Israel’s Invasion of Lebanon

I encounter a lot of criticism of Israel these days, with people mainly of the left/progressive political persuasion being barely able to conceal their anti-Semitism. Pointing out that Israel, regardless of its current actions, does in fact face a host of enemies with the stated goal of exterminating the state of Israel does not in any way stem the hateful stream of bile that otherwise normal people sprout on the subject. It is just remarkable how, people who pretend to be democrats will effectively provide verbal, moral and financial support to what are at the end of the day despotic regimes and their supporters. Naturally, many of these folks sooner or later descend into a more familiar anti-Americanism and Bush is the anti-Christ delusions as you point out the factual deficiencies of their arguments.

What I do feel is missing from the entire discussion both from those folks and the media is a separation Israel’s moral justification, modus operandi and the likelihood of it ultimately gaining from its actions. Essentially,

1. Moral justification: i.e. is Israel morally justified in attacking Lebanon from the ground and air. I believe it is. I am not talking about either of the other two points below but simply the narrow question of moral justification. The undeniable fact is that Israel faces enemies that are bent on its destruction and the mass murder of its citizens. When these enemies are states it is easy to see how provocation such as kidnappings and rocket attacks would provoke justified self defence. When the enemy is a nebulous organisation that operates as a virtual state within a state in an otherwise peaceful neighbour it is tempting to maintain that this is different and does not constitute a sovereign attack on Israel. Rather that, Hezbollah’s attacks where a form of terrorism that should be dealt with by the International community as would any other forms of terrorism. I think this is wrong. A country that fails, either deliberately or not, to control a group within its borders that then goes on to attack another sovereign state has in my mind forgone its right to sovereign integrity. Attacking that country is therefore self defence and thus, morally justified;
2. Modus Operandi or the question of whether Israel’s, morally justified, attack on Lebanon was conducted in an appropriate manner. Another way of posing this question is whether Israel, a democratic state, is justified in destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure and attacking civilian targets where those are being used for offensive purposes. Here I completely disagree with the Israeli position; if Lebanon had attacked them in an all out war then destroying infrastructure is simply a normal and acceptable way of winning the war. Similarly, in an all out war you do accept civilian deaths as regrettable but inevitable and therefore, fire at civilian sites that are somehow being used militarily. But an all out war between two sovereigns is not what we have here. Israel is not only the dominant, by some distance, military power here, it is fighting, not a sovereign power but a militia that exists as a sort of parasite upon the Lebanese nation. This militia numbers in the thousands, the fighting part of it that is, and is not in any way a terminal threat to Israel. In other words Hezbollah can never win or even seriously harm Israel militarily. For, Israel to demolish the entire civil infrastructure of a third party to this conflict, however morally justified their fight, is simply excessive. Shelling civilian cites even when those are being abused as shelter by the militia is not only counterproductive it is not civilised behaviour when you are the stronger party. Israel as the stronger party and a democracy to boot has a duty of care to the non combatants that is not only part of International law but a simple matter of decency. In the end the Democracy that is also the superior military force must be held to a higher standard than the terrorist.
3. And finally what does Israel stand to gain with all of this. I mean to destroy Hezbollah’s militarily is without a doubt an worthwhile objective but is there not a higher objective that should take precedence? I am thinking about living in peace with one’s neighbours which must be the long term goal of Israel. If all Israel wanted to achieve was short term victory over Hezbollah then no doubt they’ve done a sterling job. But without being an expert on Lebanon, or the Middle East for that matter, I rather suspect that what Hezbollah has lost in military strength it has gained manifold in political strength. I have heard people suggest that Hezbollah basically started a civil war and got Israel to fight it on its behalf. Furthermore, the anger that the war has generated across the Middle East will take a generation to calm down. So what Israel has achieved appears to be to strengthen its worst enemy, weaken the democracy next door, and ruin what goodwill it may have had amongst Muslims. Probably, not a good bargain in the long term for Israel. I really don’t know what information the Israeli Government possessed in order for them to think this a good bargain. Or did they just miscalculate. Whatever, the facts I don’t think their long term position has been improve.

Not a pretty picture is it.