Cashout

by von

WELL, WELL, WELL, WELL:

TALKING TO SYRIA....There are still plenty of nay-sayers, but the chorus calling for Syrian involvement in crafting a Lebanon ceasefire solution now includes Richard Armitage, Warren Christopher, and Mr. Flat World himself, Tom Friedman.

Let me be the first to say that any drunk fool coulda seen this one coming:  Unless Israel smashes Hizbollah -- the chances of which were (and are) slim to none -- the logical role of peacemaker will go to ... Yes, Syria.  Indeed, such was predicted by this drunk fool:

But Israel's war in Southern Lebanon is turning into something altogether different.  Yes, Israel was fully justified in its attack on Hizbollah.  Yes, it cannot yet disengage (and the US has done right by its ally in holding its criticisms thus far).  But do not mistake this support for the best of a bad lot (again) as support for Israel's chosen policy.  The damage now being done in Lebanon and throughout the region is incalculable.  The Cedar Revolution is all but dead.  There is now a high likelihood that Syria will be asked to use its influence to ensure stability in Lebanon -- for what other option will there be, if Hizbollah is to be restrained and an as-yet-unformed international force inserted? 

It will escape many in the blogosphere:  That this action -- even though morally justified, even though against an evil foe -- was stupid.  That it has caused more harm than good.  When the necessity for Syrian involvement becomes clear -- and it will -- the usual suspects will cry appeasement and refer us to the example of Chamberlain.  I cannot save such folks from their foolishness.  Nor can I make them realize that they themselves bear part of the blame for the disaster.

Indeed, who else to restrain Hizbollah but Assad-the-Younger's Alawite clan?  Secular Arabs following a minority strain of Islam, Syria's leaders are not natural bedfellows with either the Persian Shi'ites of Iran or fanatical Shi'ites of Hizbollah. They are bedfellows of convenience.  When the Syrian Mukhabarat reinfilitrates Lebanon (I suspect that it never left), the death of the Cedar Revolution will be complete.  Let the handwringing and accusations of appeasement and betrayal begin!

What a supremely stupid little war.

Yet, maybe there is hope.  With the right combination of bribes, perhaps we will be able to pry Syria from Iran.  Payment to Syria in exchange for the restraint Iran's power in the Levant is not a good deal.  But it may be the best deal remaining on the table.

The problem is that the deal cannot be made unless Israel fights on, and we support them. Iran must not be allowed to exploit the opening that we've left it, and the pounding of Lebanon must be sufficient to strengthen Syria's hand over Hizbollah.  Megan McArdle, guestblogging at Instapundit, suggests that the war-not-to-lose will be bloody.  Its casualties will include Israeli and Lebanese civilians, of course, and also more ephemeral things, like a young Arab democracy. But, with luck and pluck, maybe we can achieve the second-to-worst outcome. 

What a supremely stupid little war.

Comments

[dmbeaster]

Excellent observations, but is there any chance of the Bush administration using diplomacy with Syria in this manner? When key members are busy trying to lobby Israel to bomb Syria, and providing secret NSA data to pinpont potential arms shipments to Hezbollah traversing Syria as bombing targets?

Does not appear to be much chance for even the second worst outcome, although I cannot tell where this thing is going. My current vote is Israel settling into another occupation of south Lebanon, with low level fighting continuing along that new boundary
line and no real peace. Forget any international buffer force -- that is a pipe dream. All of the major players want war.

Hey -- Israeli settlers can soon move into the depopulated south Lebanon zone!

[Slartibartfast]

providing secret NSA data to pinpont potential arms shipments to Hezbollah traversing Syria as bombing targets?

Not supported by your link, as far as I can tell.

[lily]

I don't really understand the necessity of Isreal starting what you characterize as a stupid war. I mean if it was that stupid, why was it necessary to start?

But, whatever, water under the bridge now.

So we have to deal with the Syrians now. What are the chances of that actually happening? Bush has gone on vacation, the better to shore up his self-imposed ignorance and unmerited self-esteem. I'm not sure he will do anything commonsensical or pragmantic so close to an election. There is a lot of talk on the "Different Ways" thread about death cultists, and yes, I agree that some Islamic extremist groups are death cultists, but I'm much more worried about the influence our homegrown death cultists have on the Republican party in general and this administration in particular. Our "Christian" death cultists want more war. They are not going to be happy with a reduction in tensions with Iran. They WANT war. Birth pangs and End Times. That's why they voted for Bush.
Also a big part of the right wing worldview is the obsession with feeling like a winner, winning being far more important than ever defining what one is fighting for. It is getting very very hard to maintain the illusion that anything has been won in Iraq. So what will the rightwing do? They can blame Democrats but that so silly I don't think it will stick even with wingnuts, they can blame the news media, but that too lacks resonance, or they can run off to support some other war eslewhere so that they can be winners in a different venue. So on to Iran!
So I'd be surprised ( but happy) if this adminstration does anything more than bloviate more about evil Iranians.

[Jay C]

Great: so now you think we are going to have to rely on Syria - junior associate in the "Axis of Evil" - as the necessary "peacemaker" between Israel/Lebanon/Hizbollah? And at what price?
"..restrain[ing] Iran's power in the Levant" is, of course, a worthy goal, von: but what on earth leverage do we have with the Assad regime that would accomplish this? "We won't attack you"? "We won't prod the Israelis to attack you"? "We'll stop saying nasty things about you at the U.N.?"
("We'll pay you billions of dollars under-the-table"?)
Considering that this Adminstration and its apologists have been dumping mercilessly on Syria for years (not without justification, though, it IS the last Ba'athist state) - this sort of volte face doesn't seem a likely prospect: at least not without the sort of diplomatic finesse which the Bush 43 foreign-affairs team has shown itself monumentally incapable of demonstating.

What a supremely stupid little war

Aphorism Of The Day.

[CharleyCarp]

Well, we know the Syrians are interested in a place called Golan. Enough of a bribe?

[Gulliver]

Too much of a bribe. Golan is worth (for Israel) a comprehensive peace treaty with Siria.

[Gary Farber]

Incidentally, speaking of holding grudges, those darned always-preferring-violence-to-diplomacy Israelis, who are just dying to go re-occupy a strip of Lebanon again, because it was so much fun last time, have a government saying:

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert would welcome the participation of German soldiers in a stabilization force in South Lebanon, he said in an interview with a German newspaper published on Friday.

"I have informed (German) Chancellor Angela Merkel that we have absolutely no problem having German troops in South Lebanon," Olmert told the daily Suddeutsche Zeitung.

"There is no other nation that Israel considers more of a friend that Germany ... I would be very happy if Germany participated," he said.

In other news that isn't quite news:

A senior Iranian official admitted for the first time Friday that Tehran did indeed supply long-range Zelzal-2 missiles to Hezbollah.

Mohtashami Pur, a one-time ambassador to Lebanon who currently holds the title of secretary-general of the "Intifada conference," told an Iranian newspaper that Iran transferred the missiles to the Shi'ite militia, adding that the organization has his country's blessing to use the weapons in defense of Lebanon.

Pur's statements are thought to be unusual given that Tehran has thus far been reluctant to comment on the extent of its aid which it has extended to Hezbollah.

Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah warned Thursday night in a televised broadcast that his organization would target Tel Aviv if Beirut was attacked by Israel.

"If our capital, Beirut, is attacked, we will attack your capital, Tel Aviv," Nasrallah threatened.

The Hezbollah leader issued his warning after Israel Air Force aircraft dropped leaflets over the Lebanese capital, calling on residents of three Shi'ite neighborhoods in southern Beirut to evacuate their homes.

Israeli security sources assessed that Nasrallah's threats are serious.

On Wednesday evening, the IAF attacked Beirut for the first time after a hiatus of nearly five days. The dropping of the leaflets yesterday is considered to be a precursor to new air strikes on the city.

Military Intelligence estimates that Nasrallah would like to end the war with a dramatic move, such as the firing of missiles against Tel Aviv.

Israel, incidentally, adopted a new tactic a few weeks ago of not just leafletting to warn people to leave an area to protect their lives, but of phone-calling individual houses in the Gaza strip, telling people personally to leave, leave, leave, so they won't be hurt.

This out of sheer indifference to human life, of course, and malicious interest in "destroying" for no reason whatever except to blacken their own reputation. Because who doesn't enjoy doing that? (Okay, well, besides Hezbollah, and similar types?)

[Gary Farber]

Whoops, wrong thread. Apologies.

[Gary Farber]

"Hey -- Israeli settlers can soon move into the depopulated south Lebanon zone!"

So the point of making up nonsense like this is?

I mean, it's vicious, stupid, factless, stuff.

[Mo MacArbie]

Nah, we can't talk to Syria until they destroy all the WMD that Iraq gave them...

[Donald Johnson]

Gary wrote--

"Israel, incidentally, adopted a new tactic a few weeks ago of not just leafletting to warn people to leave an area to protect their lives, but of phone-calling individual houses in the Gaza strip, telling people personally to leave, leave, leave, so they won't be hurt.

This out of sheer indifference to human life, of course, and malicious interest in "destroying" for no reason whatever except to blacken their own reputation. Because who doesn't enjoy doing that? (Okay, well, besides Hezbollah, and similar types?)"

I saw that in the NYT, Gary. So if the guy doesn't move out and gets blown up with his family he has only himself to blame. Gosh, I'm touched.

Some Palestinians (Marwan Barghouti, I think, is a prominent example) only want to use terror tactics on Israelis in the West Bank. So if they'd leave their illegal homes which they have no right to be in they'd be safe. The settlers have to be racists to be settling the West Bank, or at least utterly indifferent to Palestinian rights and they certainly don't care about the risks they bring on their children by moving there and the Israelis as a whole haven't stopped them. So I suppose that makes Marwan a real humanitarian--he tells the Israelis they can be safe if they don't live where they have no moral or legal right to be.

Speaking for myself, I think Marwan the moderate belongs in prison, which in fact is where he is.

[dmbeaster]

Sorry Slarti about the wrong link -- the story appeared in Salon and not at Drum's cite -- here is a link that excerpts the relevant part.

[dmbeaster]

link fixed.

[dmbeaster]

Gary wrote--

"Israel, incidentally, adopted a new tactic a few weeks ago of not just leafletting to warn people to leave an area to protect their lives

Of course, after being so careful with leaflets, they then show up and use Palestianian citizens as human shields -- just another extension of that care and thoughtfulness!

Nice to see that the Israeli Supreme Court has condemned the practice (wonder if that will actually stop it -- doubt it), but obviously like the Bush administration and Hamdan, why does it take a high court decision to stop an obvious sick practice?

The idea that the IDF exercises great restraint in harming civilians is a myth.

[dmbeaster]

"Hey -- Israeli settlers can soon move into the depopulated south Lebanon zone!"

So the point of making up nonsense like this is?

I mean, it's vicious, stupid, factless, stuff.

Of course its made up gallows humor with no factual basis. So what is the point, you ask?

To demonstrate by use of an obvious nonsensical exaggeration a fact about one essential historical aspect of Israeli character -- a lust for Arab lands obtained by force of arms. It won't happen in south Lebanon, and I am not saying it will. But it has happened in plenty of other places, and is one of the root causes of this festering conflict.

I would say that the tiny baby steps involving the removal of Gaza settlements, and the return of the Sinai, run counter to the trend. But even then, they arouse profound disputes that shake the Israeli polity to the core. They are the exceptions that still prove the rule.

Its not vicious, Gary, unless you want to pretend that this is not an essential aspect of Israeli character that is key to understanding what has been going on over the last 60 years.

[Gary Farber]

"Of course, after being so careful with leaflets, they then show up and use Palestianian citizens as human shields"

"Friday, October 07, 2005"

Gosh, who knew Israel had timetravel?

The whole problem really should be solved by now, don't you think?

And, yes, it's just terrible that Israel has a Supreme Court that defends the human rights of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. Definitely an indictment of Israel.

[dmbeaster]

And, yes, it's just terrible that Israel has a Supreme Court that defends the human rights of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. Definitely an indictment of Israel.

What, no comment on the fact that it took a Supreme Court decision to address the insane barbaric practice of using Palestinians as human shields? Something is seriously out of balance if stopping that practice requires a high court decision -- that measn that the oh so careful IDF is fighting hard to preserve a barbaric practice.

The point being that can we please stop spreading the myth about the alleged high degree of care and concern of the IDF about harming arabs? Yeah, they do balance restraint and the use of barbarism, but barbarism is clearly part of their arsenal, too. If you want to argue that some measure of barbarism is necessary and proper -- fine. Just don't peddle the contradictory argument about their high degree of restraint.

[dutchmarbel]

Gosh, who knew Israel had timetravel?

July 1tth 2006:

B'Tselem's initial investigation indicates that, during an incursion by Israeli forces into Beit Hanun, in the northern Gaza Strip, on 17 July 2006, soldiers seized control of two buildings in the town and used residents as human shield.

[Gary Farber]

"What, no comment on the fact that it took a Supreme Court decision to address the insane barbaric practice of using Palestinians as human shields?"

No. I've never said Israelis are saints, and I've endlessly said that I'm not someone who thinks Israel does no wrong.

On the contrary, I've pointed out over and over and over and over again that I'm someone who has spent a lifetime, about forty years, being on the side of the Israeli left and of B'Tselem. I dare say that after many years of reading their reports, that I know approximately 1000 times more than you do about Israeli crimes and wrongdoing, and that I've spent tens of thousands of hours more of my life than you have with yours writing letters in the past, going to meetings of organizations, going on marches and pickets, and so on, for Palestinian rights. And not to mention, in the past, working with Palestinians, and with Palestinian friends, on these issues.

Bub.

On the other hand, you might pay attention to how crazy this country went after 9/11.

Then consider that Israel is smaller than New Jersey. That at point it's all of 6.2 miles across. That's how small Israel is.

Then consider that it came into existence in 1948 when six armies tried to over-run it, and it had no uniforms, no tanks, no planes, no heavy guns, and barely survived. Then decades of not just war after war, but in between, what people who don't know the history are unaware of, constant low-level incursions and fights from its neighbors, which literally takes several books to document the details of, and which merely ratcheted up and down in level of assaults and deaths; constant low-level, and sometimes not at all low-level, war, for decades. Not counting the major wars in '56, '67, and '73.

Then, in recent years, the equivalent of small 9/11s on a daily basis. Being unable to walk out of your house, and get on a bus, without knowing whether it might explode. Being unable to go to a restaurant, without knowing if suddenly limbs will be flying past you, and someone's head butting your stomach, but with no body attached. The same when you go to a mall. Not knowing when the nails and blood will strike, including blowing you, and your children, apart, anywhere you go in public. Never knowing when you will get that call that mom's arms were just blown off, that dad's body was ripped apart, and all that are left are shreds, or maybe that your 8 month-old baby had her head crushed by a rifle butt.

And actually experiencing that, which countless Israelis have. (And I'm not speaking here of what Palestinians have to deal with, which is another, terrible, topic; we're talking about the conditions under which Israelis live, and their institutions.)

Week after week. Month after month. Year after year.

And, yet, Israel has a legal system that preserves human rights. That works for Palestinians and Israeli Arabs -- as imperfectly as any human institution, as imperfectly as our institutions in the U.S., but which works. Israel has Arab members of parliament. It has freedom of speech. It has freedom of religion. Palestinians sue in court all the time, and win. They win on human rights issues.

Israel is full of flaws. It's full of human beings. Human beings are flawed. They give in, at times, to fear, and to hatred, and to prejudice. They do wrong. And Jews do all these things. Boy, I'm pretty sure that, again, I know that better than you. Could I tell you stories of asshole Jews and Israelis! Of racists Jews and Israelis. Of evil Jews and Israelis. Yes, indeed, I could.

And so could I of Americans. And so, I'm sure, could you.

So. Effing. What.

Should we be surprised by that? Is anyone denying that?

No.

So what you're on about, I don't know.

What I do know is that you seem to have no perspective, no balance, and no sense of appropriate language.

You just seem to have a lot of ranting hatred for Israelis.

If you can do better, as I'd like to think you can, please do. Up to you.

[Gary Farber]

If any of the many pro-Israeli fanatics who do think Israel can do no wrong drops by here, incidentally, and starts making such claims, rest assured that I'll tear into them with the facts.

But, of course, as is typical of America and the world today, such people exist only in tiny numbers. So tiny that we have none here.

So since none are around here, we don't see me ripping their heads off with B'Tselem reports, and facts about Israeli racism and crimes, and the oppression and the suffering of Palestinians.

All we have is a lot of unbalanced rantings that would seem to indicate that Israel is nothing but an evil, racist, apartheid, bunch of war criminals, who delight in making Arabs suffer, out of sheer hatred and barbarism.

So I wind up trying to give some perspective.

If people actually write with perspective and balance in the first place, discussing crimes of Israel, and wrongdoing, but in context, rather implying that Israel is The Worst Place On Earth, far worse than, say, Chechnya, or Zimbabwe, or the Chinese government, or any of a list of a zillion other countries, I'd be right there nodding and saying "yes, that's correct."

[CharleyCarp]

All we have is a lot of unbalanced rantings that would seem to indicate that Israel is nothing but an evil, racist, apartheid, bunch of war criminals, who delight in making Arabs suffer, out of sheer hatred and barbarism . . . implying that Israel is The Worst Place On Earth, far worse than, say, Chechnya, or Zimbabwe, or the Chinese government, or any of a list of a zillion other countries

Think there might be a little straw in there, Gary? Maybe more than a little mindreading?

[dmbeaster]

You just seem to have a lot of ranting hatred for Israelis.

Well, at least I wasn't accused of being an anti-Semite.