Tag it:

“We are entering an open war. Our goal is to ‘change the rules of the game.’”

This was the declaration of Israeli political and military leaders at the start of the Israeli aggression on Lebanon. The Secretary General of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah responded, “If it is open war you want, then open war you will get. You want to change the rules of the game, so let the rules of the game change.” It certainly appears as if each party is aware of the political and military contexts and objectives of this war, which have now completely circumvented the issue of the captivity of the two Israeli soldiers.

In reality, it is an open and all-out war, the direct and long-term political goals of which are crystal clear to those who analyze the overtures to the current confrontation and the potential shape of things to come.

For the Israeli government and its chief ally, the US, the war is aimed at altering the political reality in Lebanon by direct force and the imposition of conditions for the political situation in the region, according to a joint American and Israeli strategy, as expressed by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in her speech on a new Middle East.

A group of goals:

Understanding the dimensions of this  war of aggression against Lebanon necessitates a definition of the motives behind it and the desired goals to be gained from it. Israel did not throw all of its military weight into the confrontation solely to liberate its two captured soldiers. To only consider this goal is more of a joke than anything else.

Direct goals:

Israel has clearly declared that its all-out war is aimed at destroying Hezbollah and crushing its military power, resulting in the liberation of the two soldiers with no limitations or conditions. The parallel goal to this demand, is the Israeli army’s use of absolute force to change the balances of political power in Lebanon and to rearrange the situation in a way that is more suitable to American goals and visions, which clearly developed after the assassination of Rafiq Hariri a year ago.

Three years after the United States entered the Iraqi quagmire, it has realized that its project of domination in the region is “gone with the wind.” This project aimed at changing and overthrowing regimes that opposed American policies in a manner that would have a domino effect. However, the project has been foiled thanks to the courageous Iraqi resistance.

Therefore, the US administration began working with a strategy of pressure to impose change through intimidation and besiegement. The assassination of Hariri was the perfect opportunity that allowed for the reshuffling of Lebanese conditions. The first step in this direction was the Syrian pullout from Lebanon , through the use of Lebanese political forces loyal to the American project. These groups united and became known as the 14 March force: Al Mustaqbal (future) group under the leadership of Saad Hariri, the Druz leader Walid Junblat and the Lebanese forces under Sameer Ja’ja. This effort was crowned with the adoption of Security Council resolution 1559 in September 2004.

The project did succeed in achieving the first step of the pullout of Syrian troops from Lebanon . However, the American project fumbled again when it clashed with the Lebanese forces opposed to American domination ( The Presidency and army of the Republic, Hezbollah, The Amal Party, the Free National Party under Imad Awn the Marada Party under the leadership of Sameer Franjiya and part of the Druze sect under Talal Irslan).

However, the biggest deterrent to the continuation of the change process in Lebanon according to the American agenda was the presence of the Hezbollah resistance and its military power.

This situation put Hezbollah in the bull’s-eye for being directly targeted. After the failure to implement Resolution 1559, which stipulates the disarmament of Hezbollah and the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south to enforce Lebanese state sovereignty there, it became clear that Israel and the US had no other choice but to use direct force to change the rules of the game, crushing Hezbollah and installing a puppet Lebanese government. This way, Syria ’s role would be permanently obliterated in Lebanon .

Long-term goals:

Achieving the aforementioned goals quickly and decisively opens up opportunities for the American project to continue acting in the east under the guise of “the war on terrorism” and the democratization of the Middle East . The chain begins in Afghanistan , moves on to Iraq , continues through Lebanon , and in this same context, into Palestine .

The complete success of American domination in the Middle East depends on a decisive victory in Lebanon and an end to the state of resistance and all it embodies in terms of challenges and role models. At the same time, it necessitates the crushing of the Palestinian popular Intifada by force, and imposing a final solution according to Israeli conditions. After that comes a siege on Syria and forcing it into submission. Finally, Iran must be placed under political and economic siege and a military threat established to prevent it from achieving its nuclear aspirations.

Thus, the all-out war on Lebanon is aimed at crushing Hezbollah for good and imposing a regime in harmony with American policies and schemes. In tandem with this, is Israel ’s continued attack on the Palestinian people aimed at crushing the Intifada and bringing down the Hamas government as a first step. This would be followed by the imposition of an accommodating Palestinian Authority, which means in practical terms, a disqualification of the Palestinian Legislative Council election results and stripping Hamas of any democratic and popular legitimacy. What this entails in the longterm is the prevention of any attempt at real democratic change in the Arab world if it is incongruent with the vision and goals of American-Israeli domination and control.

To achieve these strategic goals, Israel , with total American support, used its full military power from the start of the war to achieve the broadest political goals, which reflect the depth of the American objectives for reshuffling conditions in the region. This insistence of America ’s pressure on Israel to continue its operations and its clear demand not to accept a ceasefire, coupled with the continuation of the confrontation have begun to have an impact on Israel . Israel has lost its margin for political and military maneuverability that directly coincide with Israeli interests. Hence, Israel has found itself pulled into the quagmire of war, not because its immediate interests necessitate this, but because it agreed and submitted to pressure from the American administration. Therefore, it is no longer waging an Israeli war, but rather an American war by proxy.

This is the overall analytical framework for understanding and comprehending the dimensions of what has been happening in Lebanon for the past weeks and what has been happening in Palestine for months.

Anyone who believes we are witnessing an Israeli response governed by the logic of regaining its status following the capture of two soldiers is mistaken. The breadth and cruelty of the war, and its total destructive nature, indicate clearly that we are witnessing a premeditated military-political project which was only waiting for the appropriate moment to be put into action.

This is the truth, which totally refutes the allegations of certain parties that hold Hezbollah responsible, maintaining that Hezbollah provoked Israel with the capture of two soldiers.

The political cover:

Achieving these Israeli-American equations called for political cover on domestic, regional and international levels, so that Israel would not appear to be merely waging an unjustifiable revenge attack through destroying all the economic structures and civilian infrastructures of Lebanon . Therefore, they had to ensure legitimacy and a political cover for this war so it would appear that Israel was in a position of defending and abiding by legitimate international resolutions.

As for the internal Israeli situation, Olmert’s government turned to the Israeli street to justify the war and to legitimize it through investing in the case of the two captured soldiers, claiming that its actions were in the context of the right to self-defense. The government has also played on the threat that Hezbollah poses to the security of Israeli society through its missiles, which justifies the Israeli army’s destruction of this organization and the squashing of its military power.

Using these justifications, an Israeli national consensus has been built to stand behind the army in its war against Hezbollah’s threats. This also serves to justify Israeli losses incurred.

On the international level:

The United States has exerted all of its energy in avoiding condemning Israel . Rather, it adopted its hackneyed phrase: the right of Israel to defend itself and that Hezbollah and those behind it— Syria and Iran —are responsible.

Under the influence of this interpretation, the international community and international organizations kowtowed to this American pressure, which justifies and legitimizes the war as a necessary move to implement resolution 1559. Hence, the international position, including that of the G8, the discussions of the Security Council and the American support for the Israeli aggression all indicate that all parties are taking their stances and decisions knowing that the result of the war has already been predicted and known, which is: the complete defeat of Hezbollah and the complete victory of Israel . This is why, in the first days of the war, there was a focus on holding Hezbollah responsible while offering an understanding and justification for the Israeli response.

There was also a promotion of the Israeli conditions as a basis for a solution with a few feeble comments about the use of excessive force by the Israeli Rambo, which, while raising the sword of justice and punishment, should show a level of compassion as it punishes Hezbollah, which dared to challenge the will of the masters in this region. This is how Israel has been portrayed in this war—as if it is carrying out the will of the international community and is striking with this community’s sword.

This is the general context in which the United States is pushing Israel into the circle of an open war. It is trying its best to give the Israeli army enough time in the field to achieve a clear victory, as a precursor for imposing its political conditions and to change the rules of the game for good.

At the Arab level:

On the basis of frustrating the official and historical Arab regimes and their lack of confidence in the possibility of confronting Israel while promoting the truism that Hezbollah is waging the war in Lebanon on behalf of Syria and Lebanon, and on the basis of linking the fate of the Arab regimes to American policy, based on the premise that Israel will eventually and easily win, the Cairo-Amman-Riyadh axis has been put into action on direct demand from the American administration to hold Hezbollah responsible. This has provided valuable official Arab political cover for the Israeli aggression.

At the Lebanese level:

Since the assassination of Hariri, the Lebanese arena has been plagued by political divisions between the 14 March force, loyal to American policies, which calls for the disarmament of the opposition resistance movement, first and foremost Hezbollah and the republic presidency, which rely on the opposition forces in Palestine , Lebanon , Syria , Iraq and Iran . This division has provided the suitable venue for Israeli political penetration into Lebanon and has given a strong justification and cover for the war under the guise that Israel is not waging a war against the Lebanese government or the Lebanese state, but is targeting Hezbollah and the threat it poses to all. In this sense, it is helping the Lebanese government to impose its sovereignty in accordance with resolution 1559.

This is the overall context in which the war is taking place. However, what are the calculations, the culture and the philosophy that urged Israel into delving into this adventure with the conviction that it would achieve a decisive and quick victory and which, in the end, will result in it imposing its political conditions in addition to allowing this political framework to settle according to Israel ’s plans?

Prevalent culture and pre-conditions:

Israel did not enter into this adventure only because it was provided with political cover, as Israel does not need any cover when it decides to wage its wars on Lebanon or any other Arab country.

The principle motivation for Israel ’s war can be attributed to more than justifications or to the provision of a political cover. It has to do with estimations, convictions and presupposed-truths that govern and guide Israel ’s political and military practices.

The first of these convictions and truths: the belief in the absolute power of the Israeli army, in that it is invincible, alongside the conviction that there is no Arab power that dares to confront this army; the absolute belief that the Israeli army is able to quickly transport the battle to enemy territory and can finalize any battle in a few days while waiting for the other side to concede, beg for a ceasefire and kneel before the omnipotent Israeli force.

Israel has grown accustomed to speedy wars fought by the front lines, while the back lines continue their comfortable lives and enjoy their army destroying the other side.

This is all based on the interpretation that Hezbollah, no matter how strong it is, will not be able to endure more than a few days and will then begin to collapse like Arab forces usually do.

On this premise, talk of an open war and changing the rules of the game began whereby Israel will strike with all its force and then impose whatever it wants, however it wants.

This is not all. There is a prevalent belief that the Israeli army will not have to engage in ground confrontations because its air force will accomplish the mission with ease. It seems that in the back of Israel ’s mind is the experience of the US army bombing Baghdad for 40 days without the Iraqi army being able to do anything. However, Israeli leaders fail to note one fundamental difference between the Iraqi and Lebanese cases, which is that the current confrontations are between a sophisticated, qualified and well-prepared resistance movement, not to mention a comparatively small geographical area on which the war is taking place. This allows for the center of Israeli territory to be accessible to even the simplest of rockets while in Iraq , Washington was never in Saddam’s firing range.

So, based on these estimations, Israel declared all-out war on their absolute belief that Hezbollah is already defeated and that Israel is already victorious. This is why the Israeli rhetoric and discourse from the beginning of the military process has been flavored with arrogance and presuppositions. There is nothing to wait for and see. This reality is what pushed Israel towards this crisis with a continuation of the war without any beneficial results. Some analysts have described this as someone climbing up and tree without knowing how to get back down, although the truth is that Israel has been sitting at the top of this tree for a long time. There is an assumption that the Israeli military is invincible, and because of this, Israel can impose its will and desires on the Palestinians and any other opponent. Israel has not left a margin for negotiation with the conditions Israel is demanding. Now, without an invincible military, and without a victory, Israel is stuck up its tree.

But what about Hezbollah?

As for Hezbollah, it seems clear that it realizes the seriousness of the confrontation and its immediate and long-term goals. Since the liberation of the south in 2000, Hezbollah knew that its head was wanted politically and militarily. This is why it foresaw the confrontation with Israel coming sooner or later. The capture of the two soldiers has not changed this fact, it may only have expedited the confrontation, but it is not the essential reason for its outbreak.

Based on this conviction, Hezbollah knows that the current confrontation is a decisive one in every sense of the word and its outcome will decide the very existence of the movement and the future of Lebanon in the coming decades. It is the confrontation of “to be or not to be”; if Lebanon is to be free and independent or if it will become a backyard for Israel .

Therefore, the current confrontation cannot endure partial solutions because each side has thrown all of its weight into the confrontation, in order to finalize it once and for all.

The question, however, remains: After we have pondered the Israeli estimations and assumptions, what are the assumptions that Hezbollah is banking on in engaging in this war? Are they aimed at defeating Israel and destroying its army? Or does the party have a different vision and goal?

As we mentioned before, Israel had already formulated a scenario for the confrontation on the basis of finalizing it quickly and crushing Hezbollah’s strength with powerful blows and then imposing its own conditions to reshuffle the situation in Lebanon .

Hezbollah’s strategy, no doubt, is not based on the assumption that it can crush the Israeli army but rather on frustrating Israel ’s goals. That is why its administration of the confrontation is based on absorbing the blows, remaining steadfast, preventing the destruction of its military force, prolonging the confrontation and pushing Israeli society into a ring of fire and confrontation for as long as possible.

Hence, the concept of victory for Hezbollah is to prevent the achievement of Israeli conditions. While engaging in the confrontation, it is taking very calculated steps and is constantly working to foil Israeli attacks, which is the other aspect of victory. Through this formula, Hezbollah has become a political and military force to reckon with and which ultimately means that the rules of the game will indeed be changed. This is exactly what Hassan Nasrallah meant.

Hezbollah’s calculations are not limited to the direct balances of power. Just as much as it holds cards for initiative and maneuvering at the level of the military field, including some surprises that Nasrallah talked about, it also depends on critical and difficult regional equations, the most important being the responses of Iran and Syria . If the United States continues its support and involvement with Israel and encourages it to continue in this war until Hezbollah is crushed, then the US may be surprised by a dramatic change in the positions of Iran and the Shiite resistance in Iraq, thus leaving 150,000 American soldiers in Iraq to face a true disaster.

At the moment, this card is not yet on the table. Syria is still maintaining its silence. Israel may be thinking of expanding this circle of fire or this circle could continue to spread and expand along with the continuing endurance of the resistance and its possibility to drag Israeli ground forces into the trap of a lengthy ground war of attrition in the south and in the depths of Lebanese territory. In addition, there is the growing anger in the Arab street and the possibility of this turning into a popular movement that could threaten regimes conspiring with the aggression. In light of all this, the American and Israeli calculations could be put before new questions and realities that could reach the point of a political defeat in the region.

This interpretation and these assumptions are surely present in the minds of the Hezbollah leadership. They are therefore moving calmly and steadily towards a lengthy confrontation that would forever thwart the Israeli concept of a swift war, the result of which would mean a change of the political reality in the Middle East .

In the field:

After this lengthy presentation of analysis and predictions, which may have hit the nail on the head in some places or not, the question poses itself: What are the indications resulting from this war two weeks or so after its outbreak? To whose advantage is it progressing?

Without exaggeration or naïve optimism, and on the basis of keeping options open, we can say that the results of the confrontations up until now have been a surprise to Israel , its allies and those in conspiracy with them among the Arabs and Lebanese.

In spite of the losses and destruction suffered by the Lebanese economic structures and civilians infrastructures, the Israeli war machine, which has put in all of its efforts, has not yet been able to achieve any serious and decisive accomplishments. The airports, bridges, power plants, water stations, factories, gas stations and houses have been destroyed and people displaced, etc. but still Hezbollah’s rocket system has continued to strike calculatingly deep into Israel .

The resistance, on the other hand, has made accomplishments and noticeable and surprising moves, such as shelling the Israeli warship, and has managed the limited ground offensive with tremendous capability, causing significant losses to the Israeli army.

The Israeli army was taken by surprise by the ferocity of the confrontation, and by the practical expertise of the resistance in maneuvering and in steadfastness. As for the wager that the popular mobilization around the resistance would be shaken, this has begun to weaken and retreat with time.

Hence, the confrontation planned by the White House to be swift and decisive by using the Israeli army has begun to move toward a cycle of extension of both place and time. This could threaten to become a war of attrition by keeping the Israeli heartland in a state of social, economic and moral paralysis.

In light of the Israeli warplanes’ inability to finalize the battle in the field, the option of ground offensives and invasions has become more and more possible, something which reminds us of the possibility of the Israeli military falling, once again, into the deadly Lebanese marshland.

As for the Israeli heartland, which has been subjected since the start of the war to powerful and systematic strikes, it is now facing a critical question: Where is this war heading, and was it necessary in the first place?

In any case, it can be said that up to this point, Israel has lost a number of components that can not be easily compensated, the first of which is pushing the Israeli heartland into the circle of war and fire. Second is the damaging of the Israeli strategic concept of deterrence given that the human, economic and moral losses are continuously escalating.

The continuation of this war at this pace, therefore, means accumulative achievements for the resistance and increasing losses on the Israeli side. As for the ground offensive, the results of the initial tests of Israeli Special Forces and artillery proved that a ground invasion would have a heavy human and material price. This would also undermine the Israeli army adage that it is invincible.

In short, we are witnessing a new phase in every sense. The rules of the game are truly changing, but not as the leaders in Tel Aviv and the White House envisioned them.

Things in the Middle East will not be the same as they were before this war. It looks as if heads will be rolling both here and there. From here on, the popular belief of a safe heartland has fallen through, in addition to that of an undefeatable army which can transfer the battle to enemy grounds and finalize the battle with airplanes and smart bombs.

These initial facts and results—in spite of the destruction, death and aggression, reveal once again the futility of the erroneous strategies and political readings for a solution to the conflict in the Middle East , especially at the level of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

This war has revealed the enormous naiveté of the political logic based on the principle of idiotic force, which leads to even more idiotic wars aimed at finalizing the struggle between nations and peoples and to impose solutions by force. Many illusions have fallen through in this war, including the illusion that security and peace can only be achieved through humiliation and arrogance, and that any people, however unequal the balance of powers may be, will seek to change realities with any opportunities they have, something which will continuously push towards a cycle of wars, bloodshed and destruction.

As of today, Israel , no matter the outcome of this current confrontation, is no longer a supernatural force or state above the law.

It is time for Israel to be modest in its role and objectives, and to put the interests of the majority of Israelis above any other consideration, through a serious and rational search for a just and comprehensive solution to the conflict in the Middle East . This solution should be far from the idiocy of force and all the disasters this idiocy entails for everyone.

In this context, just as Israel is pointing the finger at Hezbollah, claiming it is waging this war on behalf of Iran and Syria, Israeli society must ask its own government and its political and military elite: How long will Israeli governments continue to push Israeli society into the United States’ wars in the region?

This perspective and this question puts Israeli society before existential and decisive questions, both politically and morally. How long will this society remain hostage to the policies of war, aggression, domination and the occupation and humiliation of other peoples?

The practical political interpretation of this inquiry opens the door to those Israeli forces that believe in peace and coexistence, and in pursuing a final, moral and humane peace project, so that Israeli society does not comprise simply a cover and fuel for aggressive wars. The narcissism with which Israeli governments fill their citizens’ heads, the concept of the invincible über-state, must be eradicated. In all of its strength and vitality, Israel remains just a country like any other country. It is also my belief that the aspirations on the Israeli street do not exceed security, stability and coexistence with their neighbors. Without the recognition of the rights of these neighbors, however, the fires of conflict will remain perpetually ignited.

The most important lesson from this war is that every confrontation or war waged by Israel on the basis of aggression and occupation only brings more political and social forces in the Middle East into the circle of resistance. This sets the stage for continuing, deeper and more comprehensive confrontations and which will constantly pose decisive and fateful questions to Israel .

Barring the predictions and outcomes of this current confrontation, even if Israel is able to defeat the resistance, such a confrontation has already created a new standard and model of resistance and action for Arab resistance movements. This means that if Israel continues with its arrogance and aggression and continues to play the role of the United States ’ “imperialistic claws” in the region, it will be faced with endless challenges and resistance.

Such facts are brought to mind as we all watch what is happening on either side of the borders and hear the war cries, destruction, death and terror that are engulfing everyone. Terror, in any case, can never create peace or security.

Yes, this is the moment that illusions crumble and equations change. This war has gone beyond any limits or rationale, and is threatening to spread into something even more disastrous. Is the time right for pressure groups to rise up and rein in the hounds of war? Or will Israel and the United States continue their arrogance while their war machinery continues to work against the peoples of this region and the US continues to push the Israeli people into one war after another?

As for the international community and international institutions, they have proven over the past days their shameful inability, if not their conspiracy with, and blessing for US-Israeli policies, which strips these institutions of their political, humanitarian and moral roles.

They are now before a decisive question: will they continue to base their positions and define their roles according to the arrogance of force and aggression or will they have the courage to take firmer roles that reflect the determination and rights of the peoples of the world who seek security, peace and justice?

Nassar Ibrahim is a Palestinian writer and journalist. He is also the editor of the Arabic quarterly journal Rouy'ya Ukhra, published by the AIC. 

This was originally published in News from Within Vol. XXII, No. 7, August Special Issue, 2006.