WWIIGuy's View of the Israeli-Lebanese Crisis

This particular entry is dedicated to my friend, Melissa, who about the time I was working my way back to Cincinnati, decided to up and leave for Arizona. We've only had the chance to discuss politics and world issues a few times, but it's enough to know that I miss sparring with her now over the current geo-political (Are you impressed with my vocabulary?) situation.....

So, interesting things have developed in the Middle East lately. On top of the tumultuous situation in Iraq, the Iranian nuclear situation, the North Korean missile situation, Afghanistan (and the list could go on), now we have the war between Israel and either Lebanon or Hezbollah, depending on how you view it. One thing you learn when studying Geo-Politics is that each nation can be expected to look out for it's own interests. And in today's situation, you might even tweak that a little and say that each political organization, ethnic group, etc. can be expected to try and further their own interests. For in today's situation, we don't just have to take into account the actions of nations, but also of the Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, and many other sub-sections of peoples whose borders are sometimes completely unrelated to the boundaries between nations. The reason we must do this nowadays is that the actions of a relatively few - perhaps only several thousand in the case of Al-Qaeda - can radically affect the overall Geo-Political landscape for millions and even billions of others. Does all that make sense? I hope so.

One of the first questions that came to mind when the current conflict between Israel and Lebanon flared up, was what are the sides? Because even though it's officially only a two-nation war right now, anyone with the ability to see beyond the surface knows that a great many more nations and political groups are involved here. There are probably three or four or even more sides in this one.

First of all, we have the Hezbollah, who we must remember through all the smoke and mirrors, started this current fight. Even though they are part of Lebanon's government, it can be argued that the majority of the rest of the nation really does not share their radical, violent perspective. We already have two sides emerging. In fact, Hezbollah draws more of its support from Iran, Syria and other closely related radical Islamic groups.

Second, we have the rest of Lebanon. At first they appear to be innocent victims here. There is some truth to that statement, but one must ask how did Hezbollah gain a base of power in Lebanon in the first place? It's an issue very parallel to the question of what guilt did the average, everyday citizens of Japan, Italy, and Germany have in creating the monsters of Fascism? Remember, one thing all those nations have (had) in common is that they were in some fashion, democracies where the citizens had a say in the governmental leadership. Unlike the Soviet Union under Stalin or the People's Republic of China under whatever Chinese guy they are under now and in the past. Israel has even tried to make a point of saying that their beef isn't so much with Lebanon as it is with the Hezbollah. Many would argue that, in fact, even though the geography of the fight is in Lebanon and Israel, she is actually more at war with Syria and Iran than Lebanon. Some nations who are supporting Israel (including the USA) have taken the stance that they want to see Lebanon's current government remain intact.

Third, we have Israel and some of its very close allies. The USA and UK would probably be the two and perhaps only allies that fit in this category. Although there is a minority in each nation who would trade in the alliance with Israel and maybe even be willing to see her destruction in hopes of a less volatile situation in the Mid-East, those views are currently overruled by a more powerful contingent who view Israel's presence as a strong counterpoint to the parts of the Arab and Islamic world that stand against Western culture and political aims.

Fourth, there are more moderate Arab nations. Although they don't particularly care for Israel, they would prefer the lesser of two evils. While they can't officially take sides with Israel because of their Islamic faith, the unspoken knowledge is that Israel definitely makes a better neighbor than some of their violent, radical brothers in Islam. Here's an analogy that just came to mind. A year or so ago, one of the homes next-door to my parents went up for sale and a gay couple bought it and moved in. Now, my faith tells me that they are living in a way contrary to what I know to be right (and just so you know, I'm not a gay-basher. When I was fornicating I was living a life just as wrong as theirs, but that's another whole blog entry!) But would I have preferred it if a militant abortion clinic-bombing, gay-hating family had moved in instead??? No freaking way!!! And in fact, that analogy is not even a perfect one, because I would have no qualms at all in stating that I'd rather have the current neighbors instead of the more militant ones. On the other hand, these more moderate Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan - whatever official stance they take, they must step carefully, for if they offend their neighboring militant Islamic brothers they risk receiving retribution as violent as what is poured out on the official enemies of radical Islam.

Fifth, you have a huge chunk of the European nations. While not being next-door neighbors, they live in close proximity to this Brew-haha, and also do not have the same resources with which to defend themselves from these elements as the USA has. US citizens do not realize what a luxury we have in our powers of self-protection. Much of Europe's security since WWII has been reliant on the USA. If 9-11 had occurred in Europe, they wouldn't have had even close to the same ability to enact measures to try and prevent another terrorist act from happening again. So, while not walking on eggshells like the moderate Arab nations, they still don't want to piss off the neighbors down the street too badly. The second factor that draws some of the European nations together, is their stance towards the USA. At times, it's like the relationship between two siblings. There is the older sibling who had his/her glory days but due to unfortunate events, now finds him/herself in the shadow of the younger, more powerful, more successful sibling. They even ask for help sometimes, but that doesn't mean there isn't a nasty streak of jealousy there. Haven't you ever had a friend or sibling whom you cared about, but at some point became jealous of? They sort of "got too big for their breeches" in your opinion and you secretly took pleasure in seeing them knocked down a few notches? It may not have even been that they did anything personally to hurt you - in fact, they may have been very good to you, but still it felt good to see them fall on their face and maybe made you feel closer to being equal with them. It's not that you wanted to see their destruction, but it was more a feeling of "Ha, you're not as righteous and strong and up-standing as you want everyone to think you are! Serves you right!" The USA is not the bully that some nations want to portray us as being. Yes, we can be arrogant at times; we can sometimes stick our noses where it might be better to stay out just like an overprotective or overbearing big brother or sister; we can be bossy on the geo-political landscape; we may even have some hypocritical ways such as owning a nuclear arsenal while trying to prevent other nations from having them (although I'm not sure it's being hypocritical to say to a crazy man, you shouldn't have nukes). But in the larger scheme of things, there are few if any nations who could honestly say they would be more generous and tolerant of it's neighbors (friends and enemies alike), and less imperialistic than the USA has been with the power, prestige and place God has given to us. Can you imagine the French, the Soviets, Japanese, any African nation, Mexico, Israel, China, Korea, any Arab or Islamic nation being so generous and tolerant of its disagreeable neighbors or being less dominating to it's allies? I think not. Perhaps India or one of the South or Central American island nations could be. All in all, the USA has done a more admirable job than most nations would have done in how we have used our power and influence. Again, defending the USA to her jealous European brothers and sisters though is better left for another blog entry. One other point that might have some legitimacy to it is the undercurrent of anti-Semitism in some parts of Europe. I do not believe that it is too far-fetched to say that some of the people and descendants of people who allowed over 6 million Jews to be exterminated just might have some bit of influence in the overall European community's stance towards Israel and the current conflict. I'm not saying they have a lot of influence, but some influence. So, three things that unite a good portion of the European community:

1. While not being next-door neighbors to these radical elements, they are close enough that they would prefer to not piss them off too badly in their geo-political stance.

2. There is a very noticeable undercurrent of jealousy and/or animosity towards the USA. They don't necessarily want to see our destruction, but they do sometimes seem to take satisfaction in our failures and struggles.

3. There is quite possibly a bit of anti-Semitism in their stance towards Israel.

Sixth, there is Russia and some of the former Communist states. They still have some degree of antipathy for Western culture. And though the cold war is over, there is still that carry-over feeling of "If it's hurting the democracies of the world, it's probably a victory for us." But on the flip-side, there is that gut-feeling that radical, militant Islam is a far worse enemy than their old traditional enemies of the West. Even though militant Islamic groups are mostly targeting Communism's old traditional enemy, the Western Democracies, even Russia has the sense to know that through a Jihadist's eyes, Christians, Jews, and Atheists are all Infidels who must be converted to Islam or destroyed.

Seventh, there is China. Even after all these centuries of contact with the West, both peoples are hugely an enigma to the other. It's as if the Great Wall is both a physical, as well as political and spiritual barrier between our two very different civilizations. In the last 100 years, we have both fought beside and against the Chinese. But I think we would have more in common with and better understand aliens from another planet than we do our Asian neighbors. It's not that they or we want to see the other's destruction. It's more a matter of we're concerned with will we get in each other's way? A people who would take the terrorists of this world and privately torture and then publicly execute them - well, we have to admire some of their qualities even if we don't understand them very well. But we just have to remember that they would do that to us as quickly as to a terrorist if they felt it was in their nation's best interest. Maybe it's best that we keep that Great Wall up for as long as possible.

Eighth is North Korea. On the surface you might think that they would obviously belong to the side of the radical Islamic nations and organizations. They've shared nuclear and military technology with Iran after all. And who knows what other assistance they've given to our enemies. However, though they are ruled by a crazy man who resembles a cult leader in his governing style, North Korea still has that Asian mindset. The North Koreans would ditch their Iranian and Syrian allies for another partner in crime in a heartbeat if it suited their ends better. In fact, they wouldn't just ditch them, they'd be the first to stab their former allies in the back if it was beneficial for the North Korean agenda. North Korea's word or honor has no credibility in the world community, but neither do they seem to care. There is some advantage in being known as the hot-headed crazy man in the neighborhood. As long as you don't go overboard in keeping that reputation, you can get away with a lot that others wouldn't be able to. You can be the loud-mouthed drunk in the bar who goes around talking trash to the other patrons. Sure you upset the other people in the bar, but is it worth their time and trouble to try and shut you up?? Maybe you're full of hot air and would go down with one solid punch to the nose, but then again, they can't be sure of that. Maybe you'd put up a pretty nasty fight and both parties would end up in the jail or hospital. As long as the loud-mouthed drunk doesn't become too obnoxious it's probably not worth anybody's energy to stir up trouble with him. Just let him vent and get it out of his system. But then again, a loud-mouthed drunk in a bar usually ends up pushing things a little too far. Unless he sobers up in time, there's a very good chance he's going to take his attitude just a little too far. At that point maybe it will only take that solid punch to the nose to shut him up and send him on his way out the door, or maybe he'll put up a pretty good fight for a drunk man. I tend to think North Korea is one of those punks that if you show him he's going to get whooped, he'll back down as long as you let him save face. Lets hope I'm right.

So there you have it. I've just spent an hour or two writing my thoughts and I've found eight sides already. I'm sure there are others, and if this conflict grows, some sides will join up forces with other sides in a melding of agendas until there the warring parties can be classified into only two or possibly three factions, with an outside chance of four. I'd love to write more, but a much more important issue than the Mid-East crisis - eating some breakfast - is calling me.