|
Lebanon – U.S. Offers To Ignite Sectarian War
During a press conference at the G7 meeting in France U.S. President Donald Trump criticized Israel’s way of waging war against Hizbullah.
Video via FOXnews.
Partial transcript:
I tell you what – Israel is fighting Hizbullah too long and too many people are being killed. And you don’t have to knock down an apartment house every time you are looking for somebody. Because there are a lot of people in those apartment houses and not all are Hizbullah. That I can tell you.
Trump does not say it explicitly but he is accusing Israel of committing war crimes. Fine so far.
But then he suggests to solve the Hizbullah problem by using Abu Mohammad al-Julani aka Ahmed al-Sharaa, the al-Qaeda ruler of Syria, to (re-)ignite a sectarian Sunni-Shia war:
And I suggested to Israel to let Syria take care of Hizbullah – ’cause to be honest with you I think they would do a better job of doing it. [….] Syria, you know, he’s pulled that country together amazingly quickly. He’s very capable. And he’s been very good for me. He’s protected – everything I’ve asked for he’s done. And if Israel can’t do the job without killing everyone he will do the job, Syria will do the job.
Just an hour ago another Israeli attack in southern Lebanon killed another four random people. The U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding agreed upon two days ago stipulates an immediate end to Israel’s war in Lebanon and a full retreat of all Israeli forces from Lebanon.
Israel’s prime minister Bibi Netanyahoo is obviously trying to sabotage Trump’s Iran deal. He has already lost the war against Iran which he himself had instigated. Now his political survival depends on continuing his war against Hizbullah. A war which his own generals are telling him they can not win.
Trump will have to squeeze Netanyahoo hard – by withholding intelligence, money or weapons – to end his conflict in Lebanon. The public offer by Trump to Netanyahoo to use the Al-Qaeda kingpin of Syria to ‘finish the job’ in Lebanon may be a his last chance to escape from the problem.
But there are complications.
I doubt that the current al-Qaeda leader of Syria will want to fight Hizbullah on its home grounds. He knows that it would be a very difficult war even with CIA intelligence and Pentagon weapon support.
Israel’s intelligence services will be reluctant to sponsor radical Sunni forces which will have sympathies for Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank.
Turkey, one of the main sponsors of al-Sharaa, needs peace to find its economic balance. It will likely be against al-Sharaa taking up arms in Lebanon. Russia, which has a base in Syria, will also argue against such a war.
And who would pay for the adventure? Typically the U.S. would ask one of the Gulf states – Qatar, UAE, the Saudis – to finance such an endeavor. But given their recent losses due to the war against Iran neither of those states will be willing to take the risk of again becoming an Iranian target by sponsoring a fight against its proxy forces.
I thus doubt that anything will come from Trump’s talk.
That still leaves questions:
Who did come up with that idea and who managed to sell it to Trump?
@77 karlof
The more I look at the details offered so far, the more I find to dislike. Then as Arch says, it is an Iranian decision and they are walking a fine line, something I am quite aware of also.
The 300bn reparation fund for example, this will be a financialised investment instrument, which seems like a corporate political inroad.
The lifting of sanctions and access to funds per negotiation, this seems like being led by the nose or being tutored.
The lack of clarity on Lebanon, contradicting statements. If we remember, Hizballah entered into conflict as reaction to the atrocities of continual bombardment of Gaza. It has been in open conflict almost continuously since.
No real mention of Gaza or Palestine, and so not at least re-securing southern Lebanon and those more loyal to Palestine is a red line. I understand there is some new political incorporation of Hizballah at Lebanese political level, but so far this seems limited and governmental agreement not kept. Meaning to not defend southern Lebanon is to move towards disolution of Hizballah as a force, possibly even to cede its territory to “Israel” . This cannot be, at least not while retaining Iranian credibility as opposition to occupation of Palestine.
That the text is not publicly known before signing, this is not good. No national debate at all. I understand the streamlining of executive at time of war, but there is pause, parliamentary discussion is possible. It comes across as taking too much advantage of dificult circumstance, something more often seen in western statecraft.
It is said Mojtaba and council agree. In reality we do not know the whereabouts and state of Mojtaba. I trust what is said is true, and ultimately the revolutionary guard command would know and so act accordingly (i.e. apprehend those manufacturing false approval).
I don’t know, but I don’t get a good feeling as far as Iran’s traditional position goes, it does sometimes seem something like a take over or a manipulation that could cause local strife.
On the other hand, Iran might well have its own strategy that I am unaware of, there are surely facets of logistics or other that we don’t know, and ultimately if the leadership does decide to take Iran in a different direction now, even if Iran were to be in a way co-opted, who would I be to say ? That would be for Iranians to decide, somehow.
What would seem quite clear though is the intention to neuter Hizballah as a fighting force, no matter what show is put on to achieve that, and not via Syria I think . Also to claim all of Palestine and Gaza is primary objective, “greater Israel” not so much, it falls as much into western or globalist hegemony and whoever controls that. So where some see losing in fact they might take it as winning.
Equally, assassinations of unwanted Iranian figureheads will likely continue; so to imagine a kind of meaningful peace from all of this would seem wishfull.
As a whole it is all very unusual, but it would not be me advising Iran into a large conflict either, so where that leaves anything, I don’t know.
It is all I am able to think of this at present.
Posted by: Ornot | Jun 17 2026 1:59 utc | 97
|
