Segacs's World I Know

Posts Tagged ‘hezbollah’

Good letter in today’s Gazette:

How can a terrorist group that provokes a war subsequently claim to be “resisters” when the going gets tough?

This utter hypocrisy is echoed by Lebanon’s prime minister, who initially claimed to be held hostage by Hezbollah, only to proclaim subsequently his outright support for the terrorist group. How in the name of God (anyone’s God) can people support a group whose leader is adamantly opposed to a peaceful accord and who has often said coexistence with Jews (not Israelis) is not an option? Racism and hatred don’t get any more blatant than this.

What she said.

When will people understand that certain ways of dealing with racism only serve to compound the problem?

Take, for example, the planned Quebec anti-racism initiative, which is being launched in response to public hearings and a report by the Task Force on the Full Participation of Black Communities in Quebec. Among the report’s recommendations:

- The Quebec government should adopt an official policy to fight all forms of racial discrimination.

- Quebec’s civil service should consider hiring quotas for blacks and other visible minorities.

- The province should document how blacks are portrayed in the media so it can inform journalists and media owners about how they ”often portray blacks negatively.”

- The Ministry of Education should review school textbooks to make sure they mention the contribution of blacks and other visible minorities to Quebec and the rest of Canada.

Hiring quotas? Media portrayal standards? Are we really back there again? Hasn’t anyone realized by now that this stuff doesn’t work?

Anyway, all of this is nothing but a smokescreen. The real problem with anti-racism initiatives in Quebec is that they’re politically-motivated. Any real efforts to combat racism would have to expose the nasty little secrets about Quebec society that nobody – particularly the politicians – wants to talk about.

The truth is, racism is a problem everywhere. But in Quebec, it’s more politically-correct to be racist against some groups than others. Sure, everyone will get on board when we talk about racism against people with different skin colour… so long as their first language is French. But racism against anglophones? Against Jews? Against Asians? Against groups that the Quebec government won’t even allow in as immigrants because their command of the French language is less than perfect? Anyone who dares bring any of those up is accused of being part of the bourgeoisie elite, or the oppressive “rich white English” from “Westmount” trying to keep down the poor, downtrodden working-class French.

Most of us who live here know that Quebec society has evolved past these outdated stereotypes. So why do government officials still insist on propagating them? And why is it that any discussion of racism only focuses on some groups and not others?

Quebec society is much more open-minded, multi-ethnic and multicultural than it used to be. Look how tolerant we are for, say, Hezbollah supporters who want to march downtown with flags comparing Israelis to Nazis… and with the backing of prominent Quebec politicians.

But racism isn’t going to go away here until we scrape under that surface. In the meantime, initiatives like the one proposed by the Quebec government serve only as expensive window-dressing.

So let’s see, what can be said about the past 48 hours?

Israel has begun pulling out of Lebanon. But the UN peacekeeprs aren’t going in – and nobody’s willing to hold Hezbollah to its obligations.

In the meantime, the Lebanese army is moving to take positions in South Lebanon… but not to displace or disarm Hezbollah. On the contrary, Hezbollah’s favourite puppet government has reportedly struck a deal to allow the group to keep its weapons. (Siniora now denies this, but actions here will speak louder than words).

Oh, and the kidnapped soldiers? Still not released.

What exactly is the basis for the claim that this cease-fire is in any way, shape or form good for Israel?

Meryl gives it a D. Allison believes Ehud Olmert’s days as PM are numbered. In an op-ed in Ha’aretz, Moshe Arens claims that Israel’s war was too much for its leaders to handle. The Jerusalem Post reports that Hezbollah has been strengthened immeasurably. Yoram Kaniuk in Ynet writes that the IDF lost this war and wasn’t up to the task. The general consensus is that the cause was just but the execution was severely flawed.

Israel didn’t achieve any of its continually-revised objectives.

Get back the kidnapped soldiers? Nope.

Destroy or then weaken Hezbollah? The opposite happened – Hezbollah has been strengthened in popularity among a Lebanese population who largely rejected them before. So much for the naive goals at the start of the war that had Israeli leaders actually believing that the Lebanese citizenry would take up common cause with Israel.

Disarm Hezbollah? On paper, yes. In practice? I don’t think anyone is quite that naive. And with Iran and Syria emboldened, this does not bode well for the near future.

Encourage the Lebanese army to implement 1559 and take control of southern Lebanon? On paper, maybe, but in practice, Saniora has become more of a puppet of Hezbollah than ever before.

Install an effective neutral peacekeeping force as a buffer? Instead of NATO, Israel got stuck once again with a crippled UN force that is more likely to be part of the problem than part of the solution.

World opinion? No comment. Things weren’t good, but then, they were never good on that score even beforehand.

Sure, the Israel cabinet is spinning the cease-fire as good news. What else can they do? But there will be a lot of tough questions being asked in the days ahead.

Israel had no choice: it was attacked and had to respond. But it isn’t always enough to be right. You have to be right, and you have to win.

The good news is, hopefully – hopefully – thousands of Israeli soldiers can come home, and thousands of civilians can return to their homes. In the short term, there’s no doubt that everyone wanted to see an end to this crisis – civilians in Israel and Lebanon alike were paying far too heavy a price. But the long term is worrying.

Pessimism when it comes to the middle east is hard to avoid, and I’m not really in the mood to play silver-lining today.

• The London Times reports that Iran is trying to mine Uranium in Africa, with the goal of importing it to make, well, I’ll give you three guesses. (Via IrisBlog).
• Related to the above, Mark C. at Daimnation links to this excellent editorial in the New York Times by a French writer explaining the existential threat to Israel that made the Lebanon war necessary. (Link requires registration).
• The big story making the rounds online, of course, is about the doctored Qana photos, a story that LGF has been all over for a couple of days now. Allison links to Reuters’ (belated) response to this fiasco. (My personal opinion? While I’m sure Reuters will end up with some egg on their face over this one, it won’t be nearly enough, and in fifty years people will still be quoting some of the exaggerations from Qana as fact, just as they’re still quoting the exaggerations from Deir Yassin today. And you know what else? I can’t even bring myself to get worked up about it, because symbols last longer than facts in any case, and innocent civilians were killed in Qana, and even though Hezbollah is deliberately doing much, much worse on a daily basis, the focusing on the conspiracies and exaggerations is going to ring hollow no matter what. But I’ve ranted about this already, so I’ll leave it at that for now.)
• And while the attention of the world is focused on Israel and Lebanon, things in Sri Lanka are getting worse. But is anyone noticing? When will 15,000 people will turn up in downtown Montreal to protest this war? (Oh, right, that’s just reserved for wars they can blame on the J-E-W-S).

On that note, time for bed.

This piece by Jerusalem-based writer Naomi Ragen has been making the rounds online. I expect it will show up in my e-mail inbox about a dozen times over the next few days:

Please remember this when you hear about the “atrocity” of the Israeli bomb that killed many civilians in Kafr Qana, a place from which Hezbollah has fired hundreds of rockets at Israel. Unlike previous administrations, Mr. Olmert has my respect when he says: “They were warned to leave. It is the responsibility of Hezbollah for firing rockets amid civilians.”

Terrorists and their supporters have lost the right to complain about civilian casualties, since all they have is one goal: this entire war is to target civilians. Every single one of the more than 2,500 rockets launched into Israel, is launched into populated towns filled with women and children. Just today, another explosive belt meant to kill civilians in Israel was detonated harmlessly by our forces in Nablus.

So don’t cry to me about civilian casualties. Cry to those using babies and wives and mothers; cry to those who store weapons in mosques, ambulances, hospitals and private homes. Cry to those launching deadly rockets from the backyards of kindergartens and schools. Cry to the heartless men who love death, and however many of their troops or civilians die, consider themselves victorious as long as they can keep on firing rockets at our women and children.

Everything Ms. Ragen says is right. But I think she’s wrong.

There are too many people in the world who can’t tell the difference between a legitimate democracy fighting for survival, and a terrorist organization trying to wipe a nation off the map. They draw false moral equivalences. They put on blinders. They say ridiculous things.

I refuse to be one of them.

Yes, it’s true that Israel is better than Hezbollah. Anyone with half a brain can see that. And it should be obvious. It should be a given. There are too many people in the world who don’t get that, but by arguing the point again and again, we’re giving them credence. It shouldn’t even be up for debate.

But here’s the thing: that’s not good enough.

Israel shouldn’t be content to simply be held to a higher standard than Hezbollah. Frankly, that’s not saying much, is it?

When Israel fights a war, I don’t need anyone to convince me that civilian casualties are anything other than a tragic an accident. I take that for granted, because I know Israel and I know the truth about this and any war that she fights. These are wars of survival, fought by people with faults but with the best of intentions: to protect the security of Israel.

I’ve decided there aren’t nearly enough West Wing references on this blog. So here’s a quote from Amy Gardner:

“Jed Bartlet: Not quite as mean-spirited as the other guy.” Doesn’t really send me running to my polling place.

Israel isn’t quite as mean-spirited as Hezbollah. Hezbollah wants to kill Israeli civilians. Israel doesn’t want to kill Lebanese civilians. I get it. But I’m not content to simply make that point. It doesn’t send me running to the polling place either, so to speak.

The point is, all of the above isn’t enough. Being “not quite as mean-spirited as Hezbollah” isn’t enough for Israel. Nobody who loves Israel should say otherwise. We can’t simply be satisfied with the knowledge that we’re on the side of the angels here. When a tragedy happens, like dead children in Qana, the only way to truly show love for Israel is to ask the tough questions and demand the tough answers and the soul-searching that comes along with it. That’s how a country grows: with openness and freedom and a lively exchange of debate. And with a constant striving to do better, to do what’s right, to face up to blunders and wrongdoings and claim not only the relative moral high ground, but the absolute moral high ground too.

And so, I maintain that Naomi Ragen is right about the facts but wrong in her sentiment. I demand more from Israel, because I love and respect it so much and I know we need to judge it by the standard that it deserves.

The Israeli blogosphere is already reacting to the Qana strike. Here is some of what is being said:

Allison smells a rat, sensing that not all is as it may seem:

I am waiting patiently for a logical explanation of how a building gets bombed between 12 midnight and 1 AM, remains full of people and then 7-8 hours later, collapses the next morning.

Dave asks the same question:

An IDF investigation has so far found that the building in Qana fell approximately eight hours after being hit by the IAF. Some possibilities being examined are:

Hizbullah explosives in the building were behind the explosion that caused the collapse

The rickety building remained standing for a few hours, but eventually collapsed.

And for something a little different, Sarah talks about what it’s like to mingle at a singles event during a war:

Just before the meal started, someone dropped a box with something heavy, such as silverware, and it came down with a crash. Everyone from the north jumped about six feet. Talk about being on edge. I felt so bad for them.

Then, as the meal began . . . well, normally the conversation between singles goes like this:
What’s your name?
Where do you live?
What do you do?

But this time, it was:
What’s your name?
Where do you live?
How many rockets have you been getting?
How many minutes of warning do you get?

Talk about surreal.

Well, Sarah, you know what they say about relationships that begin under tense circumstances…

Israel has agreed to temporarily suspend aerial bombardment of Lebanon for 48 hours, to permit “investigation” of today’s strike that killed dozens of civilians, including an estimated 37 children:

“Israel deeply regrets, is greatly saddened, by this attack on innocent civilians in Lebanon. Israel takes full responsibility and is going to start an open investigation to find out how this happened,” government spokeswoman Miri Eisin said.

Of course, this is a unilateral move. And Hezbollah will merely use the respite to re-arm and re-group.

But never mind all that. Never mind that Hezbollah deliberately targets civilians, while Israelis do their best to avoid doing so. Never mind that Hezbollah’s tactics of using civilians as human shields are designed to lead to exactly this kind of disaster.

The point is, it happened. And Israel must hold itself to a higher standard than a terrorist group. The fact that most of the criticism of Israel is unfounded or exaggerated can’t allow us to hide from the fact that no nation is infallible.

The general sentiment in reaction to what happened in Qana is understandably defensive. After all, the Israeli army had dropped leaflets warning civilians to leave. Hezbollah was using the spot as a missile launch site. There is no doubt that there ought to be ample justification. And yet… none of that matters. And the sooner the spin doctors realize that images of dead children will negate all their efforts, the sooner everyone can get past denial and onto reality. Israel is going to take more of a punishment on this one than it deserves… but to claim that it did nothing wrong is to walk around with blinders.

I wish to G-d that this had never happened. But it did. And it frightens me, because when Israel is right, it already pays too heavy a price. But when Israel is wrong, her enemies have long memories. And while my support for Israel is unwavering as ever, I – along with most Israelis – will not try to justify this one. And I am scared that the price Israel will have to pay for this blunder will be wholly “disproportionate” in the true sense of the word.

I’ve read a lot of nonsensical analogies and analyses about the Israel-Lebanon war in the past couple of weeks. But I just had to highlight this editorial, written by a certain Marie Choi of Toronto, because it’s so ridiculous that it actually succeeded in making me laugh aloud:

I think the actions of Stephen Harper’s government leave Canadian children confused and bewildered when they compare political actions against the educational principles taught in this country.

The Canadian education system encourages our children to become citizens who respect justice, equity and multiculturalism. School boards place much importance on non-violence and co-operation.

My son tells me that school kids aren’t allowed to respond with physical violence even if other kids hit them – instead they are told to get a teacher or adult to intervene in these incidents. In the end, the troubled kids pay the consequences, but in a non-violent way.

In a similar vein, Harper’s views on the current crisis in the Middle East are completely contrary to school polices which emphasize avoiding violence and encouraging dialogue and discussion.

Because everyone knows that if Israel just complains to the teacher instead of hitting back, the teacher will send Hezbollah to the corner and then force it to apologize. </Sarcasm>

Something tells me that the problem lies not so much with Harper’s position on Israel, but with the policy of the schoolboards that – apparently – not only fail to teach any context whatsoever in their history classes, but also seemingly fail to teach kids anything about how the world really works.

The wife of the United Nations observer killed in Lebanon is blaming Israel for the death of her husband:

Cynthia Hess-von Kruedener said Tuesday’s attack was not the first on her husband’s outpost.

It’s difficult to blame a grieving woman for choosing to misdirect her anger. But her late husband apparently did not agree with her assessment. In fact, he placed the blame squarely on Hezbollah for the attacks that occurred on the UN post:

Six days before he was killed in an Israel Air Force bombing of a United Nations post in southern Lebanon, Canadian observer Major Paeta Hess-von Kruendener sent an email to his former commander in the Canadian army, in which he said that Hizbullah fighters were “running around” near the UN post struck by the Israel Defense Forces and that they were using the post as a sort of “shield” against Israel’s strikes.

(Emphasis mine.)

So far, the grieving widow blames Israel story is getting all the headlines here in Canada, and the Hezbollah uses human shields story is getting zero notice. Let’s see if anyone bothers to report the truth in the coming days.

Update Jul 30: The Gazette published my letter to the editor on this topic today, albeit a heavily-edited version. The link requires registration, but it doesn’t really matter, as the argument is much better-worded here than there.

The former commander, Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, who served as a UN commander in Bosnia, spoke about the email in a Canadian radio show. He said that Hess-von Kruendener wrote that the IDF strikes near the post had “not been deliberate targeting, but rather due to tactical necessity.”

“That would mean Hizbullah was purposely setting up near the UN post,” he added. “It’s a tactic.”

“My information from him is weeks upon weeks they’ve been firing on there,” she said. “They’re UN soldiers, that should have been the safest place to be — they should not have bombed that site, period.” She accused Israel of not playing by the rules anymore.

“They’re fighting a whole different war, and it’s changing all the time. And now they’re choosing to, bomb, you know, UN sites. That’s unheard of.”