WB: Math Problem + The Sands of Lebanon

August 10, 2006

Billmon:

II. The Sands of Lebanon

So it seems likely that in day or three Olmert is going to conclude he has no choice but to turn the IDF loose. And if he does that, many people, maybe thousands of people, are going to die. Given the kill ratio so far, a lot of those people are going to be Israeli soldiers –maybe more than the government of Israel currently expects, even as a worst case scenario.

I. Math Problem

Posted by b on August 10, 2006 at 04:25 UTC | Permalink

Comments

If he calls for the offensive, rockets may rain on Tel Aviv, causing more civilian casualties. Then Israel will retaliate by flattening Beirut. I don’t really see how this ends in this case until the last remaining Lebanese cries “Uncle.”
Where is that deus ex machina when you need it?

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 10 2006 5:07 utc | 1

I don’t really see how this ends in this case until the last remaining Lebanese cries “Uncle.”
I don’t think it’s going to end that way — no more than the Vietnam War ended when the last Vietnamese cried “Uncle.” The Israelis are discovering that there are things harder than steel and more powerful than high explosives.

Posted by: billmon | Aug 10 2006 5:24 utc | 2

When you have secured an area, make sure to tell the enemy.
The Israelis forgot that rule of combat, and will lose as a result. Sometimes it really is just that simple.
Any reason to believe this is significant?
“Israel Puts Ground Offensive on Hold”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060810/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel
First sentence: Israel has put its massive new ground offensive into southern Lebanon on hold for two or three days to give the U.N. Security Council more time to come to an agreement on a cease-fire, an Israeli Cabinet minister and senior officials said Thursday. (The cabinet official is Rafi Eitan, the Gil/ Pensioner’s Party represntative.)

Posted by: Brian J. | Aug 10 2006 5:49 utc | 3

Hell, they haven’t even secured the border strip, and already the Cabinet is a pack of rabid hyenas tearing each other apart…go to it boys…
The defense establishment’s proposal to expand the Israel Defense Forces operation in Lebanon was approved by a large majority of cabinet ministers on Wednesday: Nine ministers backed the proposal, while three abstained. But according to some attendees, the results of the vote do not reflect the ministers’ true opinions. “If everyone voted the way they spoke, there would be a majority opposing the proposal,” one minister said. So why didn’t anyone vote against the proposal? We were afraid, the minister explained, of showing the public and the Hezbollah that there are rifts within the government and cracks in its support for the IDF.
The problem is that such cracks exist and no one is really making an effort to hide them anymore. Rifts between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz. Rifts between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz. And those between the head of the Mossad, Meir Dagan and Head of the Imtelligence Corps, Amos Yadlin. And between Peretz and his predecessor, Shaul Mofaz and between Mofaz and Avi Dichter. One of those present summed the situation up by saying, “everyone was involved in at least one quarrel.”
The prime minister does not like the master plan prepared for him this week by Peretz and Halutz. He feared that sending in several divisions to operate for a month, possibly two, in the hostile territory of southern Lebanon would entail multiple casualties, an ongoing occupation and would gnaw at the already dwindling remnants of Israel’s international support. It is doubtful whether the Katyusha fire on northern Israeli towns would cease, even after such an operation. There will always be some Hezbollah man on donkey-back, poised and ready to launch a rocket into the Galilee, just like the Palestinian Qassam launchers are doing in Gaza.
But Olmert’s reservations clash with his original position, that the political echelon should not interfere with operational decisions, and that it should follow the army’s recommendations. What should he do? click to find out what he should do…

Posted by: jj | Aug 10 2006 6:26 utc | 4

Billmon, I have to thank you for your editorials today (not that I am not thankful for them the rest of the time).
The thing is, today I really lost it.
I thought, these hyenas that we have in the White House are worse than the Nazis.
Oh, I don’t mean in terms of the amount of human suffering they’re responsible for. I don’t mean in terms of ideology, or whatever.
No, what I was thinking about was that at least the Nazi party was shaped and came to power in a Germany that was devastated, both in terms of its power and its economy.
In our country, we have everything. And we are on top of the world. Our rivals were dispatched, the economy was great. We were the one and only remaining superpower. And so, with so much going for them, this bunch comes into the White House and what have they done with their money and their power? Have we done something good for the world? No. All they can think to do is to sew destruction – all over a whole continent. Violence, bloodshed, internecine strife where there was none before, and death, lots of death and suffering – the whole enchilada, 9 yards, the devil’s due right down to the tip of his tail. In short, a real biblical portrait of evil.
In terms of personal human corruption, I have not ever seen, never envisioned, anything worse.

Posted by: 2nd | Aug 10 2006 6:29 utc | 5

sew destruction = sow destruction
yeah, I lost it today.

Posted by: Anonymous | Aug 10 2006 6:31 utc | 6

BrianJ
It seems the “massive” ground offensive is on hold in the article you linked to. But the same article claims “violent confrontations” – so the fight is on, but maybe the IDF is not getting past the Hezbollah fortifications and bunkers in great shape.
Olmert and Bush must be hoping that Hezbollah agrees to terms that provides a face-saving “victory”. Curious how Hezbollah will deal with the international force and if they will allow them to “mapout” all their bunkers.

Posted by: ab initio | Aug 10 2006 6:37 utc | 7

It is Lebanon, not Israel, that faces a threat to its existence in this war

Whatever else it may be, this is a war between palpable unequals: a giant nuclear-armed power with the most advanced western military hardware and a potential ground force of up to 650,000 trained men, against a tiny third-world guerrilla force of around 5,000 fighters, armed largely with second-hand former eastern bloc hardware (the first Katyusha rockets were developed in the early 1940s) and castoffs from Iran and Syria.
The idea that the latter can pose an existential threat to the former, under any foreseeable circumstances, is risible at best and disingenuous at worst. While it can hardly be comfortable for northern Israel’s civilian population to be forced into shelters for four weeks, the physical safety of the overwhelming majority – unlike that of their counterparts in much of Lebanon – has never been seriously at stake. And while Hizbullah’s supposed targeting of Israeli civilians has yielded relatively few victims, Israel’s repeated “mistakes” in Lebanon have maintained a civilian death rate of about 100 Lebanese to every three Israelis. The opposite side of this coin is that while Israel’s hi-tech “surgical strikes” have killed hundreds more civilians than Hizbullah fighters, the Lebanese resistance’s low-tech weapons have killed about three times as many Israeli soldiers as civilians.
After yesterday’s decision to expand the ground war all the way up to the Litani river and beyond, Israel’s constantly shifting war plan is now moving away from its initial relatively cautious phase and has plunged headlong into grand-scale politico-strategic engineering. What Israel now seeks is less of a secure border, and more of a major rearrangement of the Lebanese domestic scene that will crush resistance not only in Lebanon, but by extension in Palestine as well, and wherever else it may exist across the seething Arab Muslim world.

Posted by: b | Aug 10 2006 6:41 utc | 8

An elderly Jewish friend of mine has a son in the regular IDF, a colonel. His specialty is contingency planning, logistics, and such.
He tells me his son described the current mess as a failure of will on the part of the Israeli Cabinet. He described the original plan for clearing Hizballah out of Southern Lebanon, which had been agreed upon by the Cabinet and IDF almost three years ago.
He said that Phase One of the original plan was for a lightning air/armor amphibious invasion way up on the Lebanese coast, at a point between Tyre and the Litani River. With no warning, they would sweep straight inland for as many miles as they could, parallel to the Litani, to set up a blocking force — the anvil. Air cover would be constant. If they got as far as the Bekaa Valley, great.
The hammer to this anvil was to be three full divisions sweeping north much closer to the Syrian border, up toward the Bekaa Valley, but turning left at that point to join with the anvil.
Creating a kill box with most of Southern Lebanon inside it. One side the sea, one side Israel, one side the hammer, one side the anvil.
The majority of Southern Lebanon would be captured intact. No one leaving without inspection and permission, and no one coming in. And no more rockets, arms, foreign fighters, etc coming in. And no journalists coming and going, either.
Phase Two of the plan was to “slice and dice” the captured territory into defined sectors, and then bring all the force of the invasion army and air forces to bear on one sector at a time, while the rest of the sectors were held in abeyance by air power and armor. Absolutely crush, dismantle and clear out one sector at a time within the larger kill box, tunnels and all, and then the next one, then the next one.
Why do it this way?
To minimize Israeli casualties.
The Slice and Dice plan was expected to cost from several dozens to several hundred Israeli lives, but the planners preferred those figures to the casualties that would come of Ye Goode Old Frontal Assault — vicious street fighting starting from the Israeli border all the way to the Litani River.
That kind of brawling would cost several thousand Israeli lives at the minimum, take much longer, and very likely would not accomplish the goal.
Slice and Dice was the most efficient and effective approach to clearing Hizballah out of the region.
The thinking was — do it the right way, lose a few hundred Israelis, but we will win hands down. Do it the wrong way, lose a few thousand Israelis to clear out the region, or fail to clear out the region, or worse — lose a few thousand for naught, and be forced back to the 1967 borders under threat of international sanctions.
The cold arithmetic of military planners — get in there, get it done, get out with as little loss as possible.
Two things went wrong before Slice and Dice was initiated. The Israeli Air Force put forward very forcefully their notion that modern air power alone could clear the region. And, the Israeli Cabinet looked once more at the “several hundred” Israeli casualties predicted in the Slice and Dice plan — and chickened out.
They went with the Air Strikes Only plan, and patted themselves on their backsides for saving a few hundred Israeli lives.
Air power has not worked. It is too late to set up the original tactical kill box, so they are trying to set up the entire southern half of Lebanon as a kill box — but there is no anvil to the hammer. They have no choice left except street fighting all the way to the Litani, and the world is not likely to stand by and watch that.
My friend’s son says the Israeli Air Force is not running things anymore, nor is the Cabinet. The IDF is calling the shots, but they are left with no real options other than slugging it out over a front line that stretches from the sea to Syria, slowly pushing northward toward that distant river.
And the IDF is NOT interested in a fight with Syria or Iran.
That’s Cheney’s Plan.

Posted by: Antifa | Aug 10 2006 6:42 utc | 9

jj
That was an amazing piece you linked to. The Israeli’s are caught in a nut. Its no more strategic planning just lurching from one plan to another and hoping Condi will help bail them out.
Are they suffering from the same necon disease?

Posted by: ab initio | Aug 10 2006 7:13 utc | 10

At some point very soon the IDF is going to have to deliver on the threat of an all-out offensive, and deliver it with overwhelming force. Otherwise, the world will assume that Hizbullah has successfully called their bluff, at which point they can kiss their “Boss Man” image goodbye. At this point, I’m not sure the Israelis, or their enemies, are ready to deal responsibly with the consequences of such a profound psychological shift.
Ready or not, here it comes.
Despite all of the blustering, I am at a loss to understand how on earth Israel plans to orchestrate an all out offensive without full mobilization.
Given the quality of the enemy, the strength of his fortifications, the superiority of his tactics, the sophistication of his weaponry, and the inhospitable ground (not good tank country), the Israelis are going to have to go in with overwhelming force (think Colin Powell circa 1991) if they are to hope for any sort of even minor victory that will help resuscitate their ever weakening bargaining position.
What’s more, all this doesn’t even count the significant committment of regulars needed to hold down the fort in Gaza and the occupied territories during the attack.
This whole ‘offensive’ talk has the whiff of Flanders about it – with the spearhead of the thrust already committed and nearing exhaustion, the attacker throws more and more bodies piecemeal into the meat grinder hoping for a miracle breakthrough that never materializes.
So instead of victory, a rushed and foolhardy charge ends up decimating the elite units and leaving the reserves to stave off the inevitable counter attack.
Unless the Israeli government is willing to call up every reserve unit it has, and the generals take the time they need to carefully plan the ground game down to the smallest detail, operationally I just don’t see them being able to pull this off.

Posted by: Night Owl | Aug 10 2006 7:14 utc | 11

Antifa: short of genocide, a slice and dice tactic is the only way to root out an insurgency that has solid popular support. That said, it would still means a lot of casualties from casual guerrilla in the areas which are not cleared by the IDF, more than they expect, I suppose. And it would also imply a huge number of Lebanese deaths, and take lots of time to complete. Not more than a street fighting conquest of S. Lebanon, but sill long enough for international community to be seriously pissed off against Israel. Then would Syria let IDF stand at its doorstep without reacting, would the move parallel to Litani work without opposition? Risky plan, still more clever than the current improvisation.
“And the IDF is NOT interested in a fight with Syria or Iran.
That’s Cheney’s Plan.”
Glad to see some sanity left in the IDF. Doesn’t mean that they can’t be conned and forced to war on Syria by backdoor manoeuvres from the US, alas. If Israeli leaders don’t intend to go against Damascus, they’d still have to make sure no one will impose them such a war from the outside.
“So instead of victory, a rushed and foolhardy charge ends up decimating the elite units and leaving the reserves to stave off the inevitable counter attack.”
Someone has been reading about the Eastern front in WWII…

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Aug 10 2006 7:50 utc | 12

@Night Owl – agree – the lack of mobilization above the 1+ brigades that was mobilized early on is weird. They may have hidden further mobilization (the military censors do sit next to the editors), but I doubt that a lot of people leaving their civilion posts could be hidden for long.
That’s why I doubt the full fledged attack will ever come.
@antifa – interesting plan, but depending on surprize and therby irrelevant for now. “Bomber” Halutz really spoiled a lot with his air centric thinking.
@jj – the fighting is not only within the Israeli cabinet. The fight is within Washington. Neocons versus neocon-light imperial realists, Cheney vs. Rice. The Israeli cabinet gets directions from one Washington phone line to hit harder, and to hold back from the other.
The OODA-loop has broken down in Washington and Tel Aviv.

Posted by: b | Aug 10 2006 8:04 utc | 13

@Antifa – the plan outlined is the obvious one. Anyone sitting down with a terrain and infrastructure map of southern Lebanon would come up with exactly that option, when outlining scenarios for various attempts at imposing control on the territory.
And you can be quite certain that the Hezbollah saw the exact same eventuality, and gamed against it. Israel wanted to launch the attack you specify – trouble was, the enemy was prepared, and the force that “rolled” into Lebanon ground to a screeching halt (or rather, was blasted to a screeching halt by prepared intervention measures).
This is why we see an apparent disparity between Israeli actions inside Lebanon, and what is happening on the border. Let’s assume that the IDF and the Israeli cabinet haven’t totally lost it, and that there was a plan behind the elimination of in-country Lebanese infrastructure.
An Israeli invasion as you describe it risked triggering countermeasures from Lebanese regulars, as well as from Syria, moving in through parts of Lebanon that did not have Israeli ground forces.
Therefore – Lebanese infrastructure: harbors, roads, bridges, powerplants, oil supplies – were taken out, to make a Lebanese/Syrian counterattack less likely, in case there was escalation in response to the Israeli action.
However, the IDF did not properly take into account the counter measures the Hezbollah had in place. Plan B was successful: the destruction of the infrastructure farther north. Plan A is going nowhere: the invasion into Lebanon.
Israel is left banging its drums and making threatening noises – they know that a massive movement into Lebanon is going to cost them their standing army, and this is not the time to make that sacrifice. What was perceived as a cleaning-up operation has become a face saving desperate measures action for Israel.
There was not a lack of will, there was just a disrespect for the enemy that the Israelis have ingrained in their nature, and which is their greatest weakness.

Posted by: SteinL | Aug 10 2006 8:31 utc | 14

“Are they suffering from the same necon disease?”
Now thats an understatement.
Antifa post, interesting theory, but as b says, too late now — givin that Hizbollah tacticions would’nt have expected and planned for such a move in the first place…not.
I have this sneaking suspicion that IDF is taking some serious hits on its armor, not that they would reveal (for the usual reasons) such a state. I’ve heard 2 tanks on average per day. At any rate, Hizbollah seems to have some (alot?) of those Russian anti-tank weapons. And also there is a conspicuious lack of IDF helicopter gunships used so far in operations — coupled with (only) high altitude air-strikes, may mean Hizbollah might be packing a supply of current SAM’s quite capable of bringing down the apache/blackhawk. All of which adds up to a more or less grunt war on the ground, ground well prepared for at that. Meat grinder (choices) indeed.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 10 2006 8:57 utc | 15

Interesting comments and theories. Unfortunately, we won’t know what
is really happening in South Lebanon for years, i.e. until censorship and
spin mongering fade into history and the facts can be stated by disinterested parties. Nevertheless reading the tea leaves (or perhaps
examining the entrails is more appropriate here), is a fascinating activity akin to Kremlinology or Vaticanology. For what it’s worth (that is, nothing) after watching the body language of both the Israeli government chieftans and Nasarullah (in his TV speech last night) I get the distinct impression that things are not going at all well for the former. Nasrullah on the other hand seemed calm, confident, and balanced, not at all the fanatical killer his detractors portray. Again, just an epidermic impression (especially since I understood about 3 words Nasrullah’s 10 minute appearance). Unfortunately it may still be “early in the game”, and one can only recall the Israeli maxim “When brute force fails, apply more brute force”.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Aug 10 2006 9:24 utc | 16

William Arkin’s latest column on the THEL Katyusha defense “system” is worth reading. Two “money quotes”

Israel has lost its current war against Hezbollah. Not because it hasn’t achieved many of its military goals and isn’t on the way to achieving more. Not because airpower and technology intrinsically are useless in fighting the “new” war.
Israel has lost in the court of public opinion, particularly in Europe. As I said yesterday, a certain ruthlessness in going after Hezbollah has challenged the aesthetic about conventional warfare and the level of damage deemed acceptable when a country is pursuing an unconventional foe.
An additional failure is shared by the Bush administration, Beltway defense, intelligence and technology “experts” who demonstrate again and again that they cannot anticipate anything: The United States and Israel once were developing a laser weapon to shoot down short-range Katyusha rockets.

Maybe THEL never would have been good enough to stop 3,500 Hezbollah rockets from falling on Israel. We’ll never know. We do know the military and defense world is sometimes incapable of seeing past the tip of their noses, incapable of getting beyond their preconceptions. And as for defense industry types: They market their goods one week for peacekeeping the next for big war the next for wars against terrorists the next for homeland defense the next to combat IEDs. In other words, they don’t care why their systems are purchased, just that they are.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Aug 10 2006 10:18 utc | 17

And also there is a conspicuious lack of IDF helicopter gunships used so far in operations
Three helicopters went down in the early days of the campaign. All in official “accidents”. Hizbullah has reported five or six down. So there are definitly manpads on the ground.

Posted by: b | Aug 10 2006 10:55 utc | 18

Christopher Allbritton from Lebanon: Dark Days Ahead

Down in Tyre, my colleagues are forced to walk in the city now, as no one is willing to take a car on the road, much less out of the city. The Israelis have dropped leaflets saying any vehicle seen moving will be assumed to be Hizbullah and destroyed. Note that all the cars we journalists drive are clearly marked with big “TV” on the sides and roofs delineating us as media. No matter to the Israelis, apparently.
The roads and bridges out of Tyre are blown up anyway. The last remaining dirt causeway that was the only means of getting food and other aid south of the Litani was bombed a couple of nights ago and the Israelis have threatened to blow up any bridge that’s built to replace it. Khaled Mansour, the spokesman for the U.N. in Lebanon, told me the organization is waiting for authorization from the IDF to build a bridge but so far, nothing.
It’s incredibly serious because according to Mansour, there are between 70,000 and 130,000 people still left south of the Litani river, mainly concentrated in Tyre and Rmaiche, a Christian village south of Bint Jbail. In Tyre, the markets are closed and the shelves are empty anyway. He said that while there is no starvation yet, “They’re running out of food very quickly.” WIthout a bridge over the Litani, it will be impossible to get food into the region.

Posted by: b | Aug 10 2006 13:53 utc | 19

hannah’s arkin link

Posted by: annie | Aug 10 2006 14:03 utc | 20

There are some great posts here, lot’s of solid military thinking, which I appreciate because that is something I don’t really understand or know much about.
Still, I don’t understand, or can’t see clearly, how the endgame will play out. It is a very complicated situation involving, at minimum, four players in Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Iran, Iraq, the rest of the Arab world, the US, EU, Russia, and China. I have no idea what maneuvering is going on behind the surface. Oh, and I forgot the Palestinians, suppossedly the “crux” of the matter — but that’s understandable, all the other players forgot them long ago.
The one clear loser is the Shi’ites of south Lebanon, who have had their whole lives destroyed. The callousness of the entire “civilized” world never ceases to amaze and depress me.
But how do we know that Israel is losing? And is that just today, or can it turn it around? How can we say that Israel has lost? Lost what? And what does this mean, if anything, for the future.
I know that Israel has suffered a loss of face at being found to be not invulnerable. I know that Hezbullah has seen its stature rise because of its not insubstantial resistance. I know that this exerts much negative pressure on the US dominated arab world. I know that, most importantly, all of this throws a wrench in the works of US plans to simply skip Iraq and move on to the next phase. (We can come back and get Iraq right after we’ve dealt with Iran and Syria.)
But, now what? I find arguments about how long the world will stand for this unconvincing, because it has stood as long as the US has wanted it to stand.
It seems that two options present themselves to Israel — the small option, of essentially declaring victory and going back to the status quo, except with a decimated south Lebanon; and the large option, of pushing on, and seeking to hold territory. It seems that at this moment we do not know which option will be pursued.
So far, the US has been unsuccessful at embroiling Syria or Iran. Is the wrench firmly stuck preventing further US escalation, or will the neo-cons just grind the metal tool in the gears of further war?
Will there be a let-up, a truce, of some period of time, while both sides prepare for the next larger battle?
Clearly, we all know that this is but one battle in a much larger war. How can we know at this point who, of the many parties, is winning the battle and who isn’t. It seems to depend on what Israel does next. And how do we know that this battle will have any relevance to the prosecution of the larger war?
Here I can only add that the USISuk have been unexpectedly surprised by their arrogant underestimation of the enemy — its capability, dedication, strategy, and weaponry, have all been far superior to estimations. This must give them pause about moving on to even bigger fish.
On the other hand, the ease with which the US has deflected the growing disenchantment with the Iraq war by supplanting it with a more popular existential war in Israel is dismaying. This seems to indicate that the war machine can move on seemingly at will, hopscotching from one unpopular conflict to the next vicarious thrill and rush of adrenaline that the beFOXed public craves.
So, help me out here. Am I asking the right questions? What are the answers? Am I trying to look too far into the future where the answers are unknowable? Is there something I’m missing from my precis here? Any hunches?
I’m lost at sea. Point me in the right direction.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 10 2006 15:02 utc | 21

Then there is this nugget from Lenin’s Tomb, which I had thought to be impossible:

Lebanon: An Open Country for Civil Resistance
Beirut August 7, 2006
On August 12, at 7 am, Lebanese from throughout the country and international supporters who have come to Lebanon to express solidarity will gather in Martyr’s Square in Beirut to form a civilian convoy to the south of Lebanon.
Hundreds of Lebanese and international civilians will express their solidarity with the inhabitants of the heavily destroyed south who have been bravely withstanding the assault of the Israeli military.
This campaign is endorsed by more than 200 Lebanese and international organizations. This growing coalition of national and international non-governmental organizations hereby launches a campaign of civil resistance for the purpose of challenging the cruel and ruthless use of massive military force by Israel, the regional superpower, upon the people of Lebanon.
August 12 marks the start of this Campaign of Resistance, declaring Lebanon an Open Country for Civil Resistance. August 12 also marks both the international day of protest against the Israeli aggression.
“In the face of Israel’s systematic killing of our people, the indiscriminate bombing of our towns, the scorching of our villages, and the attempted destruction of our civil infrastructure, we say No! In the face of the forced expulsion of a quarter of our population from their homes throughout Lebanon, and the complicity of governments and international bodies, we re-affirm the acts of civil resistance that began from the first day of the Israeli assault, and we stress and add the urgent need to act!,” said Rasha Salti, one of the organizers of this national event.
After August 12, the campaign will continue with a series of civil actions, leading to an August 19 civilian march to reclaim the South . “Working together, in solidarity, we will overcome the complacency, inaction, and complicity of the international community and we will deny Israel its goal of removing Lebanese from their land and destroying the fabric of our country,” explained Samah Idriss, writer and co-organizer of this campaign.
“An international civilian presence in Lebanon is not only an act of solidarity with the Lebanese people in the face of unparalleled Israeli aggression, it is an act of moral courage to defy the will of those who would seek to alienate the West from the rest and create a new Middle East out of the rubble and blood of the region,” said Huwaida Arraf, co-founder of the International Solidarity Movement and campaign co-organizer.
“After having witnessed the wholesale destruction of villages by Israel’s air force and navy and having visited the victims (so-called displaced) of Israel’s policy of cleansing Lebanese civilians from their homes,” continued Arraf, “it is imperative to go south and reach those who have stayed behind to resist by steadfastly remaining on their land.”
This campaign is thus far endorsed by more than 200 organizations, including: The Arab NGOs Network for Development (ANND), International Solidarity Movement (ISM), Cultural Center for Southern Lebanon, Norwegian People’s Aid, Lebanese Center for Policy Studies, Lebanese Association for Democratic Elections, Frontiers, Kafa, Nahwa al-Muwatiniya, Spring Hints, Hayya Bina, Lebanese Transparency Association, Amam05, Lebanese Center for Civic Education, Let’s Build Trust, CRTD-A, Solida, National Association for Vocational Training and Social Services, Lebanese Development Pioneers, Nadi Li Koul Alnas, and Lecorvaw.
http://www.lebanonsolidarity.org

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 10 2006 15:28 utc | 22

@malooga – Israel’s nightmare and Lebanon’s rescue:
1,000,000 million people marching from Beirut to the southern boarder accompanied by the world media.

Posted by: b | Aug 10 2006 15:43 utc | 23

Malooga: “On the other hand, the ease with which the US has deflected the growing disenchantment with the Iraq war by supplanting it with a more popular existential war in Israel is dismaying. This seems to indicate that the war machine can move on seemingly at will, hopscotching from one unpopular conflict to the next vicarious thrill and rush of adrenaline that the beFOXed public craves.”
Yeah, Bush seems to be a lot happier lately! – Disgusting.
I also agree with Malooga, excellent posts from everyone. I have no military expertise either so my comments are limited. A couple of comments I would add are:
1. It appears we (through media sources) seem to know IMMEDIATELY and EXACTLY what the Israeli Cabinet ministers have discussed and decided. How much of all this should we beleive?
2. Also surprising, the media pictures of all the troops, tanks and other equipment of the Israeli military lined up at the borders… This staging display has been consistent for weeks…. Seems like purposely making for an easy target, in any case, it shows much self confidence on the part of the IDF and is evidence that the IDF has pretty good knowledge of what Hizballuah can or will do.

Posted by: Rick Happ | Aug 10 2006 15:59 utc | 24

1,000,000 million people marching from Beirut to the southern boarder accompanied by the world media.
let us pray

Posted by: annie | Aug 10 2006 16:09 utc | 25

CluelessJoe,
“Someone has been reading about the Eastern front in WWII…”
Actually I was thinking more about the Western Front in WWI, or maybe Korea post-Chinese intervention, but the WWII Eastern Front certainly fits the bill as well.
The IDF really needs to reread it’s miltary history, because they forgot the two of the most important lessons learned from 20th century warfare:
1. Air Power alone never wins.
2. Slugging it out in bloody ground war of attrition against a dug in enemy seldom if ever ends with the advantage to the attacker.

Posted by: Night Owl | Aug 10 2006 16:14 utc | 26

I think there is a clock ticking before the conflict widens. I can’t imagine there won’t be a response from other Arab actors if the Israelis escalate in Lebanon.
the idea that Israel could have gone in with massive force in the beginning without a Syrian response seems doubtful to me as well. There must be alot of second guessing going on in the IDF right now, but the Israel position in Lebanon has real political constraints unless the Israelis are willing to spark another Arab/Israeli war.
behind all of this a clock has already run out: the secular Arab allies of the West in the Middle East I think have been completely discredited by their inaction so far. If there is a cease-fire it will mark the beginning (i would expect) renewed resistance in Egypt or Jordan. I don’t think the birth pangs are over yet and I’m pretty sure we won’t like the new baby…

Posted by: geos | Aug 10 2006 18:12 utc | 27

War destroys social space — the small, but crucial sphere open to the public in which to make their voices heard and confront the powers that be. This march is an attempt to reclaim that space and expand it beyond Lebanon to the entire world.
All that mucky-muck about 4th generational warfare and whatnot, ignores this vital dimension. Social space, and its expansion through the innovative use of new technologies distributed instantly and globally, creates new spaces, heretofore nonexistent, with which to challenge and confront unjust power.
If all the shiny baubles of technology in the world are to be good for anything; if all the internets and global methods of media dispersion are to be good for anything, than surely this is it.
Since we know war to be politics by other means, then activism is the needed caustic to neutralize the acid of war.
Politics and war — the exercise of power from above — can be countered by activism and engagement — the exercise of power from below.
Activism is the antidote to war.
Activism, through public engagement, is the opposite of war, through social isolation.
Activism is the WMD of the aggrieved.
War marginalizes the arena of public engagement.
Organized public engagement marginalizes the arena for war.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 10 2006 18:15 utc | 28

2nd wrote:
No, what I was thinking about was that at least the Nazi party was shaped and came to power in a Germany that was devastated, both in terms of its power and its economy.
The difference is that most of the US public does not realise that the US has come to the end of the line. Literally, it cannot continue to survive as it is, without a complete change of the global system, or of its own internal system.
The US response has been military – an attempt to control what escapes it – going for broke, as it left everything rather late. It is an end-times measure, a willingness to go down in flames if the strategy does not work. (See bird flu, Katrina…the US cannot, or does not wish any longer to plan, control, manage such minor disasters…) and all the legislation for internal control, which is not a showing of Junior Bush’s bad character, but a weak effort to be in a position to control the population when major strife and breakdown hit. The situation has attracted those who get kicks out of the jackboots, domination, catastrophists, and so on (neo-cons, authoritarian locals, loonies, Kristians, etc.) Bush himself would like nothing better than to be an isolationist Pres. who cuts the red ribbon at Bowling Alleys.
At present, the world is producing (my numbers are always ‘about’) 81 millions of barrels per day. Oil. Yes. All of it is already sold, and as a scarce commodity, the prices have risen dramatically. Demand, in this case, does not drive supply. There is no spare capacity at all, and if any geo-political upset interferes with OPECs mad scramble to do its best, because that is what it is, the system will start to break down. If Iran, for example, withdrew its 2 million barrels of export per day, the shit would hit the proverbial fan. Who will go without? The answer is simple – those who cannot pay, but more importantly, those who are in a poor position via supply routes etc. Japan, for example.
People have become so used to cheap quality energy, and our whole world is built on it (west) that no one can imagine that this state of affairs is temporary. Life, one feels, will continue as usual, substitutes will be found, renewables will become viable, etc. Not so.
The EU is in a worse position than the US.
Before the invasion, Lebanon consumed as much oil as the UK (per capita), now – no more.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 10 2006 18:49 utc | 29

Malooga wrote:
Still, I don’t understand, or can’t see clearly, how the endgame will play out. It is a very complicated situation involving, at minimum, four players in Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Iran, Iraq, the rest of the Arab world, the US, EU, Russia, and China. I have no idea what maneuvering is going on behind the surface. Oh, and I forgot the Palestinians, supposedly the “crux” of the matter — but that’s understandable, all the other players forgot them long ago.
The result, setting aside details, is that USukIsr will win, in the sense that they will have smashed a ME country, knocked someone off the map. None of them care about Hezb. rockets, these are a minor annoyance, or positive as they legitimise riposte, keep em coming. Who exactly is there or not, if there is an international force or not, if the Gvmt stands, or not, all of that, finally, in the long run, matters little.
US/Isr will have shown its destructive power. Even if the Hezb. makes a great showing, and somehow manages to hold the south (which I do not expect), or within International Agreements, manages to be a great nuisance for Isr, it is of no consequence. Lebanon has been destroyed, and will be destroyed further, in the coming weeks. Its a small place, with its own tensions, contradictions, problems, which I can’t entirely grasp. Toast, it is toast, and that is the point.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 10 2006 19:21 utc | 30

UNIFIL Press Release for August 10, 2006 (PDF File)
A humanitarian convoy to distribute food to the villages in the western
sector, and other humanitarian activities planned by UNIFIL, could not
proceed in the last four days due to the denial of consent by the IDF.

Posted by: Rick Happ | Aug 10 2006 20:29 utc | 31

Arabs just don’t seem to understand force, even when it is used against them in the most brutal, overwhelming way. “Shock and Awe” (Terrorism) doesn’t do it, Murder and mass destruction doesn’t do it. What’s with them anyway? Will total genocide be the only way for the US and Israel to bring peace to the ME? Is that the plan?

Posted by: pb | Aug 10 2006 21:21 utc | 32

pb, ask the Irish…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 10 2006 21:41 utc | 33

Malooga, the mucky-much about 4G War is about activism…hearts and minds, etc. It’s a battle for prestige and respect more than it is for military gains. The march would either be an amazing victory in 4GW terms, or a humanitarian catastrophe from a few loose bombs. Which would also be a 4GW victory.

Posted by: Rowan | Aug 10 2006 22:05 utc | 34

pb,
The arabs refuse to concede defeat when confroning a superior military (from the west) because they feel the fight was on unequal footing — that they were in fact, beaten only by the machinery employed against them, and not the ideology, or the way of the enemy.

Posted by: anna missed | Aug 11 2006 1:16 utc | 35

Does anyone have a map with what areas and towns the Israeli’s hold right now? And with what? Are their helicopters sitting this one out? Are F-16’s on bombing runs almost impossible to hit with Manpads?
I realize no one here is in the IDF, but there is a lot of talk and not a lot of fact.
Right now I’d say it is hard to say exactly what is going on. Just based on news reports Israel doesn’t seem happy. Hezbollah doesn’t seem too unhappy.
I don’t think the news is going to be very useful. No one involved who should know (if even that is reliable) has any reason to do anything but spin.
We aren’t going to know much about this for a few years. I guess a winner and loser can be extrapolated from however this ends, but that pesky spin is probably going to obfuscate that as well.
Whoever has the Litani river when this is over is who I think wins.

Posted by: anonymous | Aug 11 2006 2:54 utc | 36

Nonny,
A river? Why does a river matter? How has Hezbollah NOT won is my question at this point. Their irregulars have managed to fight the dominant military force in the region for 50 years to a tactical standstill and strategic victory for a month. How long did those previous wars last? Their prestige has to be sky-high – and if they lose militarily in the future, they’ll be heroes and martyrs.

Posted by: Rowan | Aug 11 2006 6:28 utc | 37

Do a little reading on the Litani river and water problems in the middle east.
Some google searches: Litani + zionist + Ben Gurion and Israel water aquifer, etc. Or specifically look for news articles about water in the middle east. The LA Times had one specifically about this matter a few days ago.
Nothing you say is incorrect, or more precisely the impression of things.
But a discussion of things such as found in City without Joy isn’t going to be forthcoming for a while. Wait and see is what I’m saying, there isn’t much any of us can do about the situation right now anyway.

Posted by: anonymous | Aug 11 2006 13:36 utc | 38

Whoever has the Litani river when this is over is who I think wins.
I’ll add my 2c worth of uninformed opinion: This is not just the Battle for Shit Creek. However events unfold, it seems to me that this will never be over. Nobody wins.

Posted by: DM | Aug 11 2006 14:04 utc | 39

Posted by: DM | Aug 11 2006 14:05 utc | 40

It’s the battle for the paddle, too?

Posted by: Rowan | Aug 11 2006 19:59 utc | 41

here’s a clip from the la times water story

The damaged or broken facilities include a pumping station on the Wazzani River, whose inauguration by Lebanon in 2002 prompted Israel to threaten military action because it diverted water a few hundred yards from the Israeli border, in a watershed that feeds the Jordan River, Lebanese officials said. At the time, Hezbollah promised to defend the facility.
The strikes went largely unnoticed by the outside world in the nearly monthlong air assault targeting Hezbollah guerrilla strongholds in southern Lebanon. But Lebanese point to the extensive damage to their irrigation and drinking water system as evidence that border security and water issues remain intertwined in a region short on both.
“Whenever Israel throughout history has thought of its northern border, they don’t talk, for example, of the mountains as a border. They always think of the valley of the Litani,” said Mohammed Shaya, dean of the college of social sciences at Lebanese University in Beirut.
Israel has said repeatedly that it has no designs on Lebanon’s water.
“There’s a policy decision at the highest level not to target those water pumping stations,” said Mark Regev, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry. “We don’t claim an inch of Lebanese sovereign territory. We don’t claim a gallon of Lebanese water. We have no hostile intentions whatever towards Lebanon as a country, towards the Lebanese people or towards Lebanese natural resources.”
But the enduring suspicion in Lebanon that Israel regards the water of the Litani as its own and the lands to its south as a security perimeter help explain Beirut’s reluctance to accept any U.N. cease-fire resolution that does not call for an immediate Israeli withdrawal from the region.
At a minimum, Lebanese officials fear that the repeated attacks on water facilities — as well as bridges, highways, power plants and roads — signal an intention to debilitate Hezbollah-dominated southern Lebanon and enable a long-term Israeli presence there.
“They started [bombing] with the Litani water reservoir, the Litani dam. And we all know that the Litani has a special place in this country,” said Fadl Shalaq, president of the Lebanese Council for Reconstruction and Development. “It’s a big reservoir of water, and the Israelis don’t hide it that there are several parts of the Litani that they would like to take for themselves.”

Posted by: annie | Aug 11 2006 20:19 utc | 42

Ahh, yes back to the water…
Don’t forget The Water Barons i.e. ‘Water Privatization’See: “Middle East Water: Time Running Out”
Also see my 24 & 25 here. and Bernhard’s (b’s) December 28, 2005 post on the Kurdish Problems, but in particular Turkey’s Gap Project. e.g. water.
Finally, my #7 here…

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 11 2006 20:41 utc | 43

Back to Main