But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at
the day of judgment, than for you.
—Matthew 11:22 (KJV Bible)
[Disclaimer: No, I'm quite agnostic, but I went through several
denominations of religious education, and some passages from the Bible
still rise unbidden to my mind in times of stress, such as this is.]
The situation in Lebanon just boggles the mind. What on earth is Israel
thinking?
What are the U.S. and U.K. thinking? Are they even thinking at all? Or
are they wrapped up in a frenzy of emotion? The latter possibility
might explain what's going on.
Make no mistake about it. Israel was sorely, sorely provoked. No
sovereign nation
can stand by while its cities are being shelled. Israel had to
respond, and to respond
forcefully. But what of that response? Israel seems to be killing
everyone but
their enemy. They are killing Lebanese civilians by the hundreds, blasting
infrastructure back to the stone age, and even taking out U.N.
observers. All the while they are making no dent in Hezbollah's
operations, despite the chest-pounding of their generals. It's surely
unacceptable that Northern Israelis have to cower in fear of constant
rocket attacks; nevertheless, the devastation that Israel is handing out
to Lebanon can hardly be considered anything short of indiscriminate and
even criminal reprisal.
The U.S. is irrelevant in this whole affair. It's interesting to see
how an ally's unstinting support
even in the face of obvious breakdown in morals has the perverse effect
of making
the supporter somewhat irrelevant. Britain under Blair has learned that
their
obsequiousness has gained them kind words, yet real contempt from the Bush
administration, and the Bush administration is subject to no less
contempt by Israel,
and for no less reason. Bush and co. wouldn't dare criticize Israel
anyway because the
response would probably involve deep embarrassment. The only reason
I'll mention
the U.S.'s hands-off approach to the Lebanon crisis is to point out
their certain
hypocrisy.
Turkey is also at present suffering attack from militants across its
borders. In this
case it's Kurdish separatists (of the PKK) holed up in the hills of
Northern Iraq. Now make no mistake: I am sympathetic to Kurdish
separatist aspirations (Turkey has been
quite oppressive of its Kurds), but in the simplest terms, a response
from Turkey
equivalent to that of Israel would involve Turkish bombing and shelling
of Kirkuk, while also destroying most of Northern Iraq's oil
infrastructure. Needless to say the U.S. would never allow that, and
this is just one measure of the staggering hypocrisy that underlies the
bombing of Beruit.
Ho hum, hypocrisy is the grease of foreign affairs, and has always been.
What truly
amazes me is the suicidal nature of Israel's devastation of Beruit.
Yes. I said "suicidal". But what does Israel, one of the world's
preeminent military powers, have to
fear from tiny little Lebanon? Nothing directly, unless you take a step
back to
history's lesson book to see that no military might has ever been able
to defeat the
force of demographics. Israelis are badly outnumbered in their little
corner of the
world, and their survival depends on the fragmentation of their hostile
neighbors.
Israel has historically been very skilful at encouraging this
fragmentation, and this has
been more of an asset than its military might. Unfortunately, in recent
red mist it has dumped all such subtlety and practicality, and is in the
process of
not only deepening the radicalism of the region, but of uniting it as
well. It's a
very ugly irony that when Lebanese families are rendered homeless by
Israeli warplanes, and their children killed, it is usually Hezbollah's
charitable wing that has been coming to their aid. This is no different
from how Israel's devastation of the West Bank
and Gaza strip a few years ago led inexorably to the rise of Hamas to power.
Lebanon's Hezbollah and Hamas are not historically likely strike partners:
The Shi'a/Sunni divide in the region is almost as deep as the national
divides, but
Israel's recent fits are uniting the radicals, and their sponsors, and
when innocent families helplessly
watch the loss of loved ones and property, they often end up joining the
ranks of the
radicals. Israel cannot afford swelling numbers of militants, as the
simple mathematics of the Lebanon war illustrate. For every 10 Lebanese
casualies there has been one Israeli. There's no reason to believe that
sheer military might will improve that ratio. The problem is that Hồ
Chí Minh's famous boast could just as easily
come from Israel's enemies:
You can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours. But even
at those odds, you will lose and we will win.
Over time Israel's population, which is essentially at a plateau, will
lose the demographic war unless it can find peace among the growing
populations immediately beyond its borders. Israelis like to say "yeah!
We do want peace! It's everyone else who wants war." Their
government's near-sighted decision-making process far too often gives
the lie to those claims.
Two things I have learned from my many encounters and friendships with
Lebanese people
is that (1) they are perhaps the most resourceful people on Earth (2)
they are perhaps
the most pragmatic people on Earth. I think they have the wherewithal
to rebuild once Israel's fit has passed (to be blunt, I don't expect
their institutions to crumble as hopelessly as those of the
Palestinians), and I do think that their population will end up much
less radicalized than one could expect under the circumstances. That is
the only basis for a faint glimmer of hope, for Israel, the region, and
the world. There may be no soothing the moral outrage of Israel's
present, apalling brutality, but perhaps if they can be shamed into
moderation the slow agency of time will prevent a spiraling escalation
through which there will be winner (most certainly not Israel).
Oh, and at some point someone still has to uproot Hezbollah from the
border regions, so there is some containment of the effects of their
murderous recklessness. I suppose the fact that Israel would rather
bomb civillians than meet Hezbollah head-on is no different from the
U.S.'s preference for invading Iraq rather than focusing on the
elimination of Bin Laden and his henchmen. I just wish I could
apprehend their logic. On the other hand, perhaps it's a healthy thing
I can't.
[Uche Ogbuji]