Hezbollah and the art of the possible By Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS - The decision by Hassan Nasrallah, the secretary general of
Hezbollah, to bomb the northern Israeli town of Haifa was received with mixed
emotions in Lebanon and the Arab world. Those who wanted to see pain inflicted
on Israel organized massive parades in his favor in Damascus, Amman, Baghdad
and Cairo.
Others, however, claimed that Nasrallah was leading the Arabs to where Egyptian
president Gamal Abdul Nasser had led them in 1967 - to unforgivable defeat.
Because of Nasser's adventurism, the Arabs lost the Golan Heights, the Sinai
Peninsula, Jerusalem and the West Bank. Like Nasser, they claim, Nasrallah is a
true patriot, but both leaders were greatly misinformed about the might of the
enemy, and the power of their own armies.
They also underestimated Israel's standing and friends in the
international community, which since 1967 have exceeded those of the Arabs - at
least in quantity. Many in the Arab world, including the regimes of Jordan,
Egypt and Saudi Arabia, see Nasrallah as the new Nasser who will lead his
people to certain defeat. Saudi Arabia even issued an official statement
warning against "irresponsible adventurism adopted by certain elements within
the state" in Lebanon.
The Saudis did not, however, mention Hezbollah by name. It would be only
natural for the Saudis, who are historically at odds with Iran, and tactical
allies of Saad al-Hariri, the current leader of Lebanon's Sunni community and a
member of parliament, to oppose the adventurism of Nasrallah. Too much Saudi
money and investment, from the days of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik
al-Hariri, is at stake in Lebanon.
The Saudis are the traditional backers of the Sunni community that is led by
the Hariri family, which wants a Westernized, economy-oriented country and not
a hotbed for revolutionary warfare. They cannot afford to losing their
influence in Lebanon and have it replaced by that of Iran - which is exactly
what happens whenever Hezbollah gets the upper hand in Lebanese politics.
For his part, in an inflammatory speech, Nasrallah addressed the Saudis
directly (but also without mentioning them by name), saying, "We have been
adventurers for all our life and brought nothing but honor and freedom for our
country."
Sunday's rocket attacks on Haifa hit a train station on Shenem Beach and caused
havoc among the port city's 270,000 residents. Nine Israelis were killed and
another 23 were wounded. It was the first time Haifa had been attacked since it
was taken from the Arabs in the Arab-Israeli War of 1948.
In addition to raising the moral of Nasrallah's supporters (and fears of his
critics from what responses the attack would generate), the attack on Haifa
proved that the Hezbollah leader was not kidding when he said that he could
strike deep into the Israeli interior.
Not only did Nasrallah bomb Haifa, but he also landed missiles on the city of
Acre in the western Galilee, 152 kilometers from Jerusalem. Israeli Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert said there would be "far-reaching consequences" for the
attack, warning all citizens in Tel Aviv to be on high alert for more Hezbollah
rockets.
On Friday, Nasrallah had caused more divisions in the Arab world. Just when it
seemed he was being defeated, he came out on Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV and
announced that an Israeli warship off the coast of Beirut had been hit by
Hezbollah rockets. Four Israeli sailors were reported missing after the attack.
According to Al-Jazeera reports, the Israelis then tried to land paratroopers
in Sidon, but their attempt was foiled by Hezbollah.
In a weekend speech, Nasrallah again defiantly addressed the Israelis, saying,
"You wanted an open war and we are ready for an open war." He added, "Soon you
will find how stupid your new government is and how it is incapable of reading
the situation. It has no experience. You said in your opinion polls that you
believe me more than anyone else. Believe me now - you attacked every house in
Lebanon and you will pay for that."
He then said: "Our homes will not be the only ones to be destroyed. Our
children will not be the only ones to die." Then Nasrallah landed rockets
inside Israel, on the city of Tiberias - another attack unprecedented since
1948.
Israel responded to Hezbollah's attacks with even mightier force. For days now
it has been bombing the southern suburbs of Beirut, where Hezbollah and the
Shi'ite population are densely located. In all, more than 500,000 people live
in the district, known as al-Dahiya.
Residents have left their homes and are sleeping in the streets. Education
Minister Khalid Qabbani has ordered that all public schools remain open to
serve as shelters to the displaced.
During the civil war (1975-90) the residents of al-Dahiya used to flee to other
parts of Beirut whenever their neighborhoods were unsafe to live in, and
vice-versa when Beirut was in flames. Today, both Beirut and al-Dahiya are
unsafe. The offices of Hezbollah in the suburbs of the Lebanese capital were
bombed, as was its radio station Al-Nour and television station Al-Manar. The
party's nine-floor headquarters was destroyed, as was the political office in
Haret Hreik (a leading Shi'ite neighborhood).
The country, Beirut included, currently lives in complete blackouts. At the
time of writing, more than 100 Lebanese have been killed and another 300 have
been wounded.
No end in sight
The crisis in Lebanon is far from coming to an end. Olmert has put forward his
country's terms for a ceasefire, which includes the disarming of Hezbollah and
the return of the two Israeli soldiers captured inside Israel last
Wednesday. Hezbollah has turned down both requests, insisting on a prisoner
exchange with Israel.
But for the sake of argument, let's say that Israel agrees to Hezbollah's terms
and exchanges prisoners with Nasrallah. It has done it in the past, with
Nasrallah himself in 2004 and with Ahmad Jibril, the secretary general of the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), in
November 1985.
The "Jibril Deal" was amazing, when the PFLP-GC traded six Israeli soldiers
held by the Palestinians for 4,765 Palestinians held in Israeli jails in
Lebanon. Some criticize Israel for giving up hundreds of Palestinians
("terrorists" in the eyes of the Israeli public) for the sake of a few - or
one, Israeli soldier.
Israeli leaders, however, were never embarrassed by such action since it
reflected high ethics and was considered true patriotism to pay a price no
matter how high for the release or remains of a captured Israel soldier. It is
also viewed as a great sacrifice to give comfort to the families of Israeli
troops.
One example, however, should immediately come to the minds of the Israelis who
are refusing to listen to Hezbollah's requests. It is the case of Israeli Air
Force officer Ron Arad, who parachuted into Lebanon when his aircraft was
damaged while on a mission to attack Palestinian bases in October 1986.
Arad was captured by the Shi'ite militia Amal, whose members broke off to
create Hezbollah. Among the members of Amal at the time was the young
Nasrallah. Arad's captors asked for a price to release him. The Israeli
government, led at the time by Shimon Perez, refused to give in to pressure and
said no, thinking that it could release him by force. It failed, and Arad
disappeared.
The moral of the story is that military force does not always achieve the
results sought by Israel. Israel certainly does not want the one 19-year-old
held in Gaza to disappear, nor does it want Hezbollah to kill the two soldiers
it has captive in Lebanon.
Jerusalem is currently asking for the release of the two prisoners and the
disarming of Hezbollah. While releasing the prisoners is possible, if Israel
offers Hezbollah something in return, getting Nasrallah to disarm is out of the
question.
Israel should remember the words of German chancellor Otto von Bismarck:
"Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable ..." And Israel forcing
Hezbollah to disarm is impossible. Also, continuing this war to force Hezbollah
to disarm is impossible for Israel.
Napoleon Bonaparte once said, "I have tasted command. I like it. And I will
never give it up." Nasrallah has been in command of the largest armed sect in
Lebanon since 1992. He is a highly popular leader who has a wide power base
that spreads throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds. He is wholeheartedly backed
by Syria and Iran, and the Lebanese Shi'ites (40% of the country's 3.7 million)
are overwhelmingly with him.
Disarming Hezbollah, and writing them off the political scene in Lebanon, would
be like asking the Shi'ites of Iraq, who now have real power since the downfall
of Saddam Hussein, to give it up.
The Shi'ites of Lebanon have the exact same dilemma. They, too, had been the
underclass in Lebanon, maltreated by Sunnis and Christians for more than 100
years. They had their day in sun under the leadership of Imam Musa al-Sadr in
the 1970s, and Nasrallah from 1990s onward.
They believe that holding on to their arms is a must to protect them from
further Israeli atrocities in south Lebanon, or in the case of sectarian
violence inside Lebanon, from their opponents in the Lebanese political scene.
Or from anybody who tries to disarm them by force, and restore them to the
status of inferiors.
For all of these reasons, the Israelis will have to amend their proposal for a
ceasefire in Lebanon if they want an end to hostilities. To gain the release of
their arrested soldiers, they must talk to Hezbollah. And they must pay the
price - Hezbollah's price - to avoid repeating the fate of Ron Arad.
Further, disarming Hezbollah should not be raised by Israel at this time as no
one in Lebanon has the power to do it. Not even the Hariri bloc, which is
backed by France, can get the Shi'ite guerrillas to lay down their arms.
The only solution would be for Israel to relinquish the Sheba Farms and release
the remaining Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails. In effect, it means doing
what Nasrallah wants.
Or, it can continue in this bone-breaking war, to see which party falters
first.
And as long as this happens, Hezbollah can play the Israeli card. Nasrallah can
say, "We cannot lay down the arms of Hezbollah because Israel is still a threat
to Lebanon."
