pub/brev...lembr5pt1.html
    Ehteshami, Anoushiravan, Hinnebusch, Raymond A. Syria and Iran, 1997, Middle Powers in a penetrated regional system: Routledge:120-125
    Gambill Gary C. Ziad K, Abdelnour,2002 Hezbollah: Between Tehran and Damascus, Middle East Intelligence Bulletin http://www.meib.org/articles/0202_l1.htm
    Hamzeh, Ahmed Nizar. 2004. In the Path of Hezbollah, Syracuse University Press: 49-59
    Last edited by achaaban; 11-27-2005 at 05:58 PM.

  2. #2
    Cato
    Guest
    I understand you are just tring to show us that the myth of Lebanon following whatever Arab Nation signs a peace treaty with Israel first to eagerly be the second.

    However I do not agree with everything you said.

    "o The Israeli invasion of Lebanon was the main cause of the radicalization of the Shiites in Lebanon."

    What about the Palestinian Occupation you mentioned?

    "o Shiites resistance from Amal Movement and Hezbollah was the main force for driving Israel out of Lebanon and the impetus behind the annulment of the Israeli Lebanese Accords 1983."

    So Syria and the Arab League were just standing by idle, and the international pressure which actually could have hurt Israel had nothing to do with those things?

    Also how Israel could expect peace is that it completed a full withdrawal from Lebanon, and has the capability of destroying the Lebanese Army whenever it wants to, so the Lebanese have a choice.

    Peace with Israel, or war with Israel knowing that they are going to lose.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616
    The IRA had a building, a mailing address, a storefront, American fund raisers and representation in the government while they were murdering people. It didn't make them anything other than murderers.Hezbollah fills two purposes: one; to wage war and two; to achieve popular support to allow them to wage war. Hezbollah has a military contingent of about 3500 regulars backfilled by regular Syrian army (250+ officers) , Iranian Revolutionary Guards and intelligence services what used to be SAVAK (about 350 - 500 combined). Running local hospitals allows them to garner local support and frankly since Lebanon doesn't really exist in the traditional way most countries do, they fill those civil services because there is no one else. But for the most part they are an army. They field hundreds of artillery & thousands of rockets.

  4. #4
    achaaban
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Cato
    I understand you are just tring to show us that the myth of Lebanon following whatever Arab Nation signs a peace treaty with Israel first to eagerly be the second.

    However I do not agree with everything you said.

    "o The Israeli invasion of Lebanon was the main cause of the radicalization of the Shiites in Lebanon."

    What about the Palestinian Occupation you mentioned?

    I think that it radicalized the Christians and not the Shiites, the Christians were the main force in the war against the Palestinians.

    So Syria and the Arab League were just standing by idle, and the international pressure which actually could have hurt Israel had nothing to do with those things?
    The Arab League sent the Syrians to occupy Lebanon, and endorsed the Syrian occupation of Lebanon.

    Peace with Israel, or war with Israel knowing that they are going to lose.
    I think that you cannot threaten people into peace; you only have peace if one does not threaten the other. So I think if we talk peace we are not talking about an imposed peace but a negotiated peace.

  5. #5
    achaaban
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mediocrates
    The IRA had a building, a mailing address, a storefront, American fund raisers and representation in the government while they were murdering people. It didn't make them anything other than murderers.Hezbollah fills two purposes: one; to wage war and two; to achieve popular support to allow them to wage war. Hezbollah has a military contingent of about 3500 regulars backfilled by regular Syrian army (250+ officers) , Iranian Revolutionary Guards and intelligence services what used to be SAVAK (about 350 - 500 combined). Running local hospitals allows them to garner local support and frankly since Lebanon doesn't really exist in the traditional way most countries do, they fill those civil services because there is no one else. But for the most part they are an army. They field hundreds of artillery & thousands of rockets.
    you are right they are an army who claims a right to self-defense against Israel and as a representative of the Shiite sect in Lebanon. Your argument regarding the social services that the government does not provide for which justifies these services existence, also applies when it comes to Hezbollah as an Army since the Lebanese Army was in no position to defend Lebanon when Israel invaded Leabnon. So Hezbbollah is the government of the Shiites in South Lebanon, that provides them security and social services.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616
    None the less it's an army that's dedicated not to 'national' defense but to wage war on another country. They may have proclaimed that their purpose was to throw the IDF out of Lebanon but that's pretty hollow. The IDF is long gone. No they are simply the Foreign Legion of the Iranians and they are there to wage war on Israel on Iran's behalf.

  7. #7
    achaaban
    Guest
    You are absolutely right; they are not a national self-defense force in Lebanon. They are a sectarian army that is designed to provide self-defense to the Shiites sect in the Lebanese sectarian system of government. Iran happens to be the only government in the world today that is providing financial support to maintain the survival of the Shiites in Lebanon socially and militarily. Your assumption that Hezbollah exits today only because of the Israelis and that now that Israel has withdrew then they should not exist is an oversimplification to why do they exist today.

    Iran serves as a financier and nothing more or less. I am positive that the Lebanese Shiites will not march all the way to Palestine to liberate the Palestinians from the Israelis, even if Iran is vowing the destruction of Israel, and even if Hezbollah starts playing this card. I doubt that this will ever be the case.

    Then there is also the Israeli issue with the disputed territories of the Cheba’ Farms, and the Lebanese detainees in Israeli prisons; these are all still unresolved issues with Israel. It is very simplistic to presume that the mere Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon has actually solved the declared state of war between the two countries. The only way that a resolution to these issues will be finalized is if Israel and Lebanon reach a peace agreement between them, this is not the case.

    These two points that I mentioned above make the existence of Hezbollah and its military a necessity for the survival of the Shiites in Lebanon internally within the sectarian system of government, as well as self-defense against a possible Israeli aggression that could be targeted at them. Israel serves as a better threat to utilize for local consumption purposes, but it will be very shallow if we do not view the internal threat that the Shiites are facing in the sectarian government.

    On a regional level, however, the main threat to the Shiites is the increase of the power of the Wahabis, who are supported by the US’s unconditional support for Saudi and Pakistan. These Saudi supported Wahabis have been relentlessly initiating terrorists’ attacks against the Shiites in Iraq, since the Wahabis claim that the Shiites are infidels to Islam and thus could be killed according to their version of Jihad. The United Sates militarily presence in the Gulf States and its support to the largest financier of Wahabism Saudi Arabia is a regional threat to the Shiites in the region. Iran, therefore is balancing the regional powers not only against Israel, but against a larger threat from the US-Saudi Wahabist possible attack.

  8. #8
    Cato
    Guest
    achaaban you said the Arab League endorsed Syrian Conquest, don't you think Syrian Conquest had more to do with the cancelation of the Israeli-Lebanese Accords then Hezbollah?

    Also a nations foriegn policy normally is doing what is in their best interest, is it really in Lebanon's best interest to be at war with Israel, and to face one of the greaest militaries in the world?

  9. #9
    achaaban
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Cato
    achaaban you said the Arab League endorsed Syrian Conquest, don't you think Syrian Conquest had more to do with the cancelation of the Israeli-Lebanese Accords then Hezbollah?
    I think that Syria played all possible cards so that Lebanon will not have peace with Israel, while the Golan Heights issue is not yet resolved. The Arab League does not care either about Lebanon or about Israel. They would like to maintain this conflict alive so that they could have a reason to exist. So, the Syrian-Arab League and Hezbollah's role in preventing a possible peace between Israel and Lebanon is more complex than their adoption of a position of rejecting peace, and is very related to a well planned strategy by the Arabs to divide and conquer. If there is peace, people will rebel against these dictators and not against Israel


    Also a nations foriegn policy normally is doing what is in their best interest, is it really in Lebanon's best interest to be at war with Israel, and to face one of the greaest militaries in the world?
    I totally agree with you it is not in Lebanon’s best national interest to be at war with Israel. However, Lebanon was at war with Israel before Hezbollah comes into existence and Lebanon continues to be at war with Israel, unless there is a peace treaty between Lebanon and Israel the state of war is what prevails. It does not have to be that we are actively shelling each other, only living next to each other feeling threatened is sufficient to maintain the feeling of insecurity alive.

    Coming back to the point of the Lebanese national interests; the Lebanese at the moment are trying to figure out the meaning of a nation, so that they could be talking about national interests. There is no such thing as a Lebanese nation and a Lebanese national interest in a state that views people based on their religious beliefs and excludes the ones who they dislike the most. Since its founding, and the application of the National Pact, Lebanon has been nothing but groups of sects fighting against each other each trying to ally with the country that will back the sect. The Sunnis ally with the Arabs and the Saudis, the Shiites with Iran and the Christians with the west and Israel, each with the aim of destroying the other. Lebanon is in a stage of deciding the reason for its existence. This should take place based on a national reconciliation between the sects and the formation of a national government that first of all will abolish the sectarian government and views the Lebanese as a Lebanese nation with common national interests. This unfortunately is not yet the case in the country.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

  11. #11
    achaaban
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mediocrates
    I am totally aware of this news, it is important to mention that I do not support Hezbollah's attacks on Israel after the Israeli withdrawal from the South, but this is another topic, which I will not address in here.

    I am trying to view this conflict not only the perspective of Israelis but also from the perspective of the community that Hezbollah claims to protect. That is Hezbollah is not only a force that vows animosity to Israel but a force that is working for the survival of a community inside Lebanon. Therefore, the issue with Israel becomes an issue that is to be negotiated, but could not be founded on the elimination of the group. It is an extremely unrealistic attempt to achieve successfully, as it will never lead to peace between the two countries. You could not possibly presume that having peace with one community can only be achieved by their elimination and assimilation. As Jews and Israelis you should be the first to reject such concepts

  12. #12
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616
    Quote Originally Posted by achaaban
    I am totally aware of this news, it is important to mention that I do support Hezbollah's attacks on Israel after the Israeli withdrawal from the South, but this is another topic, which I will not address in here.

    That's wonderful. I totally support the assassination campaign against Hezbollah with as little concern for collateral damage as is practical. But truthfully, if I were you I'd be more worried about the American army Spec Forces at this point, next door.

    I am trying to view this conflict not only the perspective of Israelis but also from the perspective of the community that Hezbollah claims to protect. That is Hezbollah is not only a force that vows animosity to Israel but a force that is working for the survival of a community inside Lebanon.
    As if those two issues were not intertwined. Killing Jews and building hospitals is the opposite side of the same coin. One enables the other enables the other. The more Jews they kill the more legitimate they are which allows them to kill more. The more hospitals they operate the more legitimate they become which allows them more free reign in killing yet more Israelis. Being a state within a state is the cry of 'liberation' all such movements claim; FARC, UNITA, and various Central African armies of plunder. There is zero that is unique about that level of mercenary cynicism.

    Therefore, the issue with Israel becomes an issue that is to be negotiated, but could not be founded on the elimination of the group. It is an extremely unrealistic attempt to achieve successfully, as it will never lead to peace between the two countries.
    See above. It's more likely that even with 30-40-50 millions/month USD funding Hezbollah receives, it can be seriously crippled with key assassinations. It's a top-down organization that can be broken like any other.

    You could not possibly presume that having peace with one community can only be achieved by their elimination and assimilation. As Jews and Israelis you should be the first to reject such concepts

    I'm close to 100% positive that no one outside of Lebanon cares how assimilated the Lebanese are or are not inside of Lebanon. There could be no Israel and Hezbollah would have to carry on the fight against some other non muslims. It's axiomatic.

  13. #13
    achaaban
    Guest
    Sorry, fatal error , correction: I do NOT support Hezbollah's attacks on Israel,

    Appologies for forgetting the not

    One last thing I am starting this argument with total recognition for Israel's right to exist as a state in peace living next to its neighbors

  14. #14
    Senior Member Mediocrates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    N Carolina
    Posts
    30,616

  15. #15
    Ariksan
    Guest
    Achaaban, are you a lebanese Christian or Shiite? Where are you from in Lebanon (I'm just curious). I may have some non-political questions for you if you permit .

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-05-2008, 02:24 PM
  2. palestinian mother, israeli father
    By tandem in forum Religion/Culture
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 10-26-2006, 12:01 PM
  3. French examplery "balanced" reaction to Israeli operation in Gaza
    By sharonbn in forum Israeli-Arab Conflict
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-07-2006, 04:01 AM
  4. Conflict within a conflict: Israel Military
    By D.Abraham in forum Israeli Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-19-2003, 05:31 PM
  5. Historian writes: Go easy on Hezbollah
    By Mediocrates in forum In The News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-25-2002, 08:04 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •