Sunday, July 30, 2006

Summary: New enemy gains on the Pentagon

By Thom Shanker The New York Times, July 30, 2006

WASHINGTON - Pound for pound and pounding for pounding, the Israeli military is one of the world's finest. But Hezbollah, with the discipline and ferocity of its fighters and its ability to field advanced weaponry, has taken Israel by surprise. Now that surprise has rocketed back to Washington and across the U.S. military.

U.S. officials worry that they are not prepared, either, for Hezbollah's style of warfare - a kind that pits finders against hiders and favors the hiders. Certain that other terrorists are learning from Hezbollah's successes, the United States is studying the conflict closely for lessons to apply to its own wars.

Military planners suggest that the Pentagon take a page out of Hezbollah's book about small-unit, agile operations as U.S. forces battle insurgents and cells in Iraq and Afghanistan, and plan for countering more cells and their state sponsors across the Middle East and in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America.

The United States and Israel have each fought conventional armies of nation-states and shadowy terror organizations. But Hezbollah, with the sophistication of a national army (it almost sank an Israeli warship with a cruise missile) and the lethal invisibility of a guerrilla army, is a hybrid. Old labels, and old planning, do not apply. Certainly its style of 21st-century combat is known - on paper.

The style even has its own labels, including network warfare, or net war, and fourth-generation warfare, although many in the military do not care for such titles.

"We are now into the first great war between nations and networks," said John Arquilla, a professor of defense analysis at the Naval Postgraduate School, and a leading analyst of net warfare. "This proves the growing strength of networks as a threat to American national security."

These network forces are not ignorant. They are computer-literate, propaganda- and Internet-savvy, and capable of firing complicated weapons to great effect.Hezbollah spent the past six years dispersing about 12,000 rockets across southern Lebanon in a vast web of hidden caches, all divided into local zones with independent command.

"They dug tunnels. They dug bunkers, they established communications systems - cellphones, radios, even runners to carry messages that aren't susceptible to eavesdropping," said one military officer with experience in the Middle East. "They divided southern Lebanon into military zones with many small units that operate independently, without the need for central control."

To attack Israel, Hezbollah dispersed its fighters. They access the weapons only at the moment of attack, and then disappear. This makes preventing the attack all but impossible. It is a significant modernization of classic guerrilla hit-and-run tactics. Hezbollah fired more than 100 rockets a day at the start of this conflict; it is still firing more than 100 a day, despite Israeli bombardment.

Hezbollah still possesses the most dangerous aspects of a shadowy terror network. It abides by no laws of war as it attacks civilians indiscriminately. Attacks on its positions carry a high risk of killing innocents. At the same time, it has attained military capabilities and other significant attributes of a nation- state. It holds territory and seats in the Lebanese government. It fields high- tech weapons and possesses the firepower to threaten the entire population of a regional superpower, or at least those in the northern half of Israel.

No solution has been written. But it would include military force along with diplomacy, economic assistance, intelligence and information campaigns.

"Most critically, we have to get better at - it's such a cliché - winning hearts and minds," said a military officer working on counterinsurgency issues. "That is influencing neutral populations toward supporting us and not supporting our terrorist and insurgent enemies."

photo: www.foreignpolicy.com - Hezbollah determination

Complete article: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/30/news/tactics.php


Saturday, July 29, 2006


An interview with Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah

The interview dating from February last, shows Nasrallah talking with former US Diplomats on Israel, Prisoners and Hezbollah’s Founding. The link also contains a video transcript.


CNN NEWS: HEZBOLLAH BACKS PEACE PROPOSALS

Beirut, Lebanon (CNN) -- Hezbollah representatives and Lebanese cabinet ministers have reached an agreement in general -- but with some major reservations -- on a proposal to end the crisis in the Middle East, high-ranking Lebanese government officials say.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- who arrived in the region Saturday -- said it initially appeared the Lebanese plan included "some very good elements."

Israel on Saturday rejected a request by the U.N. for a three-day cease-fire in Lebanon to deliver humanitarian supplies and allow civilians to leave the war zone, The Associated Press reported.Avi Pazner, a government spokesman, said Israel already had opened safe corridors across Lebanon for such shipments and that Hezbollah guerrillas were blocking them to create a humanitarian crisis.

The Lebanese cease-fire plan, reached at a meeting on Friday night, calls for an immediate cease-fire, the release of Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails and the return of two Israeli soldiers held by Hezbollah.

The plan also calls for the return of displaced Lebanese to their homes, negotiations between Israel and Lebanon concerning the disputed Shebaa farms now under Israeli control, the disclosure of maps showing Israeli minefields near the Lebanese border, the deployment and strengthening of the Lebanese army and the expansion of the U.N. force in the south.

While Hezbollah agreed to a cease-fire with Israel and an increased international presence in southern Lebanon, the group objected to "a robust force" of international peacekeepers in the region, the sources said.

Hezbollah did not specifically agree to disarm, as Israel has demanded, the sources said. The plan does, however, call for the Lebanese military to take control of southern Lebanon, along with the U.N. force, which implies that the Hezbollah militia would not operate there.

It also calls for the implementation of the Taef accords -- which ended the Lebanese civil war in 1990 -- which includes the disarming of all militias, the sources said.Hezbollah representatives told the cabinet it had reservations about the nature of an expanded international presence in the south, the source said.Hezbollah wants only an expansion of the current UNIFIL mission with the same mandate.

They don't want a "robust force," the source said."The force must be more robust, otherwise there's no sense in it," one of the high-ranking Lebanese officials told CNN.The question of what to do about the two Israeli soldiers being held by Hezbollah was not discussed at the cabinet meeting, the sources said.

The proposal, developed by Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, is the official position of the Lebanese government and is intended to be presented to Rice on her arrival in the region.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/29/mideast.main/index.html


Wednesday, July 26, 2006

It's not only about Israel, Ms Rice

By Rami G. Khouri International Herald Tribune

Published: July 25, 2006

BEIRUT Just before U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice started her short trip to the Middle East on Sunday, she described the massive destruction, dislocation and human suffering in Lebanon as an inevitable part of the "birth pangs of a new Middle East."

From my perspective here in Beirut, where she landed on Monday, as I watch American-supplied Israeli jets smash this country to smithereens, her "birth pangs" look much more like a wicked hangover from a decades-old American orgy of diplomatic intoxication with the enticements of pro-Israeli politics.

We shall find out in the coming years if, indeed, a new Middle East is being born, or, as I suspect, we are witnessing the initial dying gasps of the Western- made political order that has defined this region and focused primarily on Israeli national dictates for most of the past half a century.

The way to a truly new and stable Middle East is to apply policies that deliver equal rights to all concerned. The events of the past three days suggest that Washington and Israel already are being forced to grapple with this basic demand. They have made important shifts in their diplomatic positions in the face of limited returns from nearly two weeks of nonstop bombing of Lebanon.

In Washington, Rice had stated that Israel should ignore calls for a cease-fire. En route from Washington to Beirut, Rice changed her tune, saying there was an "urgent" need for a cease-fire in Lebanon, but that conditions had to be right.

Similarly, the Israeli government stated Sunday it was prepared to accept a robust, NATO- or EU-led military force in south Lebanon to bring calm to that region. It seems to have discovered, yet again, the limited capacity of military brutality to resolve political disputes.

So we see the clear outlines of two competing approaches to the problems of the Hezbollah-Israeli clashes and the wider Arab-Israeli tensions behind them. One position is reflected in America's active support for Israel's massive attacks against Lebanon's civilian infrastructure and Hezbollah positions to achieve short-term tactical aims and long-term strategic goals.

Short term, the United States would like Israel to wipe out Hezbollah, allow the Lebanese government to send its troops to the south of the country, ensure the safety of northern Israel, cut Syria's influence down to size, and apply greater pressure on Hezbollah-supporter Iran. Long term, Washington seeks to redraw the political and ideological map of the Middle East regardless of the cost to locals.

We have three Arab countries today where American policies and arms have played a major role in promoting chaos, disintegration and mass death - Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon. You can watch them burn any time of day or night live on your television sets. Ironically, these were the three countries that Bush-Rice & Co. held up as pioneers of the American policy to promote freedom and democracy as antidotes to Arab despotism and terrorism.

Washington's desire to change the face of the Arab world requires removing the last vestiges of anti- American defiance and anti-Israel resistance. The problem for Bush-Rice is that such sentiments probably comprise a majority of Arab people, led by Islamist parties and resistance groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and assorted Shiite groups in the Iraqi government.

Syria and Iran are the most problematic governments for Washington in this respect. So there is further irony and much incoherence in the latest American official desire for Arab governments to pressure Syria to reduce its support for Hezbollah and other groups that defy the United States and Israel.

The fact that Bush-Rice fail to acknowledge is that Washington now can only speak to a few Arab governments (Saudi Arabia, Egypt and elsewhere) whose influence with Syria is virtually nonexistent, whose credibility with Arab public opinion is zero, whose own legitimacy at home is increasingly challenged, and whose pro-U.S. policies tend to promote the growth of those militant Islamist movements that now lead the battle against American and Israeli policies.

There is another approach to the problems of the Middle East, though. It is simply to respond to Arab and Israeli rights simultaneously, as equal phenomena in the eyes of God, the law and their common humanity.

Any diplomatic efforts this week to bring about a cease-fire and install a multinational force in south Lebanon will succeed in the long run only if they respond to the demands and rights of Lebanese and Israelis alike.

Rami G. Khouri is editor-at-large of the Beirut-based Daily Star. Distributed by Agence Global.








MIDEAST DEBATE


A Lebanese man in Beirut, Saleem Khoury and an Israeli living in the border town of Shlomi, Gordon Orr, exchange emails on the conflict in their countries. This is the third instalment of their correspondence. The full correspondence can be found on the BBC website, Middle East section.

Dear Gordon,

I truly believe that you wish us safety and we feel likewise that you and your family should live in peace. You say Israel targeted the airport and the Beirut-Damascus highway to stop Iran and Syria supplying arms to Hezbollah. OK, but that argument doesn't explain the rest of Israel's bombing strategy. Why does Israel return to bridges it has already destroyed to bomb the bridge foundations? Why, other than to make the job of rebuilding harder for the entire Lebanese people.

Why is Israel bombing the aerials of all Lebanese satellite TV stations? What has that got to do with Hezbollah? It is still firing rockets, so what has Israel achieved other than destroying the country?

You say Lebanon should have sent its army to the border. Well, that's like me asking my six-year-old son to protect our house. The Lebanese army is the weakest member of the family. Since the civil war ended Lebanon has spent its money on rebuilding the country, not on equipping its divided army. But it is not for Israel to do what the Lebanese army cannot do. Send me some oranges from my grandfather's orchards... which is exactly where you live.

Hatred starts young on both sides, not just among needy Muslim children. One of today's newspapers has a picture of Israeli children writing messages to Lebanese children on 155mm shells. One reads: "From Israel and Daniele".

You have to be in Beirut to understand all the miseries here. All the school buildings are currently being used to shelter some of the 750,000 displaced people. So where are my kids going to go to school in September?

You say Hezbollah will never accept that Israel is here to stay. Well, Hezbollah has only ever had two demands for Israel: leave the land it occupies in Lebanon and free Lebanese prisoners. Israel is here to stay. But it should pull back from the land it occupies, including the Shebaa Farms. And it should give back the land it stole from the Palestinians. Israel knows it is a thief; it stole a country.

Maybe you could send me some oranges from my grandfather's orchards. From the land he had to leave in 1948 - which is exactly where you live. My grandfather used to own acres and acres of land where your settlement now is. It's such a coincidence, of all the Lebanese and all the Israelis to be in a debate...

My mother's village is al-Bassa, now called Bezet. I have a picture of my grandmother on that land in 1946. It's less than 2km from Shlomi where you are. Where was your maternal grandmother in 1946?
Israel must return our land. Then I will be the first person to cross the borders and offer you a case of fresh Lebanese apples.

Yours,
Saleem

Sunday, July 23, 2006

“Hier regent het water. Daar regent het bommen!”

Tekst: Lenie van Malde Foto: Abdelghafour el Bacha

AMSTERDAM 22 juli 2006 - In de tram op weg naar het Beursplein zie ik een jongen schuins tegenover me zitten. Aan de manier waarop hij in de buurt van de Dam zoekend om zich heen kijkt vermoed ik dat hij er ook heen gaat. We zijn wat aan de late kant. Ik weet waar we uit moeten stappen, maar ik durf hem niet zomaar aan te spreken.

De laatste toespraak nadert haar einde als ik eindelijk op het Beursplein aankom. Het is het verzamelpunt om deel te nemen aan de protestdemonstratie “Luid de Noodklok”, georganiseerd door onder meer GroenLinks en het Nederlands-Palestina Komitee.

De stoet zet zich in beweging en ik sluit me aan.”Hé Chalil!” Ik zie zijn moeder Amon en vader Adel met hun jongste kind Leila van 18 maanden oud. Aan haar kinderwagen is een bord vastgemaakt: “stop het geweld”. Chalil is de enige van de kinderen die in Shatila is geboren. Shatila. Meestal wordt deze naam in één adem genoemd met Sabra, twee Palestijnse vluchtelingenkampen in de Libanese hoofdstad Beiroet, die tijdens de burgeroorlog in september 1982 werden aangevallen door een falangistische militie. Honderden mensen werden afgeslacht. Het was niemand minder dan Ariel Sharon die destijds het groene licht gaf voor deze “operatie”.

Ik installeer me achter de kinderwagen. Adel loopt met de Palestijnse vlag te zwaaien. Daar lopen we: moeder in traditioneel islamitische kleren, vader met Palestijnse vlag en ik met mijn grijze haar. De opkomst is groter dan verwacht. En wat een bont gezelschap! Veel mensen van Een Ander Joods Geluid (EAJG) die teksten op hun romp dragen met: ”Israël doe een ander niet aan wat je niet wilt dat jou geschiedt”, of iets in die trant. Uiteraard ook veel Libanezen uit andere delen van Nederland die speciaal voor dit protest vandaag naar Amsterdam zijn afgereisd, zoals die mensen uit Assen die elkaar opzochten om bij elkaar te zitten. Maar in de stoet lopen ook grote aantallen autochtone Nederlanders mee.

En overal Palestijnse en Libanese vlaggen. Sinds ik zelf in Libanon geweest ben, doen die Libanese vlaggen me echt wat en al helemaal nu mijn vrienden daar onder vuur worden genomen. Er zijn ook Hezbollah-vlaggen. Er wordt zelfs een portret van Nasrallah meegedragen. Ook loopt er iemand met een Saoedische vlag … typisch gezien de verhouding Saoedie Arabië-Libanon op dit moment.

Eenmaal aangekomen op het Museumplein beginnen de toespraken. Ik luister wat en klap af en toe mee. Eigenlijk zijn we maar met zo weinig. Een muzikant houdt ook een toespraak. Ik controleer bij Adel of ik het goed heb begrepen: “We geven ons leven en ons bloed voor Palestina! We geven ons leven en bloed voor Libanon.” Ja, dat was het inderdaad.

Dan is het de beurt aan iemand van EAJG om de menigte in het Engels toe te spreken. Hij is geen fan van Hezbollah-leider Hassan Nasrallah, die volgens hem een politicus is als elk ander. Maar de versie van Israël dat ze alleen reageren op provocatie van Hezbollah, deugt van geen kant, meent de spreker. Eigenlijk stelt hij zich het meest kwetsbaar op van alle sprekers tot nu toe, vind ik.

Vanavond is er een demonstratie in Tel Aviv tegen het optreden van Israël. En er is altijd een groep binnen Israël geweest die zich tegen deze oorlog heeft gekeerd en die vindt dat de Palestijnen recht hebben op een eigen staat. Ik voel me weer even thuis in mijn land. Hij kan zich uitspreken, ook al was het even rumoerig bij het noemen van de naam Nasrallah. Zóveel mensen bij elkaar die het in veel opzichten niet met elkaar eens zullen zijn.

En dan komt de toespraak van een jonge Libanese vrouw die huilend haar wanhoop uit over deze oorlog. De regen die eerder begon, is geleidelijk aan overgegaan in een regelrechte stortbui. Ik vraag of ik onder de Palestijnse vlag mag kruipen. Er is daar veel plaats. Ook vanaf het podium wordt aangemoedigd om samen onder de vlaggen weg te kruipen.

We staan steeds dichter op elkaar met steeds meer mensen die sterk van elkaar verschillen. “Loop niet weg!” roept de vrouw vanaf het podium. “Hier regent het water. Daar regent het bommen!”. Bij de eerste donderslagen, weldra direct boven ons hoofd aarzelen mensen, het is ook wel een wat eng. “De Israëli’s“, lacht een baardman. “Allahu Akbar”, roepen anderen. We lachen, Arabieren, westerlingen, joden…opeen gepropt. Orthodoxen en vrijzinnigen, extremen en vrijdenkers. Het is bizar, dit luide gedonder en die striemende regen. Tot ook de vlag het niet meer houdt. Ik loop naar het afdak van een snackbar en ren dan toch maar zoveel mogelijk langs muren naar mijn huis om te voorkomen dat ik door de bliksem wordt getroffen.

Saturday, July 22, 2006



Protest demonstration in Dutch capital Amsterdam against the Israeli attacks on Lebanon and Gaza

Pictures by Abdelghafour el Bacha



Israel using banned weapons?

According to several Lebanese newspapers, including the English-language newspaper the Daily Star, Israel has used phosphorus incendiary bombs as well as vacuum bombs. But those reports have not yet been confirmed. That was last week. And so far no major newspaper seems to have bothered to look into this.

Yesterday, BBC World did interview Lebanese doctors who were saying the same thing about some bodies that were brought in. The doctors sent some tissue to a lab for further investigation.

I contacted a friend at Amnesty International – Nederland who then contacted AI’s headoffice in London to see if they had received any news on this. Hopefully, they can come up with something.


Hezbollah laying down its arms.... fat chance

The Lebanese bear the brunt of the Hezbollah – Israeli battle. That’s for sure. But some more than others. Many Shia families have had to flee their homes in Haret Hreik, as Israeli jets began pounding this southern suburb of Beirut. Then most of them sought refuge in their Bekaa villages. Upon arrival Israeli leaflets told them they had to leave again, because Israel was now going to bomb the south. Where to next? You tell me ... how the hell can people escape if all the main roads and bridges connnecting the south to Beirut and the rest of Lebanon, have been destroyed by Israeli bombs? You tell me?

The Bush administration is blaming everything on Hezbollah’s kidnap of two Israeli soldiers. Although I am everything but a fan of the Hezbollah ideology and believe that the organisation has really overplayed its hand this time just to stay in power, this viewpoint really is a willful oversimplication of facts and context.

The Lebanese government kept on pumping billions of dollars into rebuilding Beirut’s down town area, while it might have paid more attention to the living conditions of some of its people, for instance its Shia population in Haret Hreik and the South; living conditions that were and still are light years away from the prosperity of Beirut's Achrafiye or pleasure dome Jounieh .

The fact is that the Lebanese government never did so. Hezbollah simply filled the gap in providing a lifeline in terms of affordable medical and educational facilities; in very much the same way in fact, as it had already done in the south of Lebanon in the early eighties, when Israel invaded the country for the second time (the first time being in 1978). Back then the Lebanese government was hardly in sight either, although it did have a good excuse at the time, namely the raging civil war.

Hezbollah became a powerful resistance organisation and an important player in the Lebanese political arena. But even after the civil war had finished, the battle was not over yet, at least not in the south, where Israel held on its buffer zone. Hezbollah’s guerilla warfare eventually paid off, causing former Israeli PM Ehud Barak to withdraw Israeli troops in May 2000. Still, Hezbollah did not disarm.

Were it not for the present plight of the Lebanese people, it is almost ironic that Israel's so-called self-defense is right up Hezbollah's alley, as the latter now even has a better excuse for not wanting to lay down its arms. But while those two parties refuse to back down in fear of losing face, a whole nation is losing its human dignity.



American bombs for Israel

Published: July 22, 2006

WASHINGTON, July 21 — The Bush administration is rushing a delivery of precision-guided bombs to Israel, which requested the expedited shipment last week after beginning its air campaign against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, American officials said Friday.


Mohamed Messara/European Pressphoto Agency

The decision to quickly ship the weapons to Israel was made with relatively little debate within the Bush administration, the officials said. Its disclosure threatens to anger Arab governments and others because of the appearance that the United States is actively aiding the Israeli bombing campaign in a way that could be compared to Iran’s efforts to arm and resupply Hezbollah.

The munitions that the United States is sending to Israel are part of a multimillion-dollar arms sale package approved last year that Israel is able to draw on as needed, the officials said. But Israel’s request for expedited delivery of the satellite and laser-guided bombs was described as unusual by some military officers, and as an indication that Israel still had a long list of targets in Lebanon to strike.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday that she would head to Israel on Sunday at the beginning of a round of Middle Eastern diplomacy. The original plan was to include a stop to Cairo in her travels, but she did not announce any stops in Arab capitals.

Instead, the meeting of Arab and European envoys planned for Cairo will take place in Italy, Western diplomats said. While Arab governments initially criticized Hezbollah for starting the fight with Israel in Lebanon, discontent is rising in Arab countries over the number of civilian casualties in Lebanon, and the governments have become wary of playing host to Ms. Rice until a cease-fire package is put together.

To hold the meetings in an Arab capital before a diplomatic solution is reached, said Martin S. Indyk, a former American ambassador to Israel, “would have identified the Arabs as the primary partner of the United States in this project at a time where Hezbollah is accusing the Arab leaders of providing cover for the continuation of Israel’s military operation.”

The decision to stay away from Arab countries for now is a markedly different strategy from the shuttle diplomacy that previous administrations used to mediate in the Middle East. “I have no interest in diplomacy for the sake of returning Lebanon and Israel to the status quo ante,” Ms. Rice said Friday. “I could have gotten on a plane and rushed over and started shuttling around, and it wouldn’t have been clear what I was shuttling to do.”

Before Ms. Rice heads to Israel on Sunday, she will join President Bush at the White House for discussions on the Middle East crisis with two Saudi envoys, Saud al-Faisal, the foreign minister, and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the secretary general of the National Security Council.

The new American arms shipment to Israel has not been announced publicly, and the officials who described the administration’s decision to rush the munitions to Israel would discuss it only after being promised anonymity. The officials included employees of two government agencies, and one described the shipment as just one example of a broad array of armaments that the United States has long provided Israel.

One American official said the shipment should not be compared to the kind of an “emergency resupply” of dwindling Israeli stockpiles that was provided during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, when an American military airlift helped Israel recover from early Arab victories.

David Siegel, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, said: “We have been using precision-guided munitions in order to neutralize the military capabilities of Hezbollah and to minimize harm to civilians. As a rule, however, we do not comment on Israel’s defense acquisitions.”

Israel’s need for precision munitions is driven in part by its strategy in Lebanon, which includes destroying hardened underground bunkers where Hezbollah leaders are said to have taken refuge, as well as missile sites and other targets that would be hard to hit without laser and satellite-guided bombs.

Pentagon and military officials declined to describe in detail the size and contents of the shipment to Israel, and they would not say whether the munitions were being shipped by cargo aircraft or some other means. But an arms-sale package approved last year provides authority for Israel to purchase from the United States as many as 100 GBU-28’s, which are 5,000-pound laser-guided bombs intended to destroy concrete bunkers. The package also provides for selling satellite-guided munitions.

An announcement in 2005 that Israel was eligible to buy the “bunker buster” weapons described the GBU-28 as “a special weapon that was developed for penetrating hardened command centers located deep underground.” The document added, “The Israeli Air Force will use these GBU-28’s on their F-15 aircraft.”

Sunday, July 16, 2006

From my home, I saw what the ‘war on terror’ meant

From The Independent, 14 July, Robert Fisk

All night I heard the jets, whispering high above the Mediterranean. It lasted for hours, little fireflies that were watching Beirut, waiting for dawn perhaps, because it was then that th
ey descended. They came first to the little village of Dweir near Nabatiya in southern Lebanon where an Israeli plane dropped a bomb on to the home of a Shia Muslim cleric.

He was killed. So was his wife. So were eight of his children. One was decapitated. All they could find of a baby was its head and torso which a young villager brandished in fury in front of the cameras.

Then the planes visited another home in Dweir and disposed of a family of seven. It was a brisk start to Day Two of Israel’s latest “war on terror”, a conflict that uses some of the same language – and a few of the same lies – as George Bush’s larger “war on terror”. For just as we “degraded” Iraq – in 1991 as well as 2003 – so yesterday it was Lebanon’s turn to be “degraded”. That means not only physical death but economic death and it arrived at Beirut’s gleaming new £300m international airport just before 6am as passengers prepared to board flights to London and Paris.

Don't Cry for Me, Argentina
From my home, I heard the F-16 which su
ddenly appeared over the newest runway and fired a spread of rockets into it, ripping up 20 metres. The flight indicators told the whole story: Paris no flight, London, no flight, Cairo, no flight, Dubai, no flight, Baghdad – from the cauldron into the fire if anyone had chosen to take it – no flight. Someone was playing “Don’t Cry For Me, Argentina” over the public address system.

Then the Israelis went for the Hizbollah television station, Al-Manar, clipping off its antenna with a missile but failing to put the station off air. That might be a more understandable target – “Manar”, after all, broadcasts Hizbollah propaganda. But was it really designed to find or recover the two Israeli soldiers captured on Wednesday? Or to take revenge for the nine Israelis killed in the same incident, one of the blackest days in recent Israeli Army history although not as black as it was for the 36 Lebanese civilians killed in the previous 24 hours. An Israeli woman was also killed by a Hizbollah rocket fired into Israel. So, in the grim exchange rate of these wretched conflicts, one Israeli death equals just over three Lebanese; it’s a fair bet the exchange rate will grow more murderous.

And by afternoon, the threats had grown worse. Israel would not “sit idly by”. It ordered the entire population of the southern suburbs – home to Hizbollah’s headquarters – to flee their homes by 3pm.
Save for a few hundred families, they stubbornly refused to leave. Everywhere in Lebanon could now be a target, the Israelis announced. If Israel bombed the suburbs, the Hizbollah roared, it would fire its long-range Katyushas at the Israeli city of Haifa. One of them had apparently already damaged an Israeli air base at Miron, a fact concealed at the time by Israeli censors. It certainly frightened Lebanon’s Gulf tourists who packed the roads from Bhamdoun in their 4×4s, fleeing for the safety of Syria and flights home from Damascus. Another little economic death for Lebanon.


But what did all this mean, this ranting and threatening? I sat at home in the early afternoon, going through my files of Israeli statements. It turned out that Israel had threatened not to “sit idly by” (or occasionally “stand idly by”) in Lebanon on at least six occasions in the past 26 years, most famously when the late Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin promised that he would not “stand idly by” while Christians were threatened here in 1980 – only to withdraw his soldiers and leave the Christians to their bloody fate three years later. The Lebanese are always left to their fate.

Israel’s Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, says he holds the Lebanese government responsible for the attacks on the border that breached the international frontier on Wednesday. But Mr Olmert and everyone knows that the weak and fractious government of the Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora isn’t capable of controlling a single militiaman, let alone the Hizbollah.

Yet wasn’t this the same set of Lebanese political leaders congratulated by the United States last year for its democratic elections and its freedom from Syria? Indeed, a man who sees Bush as a friend – perhaps “saw” is a better word – is Saad Hariri, son of the ex-Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri who built much of the infrastructure that Israel is now destroying and whose murder last year – by Syrian agents? – supposedly outraged Mr Bush.

Yesterday morning, Saad Hariri, the son, was flying into Beirut when America’s Israeli allies arrived to bomb the airport. He had to turn round as his aircraft skulked off to Cyprus for refuge. But it was the undercurrent of terror-speak that was particularly frightening yesterday.

Lebanon was an “axis of terror”, Israel was “fighting terror on all fronts”. During the morning, I had to cut across an interview with an Australian radio station when an Israeli reporter stated – totally untruthfully
– that there were Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon and that not all Syria’s troops had left.

And the reason why the Israelis had attacked Beirut’s infinitely secure and carefully monitored airport, used by diplomats and European leaders, a facility as safe as any in Europe? Because, so said the Israelis, it was “a central hub for the transfer of weapons and supplies to the Hizbollah terrorist organisation.” If the Israelis really want to know where that hub is, they should be looking at Damascus airport. But they do know that, don’t they?
And so it is terror, terror, terror again and Lebanon is once more to be depicted as the mythic terror centre of the Middle East along, I suppose with Gaza. And the West Bank. And Syria. And, of course, Iraq. And Iran. And Afghanistan. And who knows where next?
Beirut under attack

Haret Hreik hit hardest

Those of you who know me personally, know that I have been coming to Beirut ever since May 1993, about two years after the end of the civil war in 1991.

Initially, I went there to start working on my Ph.D on Lebanese war literature, but that has been put on a back burner for years now. Instead, I engaged in studying my Lebanese friends, which proved much more gratifying.

During those visits to Beirut, I would either stay in Baabda (Christian) or Haret Hreik – Ghobeyri (Shia Muslim). Mind you, by car the two areas are less than ten minutes apart from each other. It is Haret Hreik that is presently hit hardest, for the simple reason that it is considered a Hezbollah stronghold. Be that as it may, it is also a densely populated residential area.

The picture, taken from the Lebanese blog Beirut Lemons, shows the Ghobeyri roundabout, only minutes away from where I used to stay. So far the "Haret Hreik" family where I was staying is safe. Very early Friday morning most of the family left for their mountain village in the Beka Valley.

Friday, July 14, 2006

Fairouz -

The living Lebanese legend Fairouz was to perform in Baalbeck this Sunday. However, because of the Israeli attacks in the Beka, the concert has been cancelled.

Thursday, July 13, 2006

Israeli troops enter Lebanon

Wednesday, July 05, 2006


Lest we forget: vigil Women in Black

Every first Friday of the month the Women in Black gather at the Spui, Amsterdam, to protest the Israeli invasion in Palestinian territorities, land confiscations, the starving of civilians and so on. Yes, that means, THIS Friday.
Given the increased tensions of the past few weeks regarding the kidnapped Israeli soldier and Israel’s following, almost traditional, collective punishment, your presence is very much required. Many organisations and representatives of political parties have already agreed to be there.

Friday 7 July 2006

As of 12:45 hrs at the Spui in Amsterdam (near 't Lieverdje)

Dresscode: black !

For more information on the Women in Black vigil this Friday or for possible interviews, please contact Lily van den Bergh:

tel: 020 - 62 23 661
fax: 020 - 62 75 090
email:
info@vrouweninhetzwart.nl



Background info on the Women in Black

The international movement of Women in Black began in January 1988, one month after the first Palestinian Intifada (uprising) broke out, as a small group of Israeli women carried out a simple form of protest: Once a week at the same hour and in the same location – a major traffic intersection – they donned black clothing and raised a black sign in the shape of a hand with white lettering that read “Stop the Occupation”. Within months, by word of mouth, women throughout Israel had heard of this protest, and launched dozens of vigils.

So began the 17-year history of the Women in Black movement, as it spread spontaneously from country to country, wherever women sought to speak out against violence and injustice in their own part of the world. In Italy, Women in Black protest a range of issues, from the Israeli occupation to the violence of organized crime. In Germany, Women in Black protest neo-Nazism, racism against guest workers, and nuclear arms. In India, Women in Black hold vigils that call for an end to the ill treatment of women by religious fundamentalists. And during the war in the Balkans, Women in Black in Belgrade set a profound example of interethnic cooperation that was an inspiration to their countrywomen and men.

The movement of Women in Black has empowered women and men in many countries to mobilize for peace. It is an international movement, so that the voice of conscience in one region now echoes and reverberates throughout the world. And it provides a worldwide support system for victims of oppression, exposing their injustice to the light of day and the pressure of world opinion. The movement of Women in Black assumes many forms in many countries, but one thing is common to all: an uncompromising commitment to justice and a world free of violence.

The international movement of Women in Black was honored with the Millennium Peace Prize for Women, awarded by the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) in 2001. The international movement, represented by the Israeli and the Serbian groups, was also a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2001. Israeli Women in Black won the Aachen Peace Prize (1991); the peace award of the city of San Giovanni d'Asso in Italy (1994); and the Jewish Peace Fellowship’s “Peacemaker Award” (2001).

Tuesday, July 04, 2006

Heatwave hits Holland

Aaargghhh. 18.00 hrs and still 36 degrees Celcius. By way of comparison, in Beirut it was around 29 degrees and in Surinam around 33. If I am not mistaken this would be Holland's first heatwave for this year, as temperatures soared to 25 degrees, three days of which peaked above 30 degrees. But let's face it, this country was not built for such temperatures. The same goes for most of its inhabitants.


Saturday, July 01, 2006

1st July: Keti Koti

Pressured by Dutch abolitionists and slave resistance, slavery was abolished in the overseas Dutch colonies Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles on 1st July 1863. In Surinam, this 1st July is known as Keti Koti (chains cut or broken chains).

Here in Holland, Amsterdam in particular, many festivities will take place to commemorate the event. The Kwakoe Festival in the Bijlmerpark, Amsterdam Zuidoost being one of them: www.kwakoe.nl. For six consecutive weekends, the organization offers an extensive programme containing (live) music, films, sports, food, dance, information and meetings. The Festival has a different theme every year which is noticeable in the music, performances, art and literature.

BTW, Kwakoe was the name of a runaway but recaptured slave. His story came to represent the urge for freedom.

Wish to know more about this black chapter of Dutch history? Go to: http://www.suriname.nu or http://www.schooltv.nl/slavernij. You might also want to read up on it. If so, check out THE book on slavery in Surinam: Wij Slaven van Suriname by Anton de Kom.

The painting on the right-hand side is from the famous Flemish painter Rubens called "Negerkoppen". The original can be found in the Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Brussels
.