Here is an interesting article from the Daily Star, that leaves this writer with the conclusion that, it’s indeed Nasrallah who is running things in Lebanon. He acts like a “head of state”, literally dictating the extent and measure of the hostilities with the IDF, and if the situation ever arises, he will “allow” the Lebanese gov’t to negotiate the prisoner exchange with Israel, something that will not happen soon, if ever at all.
I am well aware of the Arab need for bluster and hyperbole, but on the other hand, Nasrallah is so “cock sure” of himself that the Hezbollah has indeed supplanted the Lebanese gov’t. He is assuming all by himself and “out loud”, that he is the regional “potentate. If Prime Minister Siniora recognizes a Hizbullah veto over any proposals that sends Nabi Berri, (from the more secular Shii’a movement Amal and close ally of Nasrallah) to negotiate with Israel for the release of prisoners……Nasrallah’s bloviations are vindicated, S.Lebanon is the address for all international communiqués.
Its been claimed by some that Hezbollah has an arranged understanding with the Lebanese gov’t, by which its Hezbollah’s duty to safeguard Lebanon’s southern border with Israel. Belief in that scenario is to discount “the tail wagging the dog” presently. The fact that the Lebanese army dares not go into “Hezbollahstan”, is an acknowledgement of Hezbollah sovereignty south of the Litani river, and that the security arrangement is not of Beirut’s design, but of Hezbollah’s. I am wondering about the contradictory statements of some in the international community, that sees Beirut wanting an end to the conflict with Israel, but also sees the worth of Hezbollah ensuring the continuance of the conflict, in its “contractual defense” of its southern border. Such a scenario also overlooks Syria’s influence over the rise of Hezbollah as well. That it’s Damascus, (the “weigh station” for Iranian weaponry) that has secured Hezbollah’s survival, due to their need for them to command southern Lebanon for Syria, not neutered Beirut.
As for the Shebaa Farms that Israel has held on to, we all know (at least should know) that the UN recognized Israel’s full withdrawal from Lebanon as being complete. We should always note that Hezbollah keeps the fiction alive that its Lebanese territory, due to the Syrian blessing of such nonsense, especially since the Syrians have the UN recognition of it being legally theirs…once, and will be a part of any future negotiations between Syria and Israel. In other words, its an issue since Syria has allowed it to become one for the Hezbollah.
For Syria, as with all dictatorships, having an outside enemy to hate is helpful in manipulating its society. I would wager that a free and democratic Syria that was at peace with itself, would not have a hard time at reaching a peace agreement with Israel. Slave societies throughout the ME, is one of the reasons why this conflict has dragged on for decades. This has to be acknowledged. The fact that dictatorial Syria wants the Golan heights is not in question, but what it wants more, is a continued environment of hostilities with Israel, to placate its Arab street, one only has to reminded of the embassies burnt in Damascus to know just how Syria manipulates its masses.
As for Iran, Ahmadinejad is a strong believer in “the Mahdi”, this is something hardly ever spoken about, but is entirely relevant and important, especially to Ahmadinejad. Most of the Arab world has been quiet about Israel’s operations, and hope as quietly, that they are successful. The Saudis fear Iran, and its meddling in Lebanon upsets Saudi rebuilding ventures, as well as upsetting the whole Middle East. Iranian commentator, Amir Taheri, writes ;
“The mini war that is taking place between Israel and Hezbollah is, in fact, a proxy war in which Iran’s vision for the Middle East clashes with the administration in Washington. What is at stake is not the exchange of kidnapped Israeli soldiers with Arab prisoners in Israel. Such exchanges have happened routinely over five decades. The real issue is who will set the agenda for the Middle East: Iran or America?”
Ahmadinejad’s infatuation with “the Mahdi” is indeed troubling. KGS