|
WB: War is Peace + Important If True
Billmon:
In other words, if it’s an Article 7 cease fire, Israel would be obliged under a UN Security Council resolution to respect fully the territorial sovereignty and integrity of Hizbullahland — and a fully locked and loaded Hizbullahland to boot.
Now ain’t that a kick in the pants?
Of course, the Jewish State could always count on the USA to veto any attempt to enforce the damned thing, but it’s still hard to imagine a more potent symbol of Israeli’s failure in this war, and the implications of that defeat for the "new" Middle East.
II. Important If True
—
I. War is Peace
Thanks 2nd, I missed that, haven’t managed to read everything here these days and Billmon’s posts are dense.
Clueless Joe, I remember someone writing that, of course it was you.
Yes, the EU has supported the scenario by pouring pots of money into Palestine – until it refused to recognise Hamas -, while the US pours money into Israel. How any of the parties can become independent and self-reliant (to borrow a word from the Clean break paper) to the point where they feel confident and prideful enough to negotiate anything or even talk to each other is moot.
Anna, the article says ‘all’ (arab money divested from Leb.) — I suppose what is meant is ‘practically all.’ It says that many big holders left after the assassination of Hariri, anticipating the crisis, and that now the process is completed. They say the money will go to Morocco, Turkey, Egypt, Wall Street – and three articles I read have mentioned that Switzerland (nudge, nudge) will do well.
As to their fear of Hizbulla, not mentioned, and who knows. There is another angle here, I think. That is, Lebanon as a ‘free’, multicultural society, where ethnic, religious distinctions are not overtly pertinent, where business and investment can be carried out without risk in a congenial, somewhat egalitarian ambiance.
Risk of violent strife; but most important, risk of lack of energy.
The day you can’t dig a hole to make a swimming pool, or your back office can’t have its computers humming day and nite, the day the VIPs can’t land, well, it is all over. Finis. Seen in an economic way, Lebanon – the Switzerland of the ME as we call it here – was in a way what Israel wishes to be but can never become. I think one might say that, yes.
All this also certainly has to do with the weakness of the Leb. Gvmt. and laws dealing with corporations, taxes, etc., about which I know nothing.
Following along, Hizbulla was/is a State within the State, organising health care, schooling, food, charity; much of its money came not only from Iran (arms etc.) but from Lebanese expats abroad, independent of religious affiliations, who pay for things like antibiotics, school books, garbage collection, etc.
A parallel society that did what the weak Lebanese Governement could not do, or did not wish to do. Complete with an army. Might the Lebanese Gvmt. have tolerated or even encouraged the rise and grip of Hizbulla along the ‘privatisation, outsourcing’ line? Conveniently, the poor part of the country takes care of itself with foreign funding and the rich pay less taxes.
A socialist grass-roots organisation in a capitalist Nation would have no interest in attack, only defense. Border skirmish; and getting its prisoners back – now that is a daunting challenge. A real threat? Yes (as we see now?) but only if provoked.
Musing. Who knows.
Posted by: Noirette | Aug 3 2006 16:26 utc | 21
|
