Despite inflicting massive destruction and suffering on the civilian populations of Lebanon and Palestine, the U.S.-Israeli war makers appear far from achieving their avowed goal of crushing the popular resistance movements on either front in the conflict.
The damage to Lebanon has been catastrophic, evidence of “a violation of international humanitarian law,” according
|
In the Gaza and the West Bank, more than 120 Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more injured by the Israeli Occupation Forces. On the Israeli side, 34 are reported killed, 19 of them soldiers, and more than 300 wounded.
While feigning “concern” about civilian death and destruction, Bush administration officials have not uttered a word of criticism of their Israeli junior partners. Nor have they called for an end to the fighting.
It was announced on July 21 that the Pentagon is rush-delivering 100 GBU “bunker-buster” bombs to the Israeli air force, along with $200 million in jet fuel. The Israeli air force has conducted so many bombing raids on Lebanon in its ferocious attack that it’s running out of both bombs and fuel. The GBU “bunker-busters” are true weapons of mass destruction, each containing 5,000 pounds of high explosives. They are instruments of assassination.
Washington and Tel Aviv have been united from the beginning in seeking nothing less than total victory, regardless of the cost in either lives or money. And “Washington” does not just mean the Bush administration. A grotesque resolution in full support of Israel and praising, “Israel’s longstanding commitment to minimizing civilian loss,” passed the House of Representatives on July 21 by a vote of 410-8, with nearly every Democrat in the body voting for the resolution.
In spite of its huge advantage in high-tech weaponry, the Israeli offensive in southern Lebanon remains stalled in a small border area. Israel occupied parts of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000. For an even longer time, Israeli military forces had entered Lebanon at will. Had it not been for the Lebanese resistance movement, led by the Hezbollah organization, Israeli forces would have remained in the region supporting a pro-Israeli puppet government.
The significant losses Israel has suffered both in personnel and equipment at the hands of the Lebanese resistance—which possesses no tanks, fighter jets or helicopters—has prevented Israel from launching a larger ground offensive up until now.
The combination of the extreme brutality of the Israeli assault and the tenacity of the Lebanese resistance has brought an outpouring of anger and solidarity throughout the Arab and Muslim world, including some of the countries with the most compliant pro-U.S. regimes. Demonstrations have taken place in nearly every Arab country, in predominantly Islamic counties and elsewhere. Click here to read about the upcoming Aug. 12 National Emergency March on Washington, D.C.
Divide and conquer
The complicity of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan—the so-called “moderate” Arab governments—with the U.S.-Israeli side in the war is motivated by fear of their own populations, as well as the need to please Washington. Across the Arab world, the sentiment is echoed that Hezbollah “has done what none of the Arab governments could do” in confronting Israel—and, by extension, U.S. imperialism—and coming to the aid of the besieged Palestinians.
In Cairo, Riyadh and Amman, as well as in Washington, this is viewed as a menacing development, one that could threaten the pro-imperialist “stability” of the Egyptian, Saudi and Jordanian regimes. That danger, they all believe, can only be neutralized by crushing the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance forces.
A divide-and-conquer strategy, designed to break up the alliance between Iran, Syria and the Lebanese and
 |
“The expected outcome of the [U.S.-Saudi] session is unclear. ‘We don’t know how patient the Saudis will be with the Israeli military action,’ said a senior official said. ‘They want to see Hezbollah wiped out, and they’d like to set back the Iranians.’ But in the Arab world, the official added, ‘they can’t be seen to be doing that too enthusiastically.’”
A July 23 AP story gives a glimpse of what’s taking place behind the scenes:
“Speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of talks, Egyptian diplomats told the AP in Cairo that the American readiness to engage Syria grew in part out of a visit to Washington last week by Egypt’s chief of intelligence Omar Suleiman and foreign minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit where they met with Rice and national security adviser Stephen Hadley.
“The two officials told the administration that the best way to solve this problem is through ‘isolating Syria from Iran, the two main backers of Hezbollah and Hamas,’ said one diplomat. ‘The interests of those countries are not always compatible, and if Syria is given a carrot it could help solve the crisis, leaving Iran in the shadows.’”
The idea is to present the Syrian government with a mixture of threats and bribes—the usual “democratic” approach utilized by Washington diplomacy. And today, after years of relentless hostility toward Syria, secretary of state Rice—on her way to Israel—was described as “open” to the idea of talks with Syria.
For its part, the Syrian government expressed its openness to negotiations, but only on the condition that the aim be a comprehensive settlement, including the issues of Palestinian rights and the return of Syria’s Golan Heights, annexed by Israel after the 1967 war.
Syrian minister of information Mohsen Bilal said today, “If Israel invades Lebanon over ground and comes near to us, Syria will not sit tight. She will join the conflict.”
U.S., Israel want NATO troops in Lebanon
Another emerging element of U.S. strategy came into focus more clearly yesterday. Officials in both Washington and Tel Aviv announced that they would like to see the deployment of a NATO “peacekeeping” force in southern Lebanon.
NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is a military alliance of all the major imperialist countries except Japan, headed by the United States. Tens of thousands of NATO troops are today occupying Afghanistan. In 1999, NATO waged war against Yugoslavia.
The deployment of NATO forces in the Middle East would represent another step in the imperialist re-colonization of the region.
