An eventful few days...

The past few days have been eventful to say the least: my first trip to the field, mass food poisoning, my first medevac... And then, there is Lebanon.

Let's start with Lebanon first. Here's a brief except from an article from AP which hopefully gives a summary of the situation to date - it was written yesterday so doesn't include the recent clashes in the district of Aley, a mountain suburb of Beirut:

Hezbollah fighters in Beirut melt away By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press WriterSat May 10, 5:27 PM ET

Hezbollah gunmen melted off the streets of Beirut Saturday, heeding an army call to pull the fighters out after the Shiite militants demonstrated their military might in a power struggle with the U.S.-backed government.

Prime Minister Fuad Saniora, in his first public statement since sectarian clashes erupted on Wednesday, said Lebanon can no longer tolerate Hezbollah having weapons. He called on the army to restore law and order and remove gunmen from the streets.
Despite his tough talk, Saniora made a key concession to the Hezbollah-led opposition that would effectively shelve the two government decisions that sparked the fighting.

Muslim West Beirut was mostly calm a day after Hezbollah and its allies seized control of neighborhoods from Sunnis loyal to the government. Most Hezbollah gunmen had pulled out, leaving small bands of their Shiite Amal allies to patrol the streets.

While tensions in the capital appeared to be defusing, violence spread and intensified in other parts of the country.
At least 12 people were killed and 20 wounded when pro- and anti-government groups fought in a remote region of northern Lebanon, Lebanese security and hospital officials said. It was the heaviest toll for a single clash since fighting began.

At least 37 people have been killed in four days of clashes — the worst sectarian violence since Lebanon’s 1975-1990 civil war.
The violence grew out of a political standoff between the opposition, which pulled out of the Cabinet 17 months ago demanding veto power over government decisions. The deadlock has prevented parliament from electing a president, leaving the country without a head of state since November.

The political standoff turned into clashes after the government confronted Hezbollah earlier this week. It said it would sack the chief of airport security for alleged ties to Hezbollah and declared the group’s private telephone network illegal and a threat to state security.
Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Thursday the decisions amounted to a declaration of war and he demanded they be revoked. His Shiite forces then overran large swaths of West Beirut.

....

My first reaction when I read about the clashes, aside from worry about friends I had left in Lebanon, was sheer increduity: after nearly 18 mths of both sides ratcheting up the tensions and playing brinksmanship with each other but nothing coming of it except hot air, I couldn't quite believe it when I read that all the political tension had finally erupted.

My second and third reactions were still increduity. Maybe this is naive of me, but I just can't imagine Lebanon descending back into civil war - all sides have too much to lose, and the memory of the last war is still too fresh in people's minds. Plus, it's immensely stupid. That doesn't mean that civil conflict is ruled out: heavens know that Lebanon has no taboo against political violence, and macho posturing has been proved time and time again to be a potent force for actions of stupendous stupidity on the part of political leaders throughout history. But, despite all the doom and gloom, I can't quite bring myself to see it happening.

That said, my feel is that things have most definitely taken a turn for worse - especially for the ordinary Lebanese. Something which Western media outlets often have difficulty comprehending is that there is a large gap between civil violence and outright civil war. Whereas I don't think the latter would happen, there's no guarantee that the political skirmishes and violence won't continue - once you get out the rifles, they're difficult to stuff back into the box - especially in a state operating in a political vacuum. And the people who suffer are the civilians and the future chances of political reconciliation.

In terms of my own opinion of the events, the March 14 coalition have just shown once again how ineffective and incompetent they are. I have an extremely low opinion of most of the politicians in Lebanon - morally, they are all at the level of pond scum, but Jumblatt and Geagea are the worst. Not only are they amoral and xenophobic to the point of fascism (and I don't say that lightly), they also do stupid things - like provoke Hizbollah into a retaliation that just proved to the world how much political and military clout Hizbollah have. I don't intend to get into a discussion about whether Hizbollah's retaliation was in any way proportionate to the offense - possibly not - but they definitely came out of this the victors.

I don't pretend to be neutral in my sympathies - I definitely have more sympathy for the opposition than for the government. From what I can tell, Hizbollah is one of the few organisations in Lebanon who give a shit about the poor and disadvantaged, and is disciplined and not completely riddled with corruption. Also, they and Amal represent historically disadvantaged Shias who make up around 40% of the population while receiving only 21% of the parliamentary seats - and are, at present, completely shut out of the government.

I'm not a Hizbollah apologist: they are rabidly anti-Israeli and the extent to which they care about Christians or even Sunnis is debatable which is an obvious issue when talking about future power settlements. They also refuse to even discuss disbanding their militias and incorporating their structures into that of the State. You could argue on the last point that that is because the State is too weak and unfairly dominated by the March 14 coalition - but even if it were not so, I highly doubt that Nasrallah would give up the power he has as an effective leader of a State within a State. He can argue until he's blue in the face about the need to protect Lebanon from Israel which is the Lebanese army is incapable of doing - although there is a great deal of truth to that, one of the reasons for it is because of Hizbollah. It's a complete cycle of cause and effect.

However, there are reasons why Hizbollah have the clout they do, and those reasons are not going away anytime soon. Trying to ignore them and shunt them out of the political process by calling them a terrorist organisation, as the West is trying to do, is simply ridiculous and short-sighted. Of all the political factions in Lebanon, they have the least Lebanese blood on their hands and the most, if misguided, claim to be the defenders of Lebanon. Unlike most of the other factions currently in both the government and opposition, they were not involved in the civil war and until recent events, their military activity has been largely concentrated against Israel - an occupier and aggressor to most Lebanese.

And this ridiculous accusation about Hizbollah being puppets of Iran/Syria by America when it's actulaly a lot more complicated than that - that just pisses me off. It's the same accusation levied against Ho Chi Minh being an agent for Russia and China during the Vietnam War - and it just shows that America never learns from its mistakes. Yes, there is influence and pressure, but there are commonality of interests as well as regional distrust and nationalism. And whatever you say about Nasrallah, he not a puppet unless he wants to be. Like the March 14 coalition's relationship with the West, Hizbollah is using Syria/Iran just as much they they are using Hizbollah.

Can't believe I've ranted on so much - that's the thing about the Middle East: everyone has an opinion depending on where they're coming from. It's impossible to stay neutral.

Here's a blog entry from Josh Landis, the Director for the centre of Middle East Studies about the recent situation:
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=707

I especially like his response to a comment left on his entry accusing him of being anti-American and a Hizbollah apologist:

I do not mean to praise Hizbullah. My weakness is that I think like an American and get angry at my government for its short-sightedness and misunderstanding of the Lebanon realities.
I am watching the demonization of Hizbullah, Syria and Iran begin for this event.
I fear that nothing will be learned from this episode.

The point, as Norton says above in Robin Wright’s Post article, is that — “If there’s going to be a solution, it will involve some compromise with the opposition, which will include Hezbollah.”
Hizbullah is not trying to impose a Tehran on the Med. It showed restraint. It withdrew from West Beirut quickly and won the cooperation of the army. This is not a coup.

Clearly, no state can survive for long with two independent armies as Lebanon has. Lebanon will survive this episode because the Lebanese Army decided not to behave as a sovereign force. It bowed to Hizbullah. This is very disturbing to all other Lebanese.
But the army is powerless because it is Lebanon in a microcosm; without unity among the sects, the army cannot function any more than Lebanon can. The army showed unity in fighting al-Qaida at Nahr al-Bared, but that is because no sect claimed the fighters of Naher al-Bared.

You point out that the problem is even worse because Hizbullah must take into account the interests of Syria and Iran or have its arms supplies dry up. I cannot contest this - although I have not seen the other Lebanese sects test Hizbullah’s nationalism by doing what Norman suggests above: offering it real equality and political power commensurate with its numbers.
They claim it is a traitor and demonize it as the slave of Iran and Syria. Unfortunately, the government has given Hizbullah no incentive to severe its links with Iran.

But let us concede that its military and even “ideological” dependence on Iran and Syria is a constraint on its ability compromise in good faith with the other sects of Lebanon, this only makes it all the more important for the US to stop its black and white - good versus evil foreign policy. By isolating Iran and Syria and by boycotting them, Washington compounds the mistake it is making on a smaller scale in Lebanon. It is ensuring that any larger compromise in the region remains out of reach.

Such a compromise will be very difficult to achieve and will take years before even the first steps are realized, but the first step must be an attempt to down play the dichotomies and to begin to reach across the ideological divides.
Only then will we be able to begin to see our way forward.

Hizbullah has proven that it can sweep aside the Lebanese state when it wants, but it has also demonstrated that it needs that state. It has a fairly reasonable sense of its limits and of the limits of the other sects of Lebanon. It is not insensitive to their political tolerances. This is a positive sign.
It should be exploited.
Instead we are hearing Washington begin to hector again and explain how Hizbullah is a terrorist entity that marches to Iran’s orders - the epitome of evil.

Other than the moral blockheadedness of the Bush administration, it is also wasting out money - not only in Iraq, but now in Lebanon. As Robin Wright records:
“The Bush administration has spent $1.3 billion over the past two years to prop up Siniora’s government, with about $400 million dedicated to boosting Lebanon’s security forces. But Washington’s assistance has been put in check by Hezbollah — the Shiite militia trained, armed and financed by Iran and Syria — which has the Siniora government under virtual siege.”

...

Enough of this - I'll leave it to people more knowledgeable than I am to understand the situation better. Now onto medevacs and cute Cuban doctors...