Who won?

As the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah has reached a stalemated cease fire everyone seems to be claiming victory. George Bush, Ehud Olmert, Hassan Nasrallah and Prime Minister Ahmadinejad of Iran have all announced that their side has emerged victorious in the military conflict. It seems to me that there can be no victors in a conflict where over 1000 innocent civilians have perished to reestablish in the words of Condi Rice the “status quo ante”. You might be able to argue that Hezbollah won because they didn’t lose and Israel lost because they didn’t win, but that is a pretty pyrrhic victory. It is, however, pretty clear who is winning the political battle. Hezbollah and Iran have emerged as the clear victors on the political front. While the west has dithered and the Lebanese government has talked, Hezbollah, with a blank check from Iran, is moving rapidly and efficiently to compensate people who have lost their homes to the Israeli bombardment with bundles of cash and promises to rebuild their homes. (Perhaps we should hire them to help with the response to the next major hurricane.) Hezbollah, Iran and the Syrians have established themselves as major players in the post conflict Middle East. Israel’s stated objective in the war was eliminate Hezbollah south of the Litna river and to destroy their arsenal and to prevent their rearming by Syria – mission impossible. Trying to drive Hezbollah out will not succeed has long as Lebanese Shia come back. It is like New York trying to drive Republicans out of Idaho. As soon as the people come back the Republicans come back. Hezbollah’s fighters are primarily reservists who keep their weapons in their closet and under their beds. When they are needed, they pick up their weapons and go fight. (To see an interview with one of these guys click here.) The long porous border between Syria and Lebanon makes any attempt to prevent rearmament a hopeless cause. The only way to accomplish the objectives is to talk to Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. Although the peace oriented left in Israel has lost its voice, (much as it has in the U.S.) the realists on the Israeli political scene are beginning to examine the concept of negotiations with Syria and Iran. Amir Peretz, the Israeli Defense Minister, has called for negotiations with Syria. (He was immediately attacked by members of his own party.) Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has appointed a “project manager” for possible negotiations with Syria. There certainly are those in Israel who are clamoring for another war with Lebanon and the current Israeli government will probably be short lived, but one hopes that reason will prevail. (To see the hawk point of view click here) Any negotiations with Syria will bring the Golan Heights into play. The Golan Heights is the strategic high ground in the Galilee. It is understandable why Israel would only agree to relinquish it as part of a firm peace agreement with Syria. Not a bad outcome. Peace agreements with Jordan and Israel have remained stable for a number of years. They may not like each other, but they live alongside each other. Condi Rice said that this conflict is “the birth pangs of a new Middle East”. It might not be the new Middle East that she envisioned and the birth did not need to be as painful, but she may have been right for the wrong reasons.