It is Iran and Syria

Haaretz has an interview with Martin Kramer and number of other Middle East Experts on how they see the war and what is likely to happen afterwards. Mr. Kramer believes as I do that the attack on Hizbollah amounts to a spoiling attack in the war against Iran.

"It was a strategic miscalculation. Hezbollah didn't internalize changes in the broader strategic climate. The top regional issue today is Iran's nuclear drive, not the fate of Hamas or the Palestinian issue. If Hezbollah had understood this fully, it would have laid very low until needed by Iran in a mega-crisis with the United States. At that point, its threats against Israel would have been added to the overall deterrent capabilities of Iran, and might have caused the United States to think twice.

"Hezbollah apparently didn't understand this. If Iran was directly involved in the decision, it also shows an erosion of discipline in Iran's own decision-making process. Iran had nothing to gain from this little adventure, and a lot to lose. It may well be that President Ahmadinejad's rhetoric is beginning to cloud judgment in Tehran.

"In any case, it is in the interests of Israel and the United States to deal with the Hezbollah threat now, and not later in the midst of a far more dangerous crisis over Iran's nuclear plans. So a war now to degrade Hezbollah is a shared Israel-U.S. interest, which means that Israel can wage it without many constraints.

Mr. Kramer goes on to point out that Hizbollah and its masters are not exactly masters of strategy. Not only that, he points out that this is not the first time that the Arabs have made a similar mistake. What we call here in the USA "stuck on stupid".

"Incredibly, Nasrallah is making the same mistakes as Nasser. By puffing himself up, he isn't deterring Israel; at this point, he's only making himself and his movement a bigger and more legitimate target. Hezbollah has become a prisoner of its own myth, which is that at any moment it can go one-on-one against Israel - and win. It can't, and now is the best opportunity to prove it - to Lebanese Shiites, to all Lebanese and to the rest of the Arab-Muslim world.

"At any moment in time, it is Israel that can turn Nasrallah either into a cinder or a shadow figure like Osama bin Laden, reduced to sending defiant missives from some basement or cave. And Israel can scatter the big chiefs of Hezbollah like the United States scattered the Taliban. This has to be the objective - bin Ladenization of Nasrallah, Talibanization of Hezbollah - and it is not beyond reach. Of course, bin Laden and the Taliban still exist, but they aren't a regional or global factor. That is the objective here as well.

Mr. Kramer goes on to speculate that the Hizbollah snatch of the two soldiers may have come about becauser of Hizbollah weakness, not strength.

"Hezbollah basked in the admiration of many Lebanese after Israel's withdrawal, but that aura has been eroded steadily over the past few years. This is because, following Israel's withdrawal, Hezbollah's continued 'resistance' along the border fell outside the national consensus.

"As a result, we have seen more and more political figures in Lebanon criticize Hezbollah. The Nasrallah personality cult has been a way to keep the faithful in line. Not so long ago, Hezbollah thugs took to the streets after a Lebanese television station broadcast a satire of Nasrallah. The mob burned tires and cars. The episode showed that Nasrallah's moral standing had slipped, and that the movement had been reduced to intimidation to keep up the facade.

"The point here is that Hezbollah is no longer the darling of Lebanese nationalism, and its recent conduct has made it increasingly look like something foreign. This is certainly the message that is being sent by leaders of most other factions in the country: that Hezbollah has usurped the power of decision-making on war and peace from the legitimately constituted government, and that it is acting outside the Lebanese national interest. The more Israel intensifies its attacks, the more that criticism is likely to spread - even among Shiites. I do not see the country rallying around Hezbollah."

Colonel Charbel Barakat is a Christian from the village of Ein Ibel in southern Lebanon. After Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 he fled to Israel. He now lives in Toronto. He talks about the true nature of Hizbollah:

"Hezbollah is an organization that lives on blood. If you do not satisfy its appetite, it will turn to prey. Regrettably, you allowed the Hezbollah monster to grow under your nose. That happened in 2000, when Israel fled from Lebanon. Israel betrayed us, its friends for 40 years. It was more important for prime minister Ehud Barak to fulfill his election promise that by July 2000 the IDF would be out of Lebanon, than to take care of restraining the monster." ..... Barak should have posed conditions to the United Nations and to the Lebanese government which would not have allowed Hezbollah to situate itself in the south, certainly not with arms. By his action he gave Hezbollah what even they never dreamed of - all of southern Lebanon. But Barak is not the only one to blame. [Ariel] Sharon also contributed to the situation when he agreed to capitulate to Hezbollah and exchange prisoners - not only Lebanese, but from all the Arab states - in return for one Israeli who had set out to deal in drugs. Israel helped make Nasrallah the true leader of Lebanon."

Colonel Charbel Barakat goes on to talk about the root of the problem. He points out as I have that the problem is not local.

"The problem is bigger than Hezbollah. The problem is Iran and in fact, the whole Middle East. The Arab leaders are stupid if they do not see that if Hezbollah wins, after Lebanon will come the turn of Jordan and Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which also have their Nasrallahs and bin Ladens who are just waiting for a show of weakness."

Well it seems that the Jordanians and the Saudis are not stupid.Ynet news is reporting that despite Syrian calls for talks to end the battle it prefers to work through Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

Syria, which appears to be on the losing side, is making demands for a comprehensive Middle East settlement (including prisoner swaps and resolution of the Golan and Shebba farms issuses) as a way to solve the problem with Hizbollah. I don't think that that is going to work. Neither does US Ambasador t the UN John Bolton.

United States rejects Syrian offer for talks: In response to remarks to Reuters by Syrian Deputy Faisal al-Meqdad that Syria is ready to hold talks with the United States to find a solution to the crisis between Israel and Hizbullah, the Americans said they prefer to mediate through Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

"Syria doesn't need dialogue to know what they need to do," US Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton told Fox News Sunday.

"They need to lean on Hizbullah to get them to release the two captured Israeli soldiers and stop the launch of rockets against innocent Israeli civilians," Bolton said.

It looks like at least another week of war. With any kind of luck we may be able to pull in the Syrians and Iranians. The Maker willing. Well as I have been saying it is not about Lebanon. It is about Syria and Iran. Surprisingly or not President Bush says it is Iran and Syria.

Technorati:
Israel, Shalit, Olmert, Palestinians, Middle East, Hamas, Middle East Rules, Lebanese Rules, Lebanon, Gaza, Hezbollah, Hizbollah, Iran, Syria, Golan Heights, Shebba Farms, Nasrallah, Palestine, Bush, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, America, United States, USA