|
Israel Failing to Give U.S. the Military Cards It Needs
by Ze'ev Schiff
 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is the figure leading the strategy of changing the situation in Lebanon. She has so far managed to withstand international pressure in favor of a cease-fire, even though this will allow Hizballah to retain its status as a militia armed by Iran and Syria. If the military cards Israel is holding do not improve with the continuation of the fighting, it will result in a diplomatic solution that will leave the Hizballah rocket arsenal in southern Lebanon in its place. The diplomatic solution will necessarily be a reflection of the military realities on the ground. (Ha'aretz)
A Proxy War
by Joschka Fischer
 The current war in Lebanon is not a war by the Arab world against Israel; rather, it is a war orchestrated by the region's radical forces - Hamas and Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians, Hizballah in Lebanon, Syria and Iran - which fundamentally reject any settlement with Israel. Conflict was sought for three reasons: first to ease pressure on Hamas from within the Palestinian community to recognize Israel; second to undermine democratization in Lebanon, which was marginalizing Syria; and third to lift attention from the emerging dispute over the Iranian nuclear program and demonstrate to the West the "tools" at its disposal in the case of a conflict. Joschka Fischer, a leader of the Green Party for nearly 20 years, was Germany's foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 to 2005 (Ha'aretz)
Does Israel Deliberately Target Lebanese Civilians?
by Mitchell Bard
 The main reasons Lebanese civilians are in danger have nothing to do with Israel. First, the Lebanese government failed to fulfill its obligation under UN Security Council Resolution 1559 to disarm Hizballah and deploy its army in southern Lebanon. Second, Hizballah has so little regard for civilians that it purposely bases its weapons and fighters in their homes and neighborhoods where they will be put at risk. Third, the civilians themselves have allowed Hizballah to create a state within Lebanon and to carry out terrorist attacks. Finally, if Hizballah had not attacked Israel, not a single Lebanese civilian would have been hurt. If Hizballah returns the soldiers it kidnaped and disarms, not one more civilian will die. (News Blaze)
Israel Is Within Its Rights
by David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey
In its operations against Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, Israel's conduct has been fully compliant with the applicable norms of international law. In determining the existence of a legitimate casus belli, a state is entitled to consider the entire context of the threat it faces. Once a country has suffered an armed attack, it is entitled to identify the source of that attack and to eliminate its adversary's ability to attack again. It is not required to accept a limited conflict that fails to meet and resolve the danger it faces. Hizballah intentionally operates from civilian areas, both to protect its military capabilities from attack and to increase civilian deaths, which can then be trumpeted for propaganda purposes. But the presence of a large civilian population does not immunize Hizballah or Hamas forces from attack. Responsibility for any additional civilian casualties must be attributed to those groups, not to Israel. The writers are Washington lawyers who served in the Justice Department under presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. (Washington Post)
|
'Disproportionate' in What Moral Universe?
by Charles Krauthammer
 What other country, when attacked in an unprovoked aggression across a recognized international frontier, is given a limited time window in which to fight back, regardless of whether it has restored its own security? What other country sustains 1,500 indiscriminate rocket attacks into its cities every one designed to kill, maim and terrorize civilians and is then vilified by the world when it tries to destroy the enemy's infrastructure and strongholds with precision-guided munitions that sometimes have the unintended but unavoidable consequence of collateral civilian death and suffering? (Washington Post)
See also Is Israel's Response Disproportionate? No, It's Survival by Richard Cohen (Washington Post)
Why Israel Must Win this War for the Free World
by Dan Diker and Ya'akov Amidror
 While Israel is at war only to eliminate the acute strategic threat of some 13,000 to 15,000 short- and longer-range Iranian and Syrian missiles pointed at its major cities, this Israeli campaign must also achieve three additional and necessary outcomes that have far-reaching implications for the future of the Middle East region and the free world. First, an Israeli victory over Hizballah may offer the Lebanese people another window of opportunity to become a democratic sovereign state Second, Israel's war against Hizballah will have a ripple effect on the international axis of radical Sunni and Shi'ite Islamic networks. Third, a successful Israeli campaign would be a blow to Iran. (Jerusalem Post)
The Tall Story We Europeans Now Tell Ourselves about Israel
by Charles Moore
 European discourse on the [events in Lebanon] seems to have been overwhelmed by something else - a narrative, told most powerfully by the way television pictures are selected, that makes Israel out as a senseless, imperialist, mass-murdering, racist bully. Not only is this analysis wrong - if the Israelis are such imperialists, why did they withdraw from Lebanon for six years - it is also morally imbecilic. It makes no distinction between the tough, sometimes nasty things all countries do when hard-pressed and the profoundly evil intent of some ideologies and regimes. (Telegraph-UK)
Hizballah Must Be Disarmed
by George Shultz
 Hizballah must be disarmed. That is called for in UN Security Council Resolution 1559. The members of the Security Council foresaw that leaving Hizballah armed would likely lead to exactly what has happened. If there is to be an international force - and there should be - its mission should be to disarm Hizballah. Such a force has to go in with the expectation that Hizballah will lay down its arms so they can be destroyed. If Hizballah won't do that, the international force has got to have the active rules of engagement and military capability to destroy those weapons. The U.S. should not be part of the international force. The writer is a former U.S. Secretary of State. (TIME)
|