Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying

Via The Heathlander:

John Bolton explains the Bush Administration’s Freedom Agenda:

A former top American diplomat says the US deliberately resisted calls for a immediate ceasefire during the conflict in Lebanon in the summer of 2006.
Former ambassador to the UN John Bolton told the BBC that before any ceasefire Washington wanted Israel to eliminate Hezbollah’s military capability.

Mr Bolton said an early ceasefire would have been "dangerous and misguided".

He said the US decided to join efforts to end the conflict only when it was clear Israel’s campaign wasn’t working.

…

More than 1,000 Lebanese civilians and an unknown number of Hezbollah fighters were killed in the conflict.

Israel lost 116 soldiers in the fighting, while 43 of its civilians were killed in Hezbollah rocket attacks.

To those of us who understand common sense, it was clear from the start that Israel would fail. But it took over 1159 dead bodies before the Bush Administration faced reality in Lebanon.

In Iraq, perhaps over a half million dead bodies has not been enough of a reality check for the Bush Administration.

Israel will negotiate for the release of two soldiers whose capture by Hezbollah militants on July 12 sparked the Israeli offensive in Lebanon, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said. - AFP, August 13, 2006

Government spokesman Gideon Meir said Israel wanted the soldiers returned "immediately without any precondition — no negotiation." - CNN, July 12, 2006

As we lurch toward a cessation of hostilities, it is worth asking if all the death and destruction was worth it? Israel is pulling out all stops right now before the ceasefire to try to save Ehud Olmert’s job. Hezbollah is gleefully firing its rockets into Israel before the clock runs out. Over a 1000 Lebanese civilians dead, over 100 Israeli soldiers dead, nearly 50 Israeli civilians dead, Lebanon in shambles. Was it worth it?

I have stated my reasons in previous posts for why I think this was a strategic blunder for Israel here, here and here. What do you the reader think?

[Hat tip: Crooks and Liars]

The Bush Administration is maneuvering mightily at the United Nations to give Ehud Olmert an exit without humiliation. Olmert for his part is trying to create facts on the ground (troops in Lebanon) as quickly as possible to give the veneer of victory. However, the damage has already been done. Israel’s aura of invincibility is all but gone.

The current draft of the "ceasefire" resolution at the UN Security Council is probably not worth the paper it is written on. As many have noted, the primary point of contention is that it allows Israel to occupy Southern Lebanon and continue what it deems "defensive" military actions. The key paragraph from the resolution states:

OP1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

This paragraph has already been rejected by Lebanon and Hezbollah. Any resolution that leaves Israeli forces on Lebanese soil will not be acceptable to Hezbollah. Nonetheless, the United States hopes to hammer the resolution through the Security Council. To do so, all that has to happen is that Russia and China do not invoke their vetoes. Given the violence on the ground, it is likely that no vetoes will be cast and this resolution, if put to a vote, will pass.

The passage of this resolution will not stop the fighting. In fact, it may even escalate it. However, it will give Ehud Olmert some breathing room until a second resolution authorizing a UN force in Lebanon is passed. In Olmert’s fantasy, an UN force will be inserted into Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah - a task that the IDF has proven itself incapable of doing. In reality, no country will contribute troops to a UN force to disarm Hezbollah. Without a political solution, Israel will be left to occupy Southern Lebanon again. Ehud Olmert will learn the lessons of history first hand.

Regardless of the direction of this conflict, the damage to Israel’s deterrence has already been done. In 3 weeks of fighting, Israel has failed to crush Hezbollah. That was not unexpected. However, in 3 weeks of constant bombardment and ground assaults, Israel has failed to stop Hezbollah rockets from hitting deep within Israel. That is a massive strategic failure for Israel. Israel has proven itself incapable of defending against a lightly armed militia with a stockpile of unguided rockets. Against a more well armed foe, the toll on Israel might have been severe.

Time is now Israel’s foe - both in the short term and in the long term. In the short term, the longer this conflict drags on, the weaker Israel looks. In the long term, Israel’s foes will inevitably acquire more and more sophisticated weaponry. Israel’s deterrence capabilities will continue to weaken as it’s enemies gain in sophistication. At some point in the future, Israel will no longer be capable of making peace on its own terms. When that tipping point is reached, the peace proposals that Israel has so far rejected will start to look awfully good, yet may no longer be available.

This gambit of Olmert’s was always unwinnable. The only question really was how much damage would Israel’s deterrence capability suffer. After weeks of fighting, it is safe to say that Israel’s deterrence is severely weakened. Israel and Ehud Olmert again have two choices to salvage this mess. They can climb down or they can escalate. It appears now that they have chosen to escalate. The hope apparently is that by causing massive destruction in Lebanon Israel will have shown its might and deterred its enemies:

A senior General Staff officer told Haaretz that for the first time since the fighting began, Israel plans to attack strategic infrastructure targets and symbols of the Lebanese government.

Other than bombing the Beirut airport to prevent arms transfers to Hezbollah, Israel has hitherto not targeted Lebanon’s infrastructure, insisting that it is only at war with Hezbollah, not with the Lebanese government or people.

However, the officer said, "we are now in a process of renewed escalation. We will continue hitting everything that moves in Hezbollah - but we will also hit strategic civilian infrastructure."

So, escalation it is. As Ehud Olmert escalates and the neo-cons in Washington cheer him on, the people of Lebanon and Israel continue to suffer. However, no amount of escalation will gain back what Israel has already lost - its deterrence.

Tonight on Larry King Live, Ehud Goldwasser’s father and wife appeared to plea for his safe return. Ehud Goldwasser is one of two Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah on July 12. It was the precipitating event of this spasm of violence.

Karnit Goldwasser, Ehud’s wife, made an emotional plea to the wives of Hezbollah for information about his health and safety. When Ehud’s father, Shlomo Goldwasser, spoke about his efforts to free his son, his voice trembled with the quiet anguish of a parent:

KARNIT GOLDWASSER, WIFE OF KIDNAPPED ISRAELI SOLDIER: First of all, I want to thank the people who brought us here to speak to you. I ask the wives of Hezbollah to help me to get a sign that Ehud and Dan are still alive and to know if something happened to them, if they are injured or not.

KING: Shlomo, you’ve heard nothing?

SHLOMO GOLDWASSER, FATHER OF KIDNAPPED ISRAELI SOLDIER: Nothing. It’s now the 23rd day since Ehud was kidnapped. We’ve heard nothing.

KING: Shlomo, what are you doing in the United States?

S. GOLDWASSER: You know, there is no school in the world to teach you what to do when your son is kidnapped. And I was thrown into this situation in the fraction of a second on the 12th of July. And judging what to do, what are the tools to bring him back, I found that there is not so many tools in my hand, and the only one that is in my hands, with the help of you, is the media. I am using it and I’m going everywhere, everywhere that I can raise my voice and have some people to hear me. And you’re doing a great job.

It seems to me that there has been too much death already in this war. Too many parents have lost their children. There has been enough death. Enough.

I still believe if both sides of this conflict could start to see each other as human beings, as mothers and fathers, as brothers and sisters, as sons and daughters, this madness that is destroying generations would come to an end. The beginning of the end can start here. It can start with the safe return of Ehud Goldwasser and his two brothers in arms.

I ask all bloggers who read this post, as a gesture of peace and good will, to repost this plea on your blogs. Ask the same of those who read your posts. Let this plea spread across the blogosphere. Perhaps this plea will be posted on the blogs of our Arab and Lebanese friends. Perhaps this plea will make a difference in saving at least one life.

Regardless of which side of the conflict you are on, let us come together on the shared belief in the sanctity of life. Arabs, Israelis, Lebanese, Palestinians, Americans, Jews, and Muslims will still have to live together after the guns fall silent.

This may seem like a naive plea while the bombs and missiles continue to take their deadly toll, but the bombs aren’t working too well - perhaps its time to find some humanity in this madness.

[Via Taylor Marsh]

With Republicans like these who needs Democrats. Let’s hope the Democrats can find some backbone by following Senator Hagel’s lead.

Sadly, I doubt they will.

CNN has the story.

Israel late Saturday night killed more than 60 Lebanese civilians including at least 34 children in an airstrike on a building in the Lebanese village of Qana. I was up last night blogging as part of the Blogathon 2006 charity event when the news flashed on CNN.

The Israeli defense of their actions was articulated last night by a very angry young IDF spokesman on CNN. He insisted that Israel was not to blame for killing civilians because of the following reasons:

• Hezbollah started it.
• Hezbollah fired rockets from around the village of Qana.
• Israel asked civilians to flee Southern Lebanon therefore cannot be held responsible for killing the ones who stayed behind.

In a combative interview with CNN International’s Shihab Rattansi, the IDF spokesman insisted that it was Hezbollah who was to blame and Israel was only defending herself. So, this is Israel’s idea of self-defense. Most sane people call this a war crime.

First, let’s list the facts:

• Israel fired a missile at a civilian building in Qana.
• Over 60 civilians were killed.
• Zero Hezbollah were killed. 

Last night, the CNN anchors kept asking the openly exasperated CNN reporters who had been to the scene if they had seen any rocket parts at the scene. To which one CNN reporter (I believe it was Karl Penhaul) replied, with frustration in his voice, that he had seen lots of dead children, and body parts, but he had yet to see a rocket part. Tonight as I write this, General David Grange is on CNN complaining that Hezbollah waits for Israelis to kill civilians and then videotapes the scene for political purposes. He complained that there was "overreaction" on the part of the international community. His only suggestion for Israel was that perhaps they should change tactics because they were losing the propaganda war.

I have news for General Grange, it was CNN who was on the scene of this one rather quickly. It was CNN reporters who were visibly shaken by this incident. No amount of spin from you or anyone else will wash away this war crime.

Here’s is how The Guardian newspaper saw the war crime:

It was an unremarkable three-storey building on the edge of town. But for two extended families, the Shalhoubs and the Hashems, it was a last refuge. They could not afford the extortionate taxi fares to Tyre and hoped that if they all crouched together on the ground floor they would be safe.

They were wrong. At about one in the morning, when some of the men were making late night tea, an Israeli bomb pulverised the house. Some witnesses describe two explosions a few minutes apart, with survivors desperately moving from one side of the building to the other before being hit by the second blast. By tonight, more than 60 bodies had been pulled from the rubble, said the Lebanese authorities, 34 of them children; there were only eight known survivors.

The bombing, the bloodiest single incident in Israel’s 18-day campaign against Hizbullah, drew instant condemnation from around the world and sparked furious protests outside the UN headquarters in Beirut. The Lebanese prime minister, Fouad Siniora, accused Israel of committing "war crimes" and called off a planned meeting with the US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice. Israel apologised for the loss of life but said it had been responding to rockets fired from the village.

Mohamad Qassim Shalhoub, a slim 38-year-old construction worker, emerged with a broken hand and minor injuries, but he lost his wife, five children and 45 members of his extended family. "Around one o’clock we heard a big explosion," he said. "I don’t remember anything after that, but when I opened my eyes I was lying on the floor and my head had hit the wall. There was silence. I didn’t hear anything for a while, but then heard some screams."

"I said: ‘Allahu Akbar [God is great]. Don’t be scared. I will come.’ There was blood on my face. I wiped it and looked for my son but couldn’t find him. I took three children out - my four-year-old nephew, a girl and her sister. I went outside and screamed for help and three men came and went back inside. There was shelling everywhere. We heard the planes. I was so exhausted I could not go back inside again. "

Ibrahim Shalhoub described how he and his cousin had set out to get help after the bombs hit. "It was dark and there was so much smoke. Nobody could do anything till dawn," he said, his eyes still darting around nervously. "I couldn’t stop crying, we couldn’t help them."

Said Rabab Yousif had her son on her knee when the first bomb fell.

"I couldn’t see anything for 10 minutes and then I saw my son sitting in my lap and covered with rubble," she recalled. "I removed the dirt and the stones I freed him and handed him to the people who were inside rescuing us.

"I then started freeing myself, my hands were free, and then went with two men to rescue my husband. We pulled him from the rubble. I tried to find Zainab, my little daughter, but it was too dark and she was covered deep in rubble I was too scared that they might bomb us again so I just left her and ran outside." She was in hospital with her son and husband, who was paralysed and in a coma. There was no news of her daughter.

In addition to being a war crime, this is also an act of cowardice by Israel. Faced with the launching of a rocket containing up to a 90-pound warhead, Israel’s response was to launch a bunker buster to destroy a nearby building. Given that these rockets, the Katyushas, are small enough to be man portable, what is the military justification of using a bunker buster bomb to destroy a mobile launcher? What was Israel trying to achieve?

It seems to me if Israel wanted to take down a guerrilla force like Hezbollah, they would engage in ground combat with them. But, perhaps it is easier to bomb buildings full of civilians rather than to fight men with guns. That is an act of a coward. At the beginning of this conflict, Israel’s military already stated Israel’s intention to go after civilians and civilian infrastructure:

Israel called Wednesday’s abductions an act of war, and Maj. Gen. Udi Adam, head of Israel’s Northern Command, said he has "comprehensive plans" to battle Hezbollah throughout Lebanon, not just in its southern stronghold.

"This affair is between Israel and the state of Lebanon," Adam said. "Where to attack? Once it is inside Lebanon, everything is legitimate — not just southern Lebanon, not just the line of Hezbollah posts." (Watch as Israeli forces enter Lebanon — 2:29)

Earlier, Israel’s chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, told Israel’s Channel 10, "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon’s clock back 20 years."

"Everything is legitimate" indeed! Seldom have war criminals declared their intentions so plainly ahead of the crime.

Who else is complicit? Why, it is the Bush Administration. Fragments found at the site of the bomb that murdered the women and children had this label on it: "GUIDED BOMB BSU 37/B". That is the label of an American 5000 pound bunker buster, courtesy of the Bush Administration. Just last week the Bush Administration rushed a new shipment to Israel so they could blow up more civilians and civilian infrastructure.

Today, as the entire world demanded an immediate ceasefire, the United States stood alone at the United Nations in rejecting any cessation of hostilities. Just as it did last week, the United States has blocked a ceasefire. In doing so, it is complicit in this Israeli war crime.

The most disingenuous comment on this tragedy so far has come from none other than George W Bush:

President Bush on Sunday renewed his call for a "sustainable peace" in the Middle East while his administration urged Israel to avoid civilian casualties in the wake of a deadly airstrike in Lebanon.

"Our hope for peace for boys and girls everywhere extends across the world, especially in the Middle East," the president said before the start of a T-ball game at the White House.

"Today’s actions in the Middle East remind us that friends and allies must work together for a sustainable peace particularly for the sake of children," Bush told the teams of youngsters and visitors. [Emphasis added by me.]

George W Bush pays lip service to the killing of Lebanese children while supplying the very bombs that killed them. A reporter asked Mr. Bush after his comments if he was putting principle ahead of lives. Mr. Bush walked away without answering - no doubt with thoughts of his "culture of life" agenda dancing through his otherwise empty thoughtscape.

Ehud Olmert began this orgy of killing to rescue 2 Israeli soldiers. What has he achieved so far? He has killed civilians in their homes. He has killed civilians as the fled the carnage. He has killed civilians in ambulances. His warplanes have strafed civilians as they lay dying on the highways of Lebanon. His missiles have found their mark on the helpless forms of sleeping infants.

What has he achieved? He has failed to damage Hezbollah. In fact, Hezbollah is stronger today than they were at the beginning of this conflict. Hezbollah is stronger today because of Ehud Olmert’s actions and George W Bush’s inactions. The only certainty is that the blood of Lebanese children is on Olmert’s hands. This stain will not wash off - no matter how much spin and what justification is spun by Israel or the Bush Administration.

Israel says it needs two more weeks to bring Hezbollah to heel. Instead what Israel will get is two more weeks of killing civilians. Hezbollah will do just fine.

This war is over save the killing.

The small Lebanese town of Bint Jbeil has in recent days been the scene of much violence between Israel and Hezbollah. However, in times of peace, this town is quite picturesque. Bint Jbeil also has a web site. It is a surreal place to visit these days. Its opening page simply has the word "Resisting!" in bright bold letters. The web site has a guest book that is now littered with a war of words instead of what one would normally expect in a small town’s guest book. There is also a list of all the families that until recently had lived in this town of just over 15,000 people.

Here are some pictures from Bint Jbeil from more peaceful times:

Ehud Olmert’s two-week misadventure in Lebanon is coming to a close. The unexpected ambush in the town of Bint Jbeil and the shelling of the UN observation post may have become catalysts for a draw down of the conflict. These two tragic events, in retrospect, will be seen to have saved many Israeli and Lebanese lives.

This war was always a losing proposition for Israel and a strategic blunder. From the start, the most obvious outcome was an exchange of Lebanese prisoners for the captured Israeli soldiers. However, Olmert wanted to prove his bona fides to the Israeli public and took what should have been a relatively minor incident and escalated it into a conflict with no good exit strategy for Israel. Having now reached a decision point where Israel could either escalate or climb down, Olmert has now chosen to back pedal:

With no sign of a cease-fire soon, Israeli warplanes and artillery pummeled targets across Lebanon without letup Thursday, concentrating fire on the rocky border hills where Hezbollah fighters are entrenched. The Israeli government called up thousands of reservists but decided against expanding its onslaught into a full-fledged invasion as some military officers suggested.

Undeterred after 16 days of attacks, Hezbollah militiamen again fired volleys of rockets into northern Israel, igniting a detergent factory and lightly wounding seven people. More than 110 Hezbollah rockets landed across the north on Thursday, following the launch of more than 150 rockets on Wednesday. More than 1,400 rockets have landed in Israel since the conflict began. [Emphasis added by me.]

The shift in Israeli direction is subtle, but nonetheless it is there and it is significant.

Israel’s climb down and the eventual end to this conflict will be seen by Hezbollah and the Arab world as a defeat. The only thing left to do for Israel and the United States is to try to soften the strategic blow to Israel by searching for a best-case withdrawal plan. To that end, the wheels have already been set in motion.

Enter Tony Blair, George W Bush’s hapless poodle. Mr. Blair will make a show of urging for a ceasefire during his meeting with Mr. Bush:

Tony Blair will press George Bush today to support "as a matter of urgency" a ceasefire in Lebanon as part of a UN security council resolution next week, according to Downing Street sources.

At a White House meeting, the prime minister will express his concern that pro-western Arab governments are "getting squeezed" by the crisis and the longer it continues, the more squeezed they will be, giving militants a boost. The private view from No 10 is that the US is "prevaricating" over the resolution and allowing the conflict to run on too long.

But diplomatic sources in Washington suggest the US and Israel believe serious damage has been inflicted on Hizbullah, so the White House is ready to back a ceasefire resolution at the UN next week. Today Mr Bush and Mr Blair will discuss a version of the resolution that has been circulating in Washington and London. [Emphasis added by me.]

The US and Israeli position will be that they can now propose a ceasefire because they have sufficiently degraded Hezbollah’s capabilities. They will proclaim victory and exit stage left. After weeks of defending the ridiculous notion that negotiations must occur before a ceasefire, the Bush Administration is reportedly ready to reverse course on the main sticking point:

The draft peace deal involves two phases. In the first, Israel and Lebanon would agree a ceasefire and a small multinational force would be deployed on the border, allowing Israeli troops to withdraw. Then a much larger force of between 10,000 and 20,000 troops would be assigned to implement UN security council resolution 1559, agreed two years ago, under which militias such as Hizbullah would be disarmed and the authority of the Lebanese government forces extended to the country’s southern border.

As with all foreign policy stands this Administration has bungled, they initially talk tough and then wither when reality encroaches on their fantasy world. So too here, when the reality of a protracted guerrilla war or an escalating regional conflict faced them squarely in the face, they crumbled. But as with all such neo-con fantasies, the cost of bravado is paid in innocent lives lost.

Adding to the chorus of voices demanding an immediate ceasefire, former President Clinton and his first term Secretary of State today firmly endorsed the position held by nearly the entire world. Former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, in particular, made the prevailing opinion on a ceasefire quite clear:

In the course of her trip, the secretary repeatedly insisted that any cease-fire be tied to a "permanent" and "sustainable" solution to the root causes of the conflict. Such a solution is achievable, if at all, only after protracted negotiations involving multiple parties. In the meantime, civilians will continue to die, precious infrastructure will continue to be destroyed and the fragile Lebanese democracy will continue to erode.

My own experience in the region underlies my belief that in the short term we should focus our efforts on stopping the killing. Twice during my four years as secretary of state we faced situations similar to the one that confronts us today. Twice, at the request of the Israelis, we helped bring the bloodshed to an end.

If only the current Democratic leadership had the courage to demand action instead of pandering for votes to save their political behinds. When this conflict is over and America’s prestige and influence in the world is further damaged the Democrats will have to share in the blame. In this instance the Democrats allied themselves with the Bush Administration, their neo-con friends and the End Timers for political expediency at the expense of America’s national security interests.

So, look for this war to draw down next week when the United Nations Security Council meets to debate a ceasefire. Look for a call for a ceasefire from the Security Council along with a carefully worded condemnation of Hezbollah and a plan to set up an international force to supplement UNIFIL in Southern Lebanon. Look for Israel to declare victory and begin withdrawing soon thereafter. Also look for the release of the Israeli soldiers followed by a discrete hand over of Lebanese prisoners a few weeks later. One might even find renewed talks on the hand over of the Golan Height and the Chebaa farms to get Syrian buy in.

Expect American pundits to flood the airwaves and declare the ceasefire to be a good outcome for Israel and a severe blow to Hezbollah’s capabilities. Expect the Lebanese to finally be able to bury their dead and begin the long path to recovery from this needless spasm of destruction.

What will be lost is a large chunk of Israel’s deterrence capabilities and some measure of America’s influence in the Middle East. What Hezbollah will have gained is adulation from the Arab masses and a greater stranglehold on Lebanese politics. What Syria will have gained is influence again in Lebanese affairs and momentum toward a resolution of the Golan Heights issues. What Iran will have gained is more regional power and clout.

All in all not a pretty picture for Israel. All of this was completely unnecessary. Ehud Olmert got his war and proved himself utterly incompetent.