Generosity in war
The only safe way out of Israel’s current imbroglio in Lebanon is to offer a generous peace in which all sides perceive concrete benefits. Waiting for the ultimate victory before offering the peace is foolish. A big stick wielded without any carrots other than an end to the beating is short sighted policy.
Israel might claim “mission accomplished� and leave after destroying most of Hezbollah’s weaponry, but it will have lost because the fighters will use the lull to rearm.
Israel’s focus should be on peace, not on victory. Generosity is a valuable tool of war. It is unwise to insist on clear-cut surrender before using that tool.
Whatever Israel’s existential fears, it cannot win a peaceful life for its children without convincing the mothers of its enemies that it cares for their children as much as for its own. Bombs that destroy entire neighborhoods are not a good way of doing that.
The real strength of Hamas and Hezbollah lies in the safe havens provided by their communities. They will never be defeated until civilians in Palestine and Lebanon perceive Israel and America as reliable and generous friends. That would make the local militias irrelevant to their daily needs. Currently, they see militants as saviors untainted by the customary corruption.
There is a real risk that pulverizing the homes of hundreds of thousands of people across Lebanon will unite all civilians behind the Hezbollah instead of isolating it as a Shiite trouble maker. To prevent further humiliation at Israeli hands, angry civilians may bury the hatchet of centuries old rivalries among various religious factions.
This is feasible because Lebanon is no longer the patchwork of undemocratic power-sharing arrangements created by France to postpone the reckoning among local warlords. That reckoning caused the long civil war. Since it ended, the Lebanese have emerged as a better educated and more united people with a sense of nationhood.
Washington wants Lebanon to grow as a liberal rather than managed democracy with a well defined national identity. If that happens, Hezbollah will gain more political power because of its dense roots among a third of the population. Having tasted political power during the past decade, the Shiites are unlikely to accept their traditional position at the bottom of Lebanon’s gravy train. Shiites were long reviled in that Sunni Muslim part of the Middle East and were also the poorest. They will not easily abandon Hezbollah, which brought them human dignity and social services.
If Lebanon is a free nation not controlled by the US, Hezbollah could also dominate Lebanon’s national army because it contains the only soldiers with experience in resisting a modern invasion. It is already present in the top echelons of the current army.
These prospects are undesirable for Israel and the US without a genuine peace that promotes friendship rather than simply avoiding war.
The hard lesson of recent decades is that violent and hardened militias cannot be defeated militarily whether in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq or India. The visceral Islamist enemies of Israel and India (in Kashmir) proactively seek martyrdom so long as they can kill before dying. They see no difference between soldiers and civilians because they believe that all Jews, Christians and Hindus are their enemies, including Muslims who cooperate with such non-believers.
The only way to win against them is to make them irrelevant for the people who hide them in their homes. That requires making the carrots much bigger and the sticks much smaller.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
14 Responses to “Generosity in war”
One of the finer posts I’ve read on this site, and on the Israel-Lebanon conflict in general. Thank you. Let’s stop this blustering about “victory” and start to cultivate a political culture in the Middle East that makes terrorism less desirable. Ironically, this is the basis of Bush’s strategy – real democracy makes terrorism a less attractive alternative. But to make it work we have to jettison all delusions that military might – American or Israeli – can stimulate this sort of transformation. This was our failing in Iraq, and it may be Israel’s failing in Lebanon.
Great post and I fully agree that Military might will not solve this problem. There needs to be a diplomatic solution – but how do you achieve one if you are Israel? The people you negociate with (Hamas and Hezbollah) dont’ fullfill their end of bargans, no one steps in to force compliance and other key actors (Iran and Syria) are not even being engaged.
One thing that I think Israel did achieve is a deeper understanding about how tenuous things are in the Middle East. I don’t think that Israel’s existence is threatened by either Hamas or Lebanon but Iranian nuclear missles … perhaps the Sunni arab countries, Russia and China may be a little more open minded to dealing with Iran now. I hope so else I could see Lebanon being a warmup for the main event next time.
Finally! something different for a change and something truly moderate. Bravo Brij.
I’m a little nervous of elegant and simple solutions which rely on the ability of others to recognize generosity.
Rule one : follow the money.
We don’t know where Hezbollah and Hamas are getting their funding. If it’s just the government of the country housing them, yes, turning public support might work, and to turn support you have to do more than make the bad guys look bad, you have to make the good guys look good.
But democracies, largely, don’t do well promoting terrorism. Hezbollah’s too much of a treat to the other political parties to be encouraged or given arms, unless the other parties like their candidates being shot in the head. And many of the captured Hezbollan arms don’t match the Lebanese military (and, yes, we do know – we rearmed a good 80-90% of Lebanon’s military forces to their current status).
If the weapons and funding are from other countries, the ‘hearts and minds’ of the people of Lebanon woon’t matter. And turning tail and running will only encourage these other countries – who weren’t punished, weren’t damaged – without doing the maximum economy damage (since weapons, ammunition, transportation, and training, all aren’t cheap).
While it’s not the most effective strategy, the ‘bleed the enemy’s coffers dry’ tactic is fairly well proven.
Let me join in applauding this post.
The only way to win against them is to make them irrelevant for the people who hide them in their homes. That requires making the carrots much bigger and the sticks much smaller
I think it’s understÆ¡d here that Israel can’t do it with carrots alone any more than it can with the stick alone. Ideologues on boths sides will always object to the proportionate response that aggressive incidents against Israel provoke.
The point of the gun is only going to enlicit one response….war.
Untill the people that have the ability to alter the world realize you can’t force people to do what you want (other than dictators) the merry go round of war is going to continue. War has it’s place, and I am not some peace and love hippie type, but it’s gotta be used only when nessicary. Israel had a good chance to put Hezbollah in a bad situation when this started, if they had just been more thoughful of peace after the war with Hezbollah was over. If they had hurt Hezbollah in the southern part of Lebanon only, recognized Lebanon’s government (a carrot), and asked them to assist them in the recovery of the 2 IDF soldiers. Maybe it wouldn’t have been perfect, but undercutting these kinds of organizations by offering an olive branch to one of the ME whipping boys (Lebanon) causes terrorist groups to loose operating areas, and public support. Instead the IDF bombs Beirut back to the early 1980′s thus making Hezbollah possibly more popular…bad move.
Israel says it does not negotiate with terrorists. They consider Hezbollah terrorists. The shia say they have no tanks, no airplanes they have only their bare hands to fight those whom have taken away their land. They call themselves the “resistance”.
Then how do the Shia Arabs in Lebanon get their 9,000 Arab POWs back from Israeli prisons? By capturing some trading stock, thats how. By getting the attention of Israel and the world.
Really, Hezbollah was left no choice. The Israelis have NEVER tried to sooth these people. They NEVER tried to create some kind of dialog. They just put forth threats as if they were not impressed by these lowly mongrels across the boarder. You don’t have any tanks and airplanes and screw your little silly rockets. Come back when you have something to negotiate with. So they did.
All money gained by Hezbollah will be used to kill Israelis. Period.
Great post by Brij Khindaria with some truly salient points. However, the rebuttal by gattsuru
Was a more realistic account of what Israel is currently facing? Ultimately the carrots will need to come into play. But not while Hezzbalah is in a position to continue the bombing nor while it is able to resupply.
Brij Khindaria also exposes the culpability of those who harbor Hezzbalah and allow them to operate within their community.
But most impressive was the tone used to express each of these divergent opinions.
Completely agree, Pyst. Because the people that the Lebanese will look to when its time to rebuild will be Hezbollah. They have been building schools, hospitals and providing social services-just as Hamas has in Palestine. On CNN there was a special showing truckloads of Hezbollah driving around with windows and doors and other construction materials. They knocked on doors to see if anyone needed repairs-then did them for free.
Demonizing them and trying to root them out and destroy them will destroy Lebanon as well, earning the wrath of those whose hearts and minds George Bush says he is trying to win. It makes me doubt his sincerity.
The Israelis hired the Christian Phalange to butcher Palestinians in South Beruit during their incursion in the 80s. 600 hundred Palestinians civilians were murdered under then defense minister Sharon.
Lets not forget the Israelis are no better than the Hezbollah in this forever conflict. They do NOT CARE if they destroy Lebanon or kill Lebanese and never have.
I’m not so sure. There is so much past baggage now, and militancy, that I don‘t see any type of peace arrangement. I think you would have to have a complete change in mindset, an end to the virulent anti-Semitism of Hezbollah, before a true lasting peace could be made. You would also need major concessions by Israel on Jerusalem, the settlements, and the right of return. Neither side is capable of that kind of shift.
I applaud this post. I think one thing that is overlooked to often in these debates is a underestimation of the power of economic incentives and the strong desire for economic and physical security. The general population is willing to make many concessions if they have a strong reason to believe that the outcome will lead to more economic and physical security for their families.
Boring Lecture Follows:
99% of people people want the same thing – security and an opportunity to maintain/enhance the well being of their family. In developed countries, most people rely on the state and its legal apparatus to maintain their physical and economic security. They have access not only to police, but also banks, stock exchanges, and other titles to private property.
In less developed countries, often, people cannot rely on the state to provide this security. Their land may not have clear title, their banks may fail, their currency may devalue, the police may not appear. They really only have one way to manage risk, by investing social capital in other people in their community (and primarily their children).
This forces them to rely much more on immediate family, extended family, and their community than we are accustomed to in developed countries. Often to preserve their security, they make sacrifices of individuality and liberties that we take for granted.
They are at the mercy of the major power and consensus in the community. If given a viable alternative that provides for economic opportunity coupled with more security, I think most people will choose allegiances that move their families in that direction of increased individuality and liberty. However, until there are institutions that can guarantee both economic and physical security, their allegence will remain with the powers in their local community.
Unfortunately, the events of the past two weeks have probably weakened local’s perception that the the Lebanese government can offer long term economic or physical security. This will surely lead to a strengthening of loyalty to local community groups (such as Hizbollah) and not the national government.
Excellent post.
gattsuru writes:
“We don’t know where Hezbollah and Hamas are getting their funding.”
You may not know but the Mossad and NSA are well-informed in these matters.
Sal, as usual, completely in moonbat territory:
“Then how do the Shia Arabs in Lebanon get their 9,000 Arab POWs back from Israeli prisons?”
Where did you get this figure from, Hizbollah.org? There are only two, TWO, Lebanese prisoners in Israeli prisons. Both are convicted terrorists. One, Samir Kuntar, is serving multiple life sentences for killing a four-year-old girl with a rifle butt.
WEVS1 wrote:
Where did you get this figure from, Hizbollah.org? There are only two, TWO, Lebanese prisoners in Israeli prisons.
***************************************************
I suppose you actually saw just those TWO Lebanese prisoners with your own eyes, and ARE NOT depending on some Mossad report you read somewhere or perhaps you took THE GUIDED TOUR WHEN YOU WERE THERE.
The last time I was in Israel, 2004, there were considerably more than TWO Lebanese in Istaeli prisons. This I saw with MY OWN EYES!