Given your location, I assume you must be aware that Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government.
You speak, though, as if you are not aware of this. Your remarks also suggest that you’re thinking of the Lebanese government as a Western-style government, with a particular party holding the reins and able to act with decisiveness, which doesn’t appear to be the case.
For years the IRA have operated with impunity in Ireland, despite the efforts of the British and irish govts.
When a group has the support of the people, and a rural area to hide in, it can be nigh on impossible to defeat them.
All very well to say “the lebanese govt should take control”, but if we can’t sort the IRA, I imagine Hamas would not be easy.
NYT:
Oooookay.
Now, I could maybe understand Israel bombing the shit out of the South, with the expectation that they could weaken Hezbollah to the extent that the Lebanese Army would have an easier time cleaning them up, but is bombing the Lebanese Army really a way to get this accomplished?
In other words, is the Israeli government serious?
Israeli attacks on the Lebanese standing army have mostly been on radar installations which could be used to assist Hizbollah .
Which shows how trustworthy the Lebanese army is…
Part of, yes. But getting elected doesn’t give you the right to run you own private militia, does it? It’s the military wing of Hizballah Israel wants dismantled. We’re not that crazy about the political wing, either, but I guess we’ll have to accept its existance.
As to your second point, the Arab world has a long history of leaders acting in a dicisive, centralized fashion. True, they’ve all been dictators, but there’s nothing preventing a democracy from acting the same way, is there? Remember Israeli history - two months after achieving independence, Ben-Gurion dismantled all the militias despite their strenuous objections; with one - the Irgun - he even had to use deadly force. It was one of the best things he ever did.
Uhhh… no.
The only radar installations I’ve seen mention of were bombed on Sunday, and they were “targeting” Israeli ships. Which is kinda understandable, given that the ships were launching missles at the time.
But anyway, if we take that at face value that the Lebanese army is providing assistance to Hezbollah and is otherwise untrustworthy, why would Israel want it deployed along its border?
At least one of Israel’s stated demands is directly at cross-purposes with its actions.
Sorry, I take some of that back. Apprently there’s some confusion as to whether the Lebanese Army was directly involved with painting the ship that got hit last week.
Still, army barracks? A fuel depot?
No cite, I’m afraid, but AFAIK there is no “confusion”. The C-802 missile, while, I believe, autonomous *after *acquiring its target, is not capable of actually acquiring the target itself. It needs to have its target “handed off” to it by a “seeking” radar, of the type that the Lebanese army – and, in Lebanon, only the Lebanese army – have.
Well, no. The point is that it kinda hinders the government of Lebanon in reaching a decision to act against Hezbollah if Hezbollah is part of that government.
Apparently Ben-Gurion had the ability to do so. But as Krauthammer says this morning, “The Lebanese are too weak” to do the same thing to Hezbollah.
And even if they had a government united in the will to act against Hezbollah, and were otherwise militarily strong enough to do so, the fact would remain that Israel has been bombing the crap out of Lebanon’s roads and bridges, making it hard for the army to move south to act against Hezbollah anyway.
Political soundbytes which contribute nothing.
However…
If this war ends within a few months, I will see a political shift from appeasement and pretty much ignoring Hezbollah by the Lebanese Government, to actually getting its ass in gear and mobilising its army and security forces into the south. I think one of the reasons as to why the Lebanese Army hasn’t mobilised to get rid of them yet is because of;
A) The spectre of civil war yet again.
B) The fact that after the Syrian Army left, it left a sizeable amount of Alawites in the officer corps (not confirmed, still trying to find the link)
C) The army has a sizeable amount of Shia within it’s armed forces, and fears that provoking Hezbollah will lead to the dessertion and weakening (further) of its strength.
And how would any of that be changed at the end of this war? They’ll still have Shi’a in the Lebanese army and civil war will remain as possible and frightenint a prospect as ever before.
Because the population in general is seeing the price it’s paying in relation to allowing pretty much a Hezbollaland to operate under its own accord. After this campaign by Israel I see much much more public support in Lebanon to shift the military south and stabilise the border.
I for one don’t see a collapsing of the Lebanese Government, yeah it might be weak, but it won’t collapse, the Christian and Muslim portions of the country have vested too much into it.