Commentary
The U.S. and Israel Suffer Another Blow in Lebanon
Militia forces loyal to the pro-U.S.
government of Lebanon have suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Hezbollah
forces, further weakening the influence of the U.S. and Israel in Lebanon and
almost certainly postponing another anticipated invasion of Lebanon by Israel.
The three days of fighting resulted in Hezbollah emerging as the most powerful
political force in the country. Hezbollah, which carefully avoided any attacks
on government buildings, and the Lebanese army, which refused to participate in
the fighting, have also put an end to the speculation that Lebanon would slip
into another fratricidal civil war such as the one that raged from 1975 to 1990
and threatened to destroy the country.
In the weeks prior to the outbreak of
fighting, the U.S. positioned warships off the coast of Lebanon and Israeli
officials were openly talking about another invasion to restore the honour of the Israeli Defence
Forces (IDF), which were defeated by Hezbollah in 2006. The U.S. was demanding
that Hezbollah allow the Lebanese government to elect a pro-U.S. president of
the country. There can be little doubt that the pro-government militias were
incited by the U.S. to attack Hezbollah and, if the fighting had continued for
any length of time, it is likely that Israeli forces would have also invaded
Lebanon in order to engage Hezbollah on two fronts. However, given Hezbollah’s
rapid victory those plans are now on hold. The Lebanese government has now been
forced to accept a compromise candidate for president – the head of the
Lebanese armed forces, the same general who refused to commit his forces to
attack Hezbollah and defend the government during the recent fighting.
The current pro-U.S. government of
Lebanon was installed as a result of the 2005 “Cedar Revolution”, which was
organized by the U.S. State Department and various “pro-democracy”
organizations such as George Soros’ Open Society Institute. The pretext was the
February, 2005 assassination of Rafik Hariri, a
former Lebanese prime minister and leading pro-U.S. politician. The U.S. and Israel,
who some suspect were responsible for the assassination, pointed fingers at
Syria and mobilized a broad movement to force Syria to withdraw its troops from
Lebanon. Shortly after the installation of a pro-U.S. government, the U.S. and
Israel began preparations for the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in July 2006,
with the intent of crushing Hezbollah militarily and opening the way for an
invasion of Syria. However, despite a massive Israeli bombing campaign and
thousands of Lebanese casualties, the IDF was forced to retreat in defeat.
Hezbollah, far from being defeated, emerged stronger both militarily and
politically.
Hezbollah’s 2006 victory led directly to
the political impasse that has gripped Lebanon ever since. The government has
tried to use its parliamentary majority, gained before the 2006 Israeli
invasion, to push through various pro-U.S. measures, while Hezbollah has used
its massive popular support as the saviour of Lebanon
to block such measures, including the election of a new, pro-U.S. president.
Hezbollah has used both its military and political power wisely, forbidding
vengeance killings and acts of terrorism against civilians, and correctly
reading the widespread opposition of the Lebanese people, including the army,
to another bloody civil war. It has out-maneuvered both the
U.S. and Israel, as well as their Lebanese puppets, at every turn, emerging as
a political force capable of uniting the vast majority of the Lebanese people
in defence of their nation.
The Hezbollah victory will have
repercussions far beyond the borders of Lebanon. For the past year the U.S. and
Israel have been beating the drums for a pre-emptive war against Iran, based on
the tired claim that Iran is building “weapons of mass destruction”, including
nuclear weapons. The U.S. has also accused Iran of supplying weapons to
insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. Bush administration has even been
openly discussing the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iranian military
installations. However, a number of U.S. generals, both active and retired,
have warned that such an attack would be certain to result in Iran retaliating
against U.S. troops in Iraq and there is a fear that Syria, which is allied
with Iran, would enter the war from the west. The U.S. army has proven
completely incapable of defeating a lightly-armed Iraqi insurgency and cannot
even dislodge the Mahdi Army from Sadr
City in Baghdad, which means that it would find itself fighting on at least
three fronts. Therefore, it is crucial for it to neutralize Syria and Hezbollah
before it can launch an attack against Iran. To date all of its attempts to do
so have met with abject failure.
This most recent failure of its puppet
forces in Lebanon has put the Bush administration’s entire Middle East policy
in jeopardy. The U.S. can respond in one of two ways. It can either arrogantly
ignore the reality of the predicament in which it finds itself and plunge ahead
from one disaster to the next, or it can retreat from its current policy and
adopt the more conciliatory policies being advocated by former president Jimmy
Carter, the Democratic Party and a growing section of the Republicans.
Unfortunately for the people of the Middle East, both options being advocated
have the goal of maintaining U.S. imperialist hegemony in the Middle East,
which necessarily means yet more death and destruction for the peoples of the
region.