Tell me More. Please...

Please, tell me more about your "Resistance" project, and how you are fighting the good fight against imperialism and occupation and cultural hegemony. About how you think the necktie is a remnant of the uniform worn by the old Knights Templar (it's not but I like to see you keep bringing that up). Tell me more about how the freedom of the individual, this so-called negative and positive freedom you keep liking to invoke, is so, so, very important to the historic struggles of the brown man as he shakes off the yoke of his oppressor. Tell me about your amazing plan to liberate Jerusalem, for the dignity of all Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims (no dignity to any of them until then, of course). Tell me about your glorious leaders and martyrs, about "keeping your word" with a brutal dictator who has butchered the Syrian people just so that he can be a president like his Daddy.

You'll only be happy to, I am sure. But right now there is something you're not telling me. Right now the so-called "Zionist Enemy" has, through their courts and laws, imprisoned a former president on charges of rape, and that there is a former prime minister who will now serve six years in prison on charges of bribery. Maybe they're not as good at picking their leaders as you are. And you definitely don't want to tell me about how your torture chambers make anything the villainous "Empire" can think of, including Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib - yes, especially them - look like Disney land in comparison. You don't want to tell me that your pet dictator and the militias you send to support him have killed more Syrians than everybody killed by US drone strikes since 2001. That they have displaced in three years more Syrians than the "Zionist enemy" ever did when it took part of Palestine in 1948, and then the rest of it in 1967. I guess these are things you don't want to tell me about...


.

Syria: Hezbullah's Quagmire?

Nasrallah's speech earlier today was, rhetoric not withstanding, a declaration of war on Syria. Syria, as some people would like us all to forget, is not the Assad regime, it is the Syrian people. And it is the Syrian people that are revolting against Assad, a fact that Nasrallah conveniently ignores in his discourse. His talk today was couched in the same kind of vague language that the Syrian regime uses to refer to the "crisis", with veiled references to "outside actors" without mentioning names, and with promises that details may perhaps be revealed "in future". That is all fluff, and observers will notice that the rhetoric Nasrallah uses to explain Hezbullah's sometimes controversial (to his followers) behaviour is intended to filter down the cult of resistance pyramid - to politicians, journalists, and social media - and shape the discourse. In this way he creates the epistemic grounds for legitimizing what his party does. But that is another blog post for another day.

Most interesting to me was Nasrallah's statement regarding Damascus. He promised that Damascus would never fall militarily and I believe he means what he says. It is one thing when all of us feel that a sustained push against the regime in Damascus is long overdue, but another thing when Nasrallah confirms this view because that means that somebody is in a position to try and take the city soon.

The statement that the city will "never fall" can mean two things, and neither bode well for the Damascenes and other Syrians who have fled there. The first is that Hezbullah (and Iran) may be heavily invested in the capital and will emerge in full force to support Assad when the campaign begins, and secondly that there will be such a rain of destruction on the city that Aleppo will look like a walk in the park in comparison. Assad's artillery and bases on Mount Qasiyoon, overlooking Damascus, have been raining destruction on the city suburbs for almost a year, and can easily level the old city if it looks like the regime will lose it. But this is not yet the case, and here it looks like Nasrallah's warning is intended to point to an alternative that he desires, negotiations. But these are not the negotiations that most people would understand.

I've said previously that when Assad's allies speak of "negotiations", they use a different meaning. Assad will use "negotiations" to refer to discussions with a loyal opposition, whilst his allies really mean negotiations between the United States and Russia on one level, and perhaps an uneasy understanding between the Gulf states and Iran on the other. The elephant in the room is the Syrian opposition in all its flavours, from the Muslim Brotherhood to the Muaz al Khatib current. This is because they are the only party that Assad and his allies cannot allow to operate freely within Syria. To allow any of these currents will mean genuine political plurality and a real challenge to the regime, therefore its downfall.

The recent, and controversial, statement addressed to him by Muaz al Khatib appears to have not even registered with Nasrallah. Instead he chose to focus, as an ally of Assad, purely on the narrative that there is an international conspiracy against the Syrian regime and that negotiations should really be with the "foreign backers" of these armed gangs. This is unfortunate and he may come to regret this olive branch later, especially when the fighting reaches Lebanon - and it will at some point.

Between Assad negotiating with his loyal opposition, and his foreign allies pushing for the world to abandon Syria's revolution, the real Syrian opposition in all its spectrums, is to be starved to death, and the Syrian people will be returned back to their fifty year induced coma. In summary, Nasrallah has dug in his heels over Assad's regime and declared war on Syria. His party will fight on under the pretence of protecting Lebanese in the country, and on the pretence of protecting the shrine of a woman who is revered by Sunnis as well as Shiites.

Hezbullah is now fully embroiled in the Syrian quagmire, and has committed itself to supporting the Assad regime. This is a grave error of judgement for while Hezbullah might be strong in Lebanon, it is not strong in Syria. One need only recall the dreadful blow it received through the assassination of Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus a few years ago, right in the heart of Assad's security district. Furthermore, Hezbullah's soldiers are not familiar with the territory they are fighting in, and they are far from their supply lines and support base.

It is clear they have been having an extremely difficult time in the Qusayr, which may be part of the reason why he chose to address his followers about it and also to justify the involvement. Finally, whilst the situation in Lebanon is still not serious enough to concern him, politics in Lebanon can escalate very quickly. By underestimating his domestic opponents and involving himself with a costly fight in Syria, Nasrallah will compound his errors and find himself biting off more than he can chew.

Nasrallah told us tonight that it is not important how "you" understand the situation (regarding Shiite interests in Syria), but how other people (his people) see it. But with his fighters trickling back to Lebanon in boxes, Mr Nasrallah seems to be misreading the situation. The only people who's understanding he needs to consider carefully is that of the Syrians, and they have already made their views of his involvement very clear. It was not long ago that Israel slipped away during the night after its failed and costly involvement in Lebanon. Today Hezbullah appear to be making the same mistake. .

Squaring Hezbullah's Circle - An Exercise in Futility

I've been meaning to comment about Amal Saad Ghorayeb's article, "Why Hezbullah Supports the Assad Regime" for some time now and simply never had the time. I think distinguishing Hezbullah's understanding of liberty as "positive" and the Syrian protesters understanding of liberty as "negative" doesn't stand up to scrutiny. In her conclusion she says that:

Hezbollah’s understanding of freedom as a positive freedom to control one’s destiny and to achieve self-determination, both digresses from and surpasses the liberal preoccupation with the negative freedom from external constraints and hindrances. To be free is not to be left alone but to continually struggle for justice. It is for this reason that Hezbollah is inherently antagonistic to liberal uprisings like Syria’s which focus their efforts on freeing themselves from state control at the expense of the struggle against US and Israeli colonialism.

I never liked this dichotomy (which is posited by Isaiah Berlin) and have always found it to be arbitrary, and Saad-Ghorayeb's use of this term is just as problematic. On what basis does she put the Syrian protesters in a box and label their uprising as "liberal", and what exactly makes Hezbullah so unique that its version of freedom is to control one's destiny and achieve self-determination? One could just as easily say the same about the Syrian protesters, who do not have self-determination and certainly don't have control of their own destiny. It is sad that an academic like Ghorayeb has to resort to such verbal acrobatics in order to square Hezbullah's circle.

Contrary to her idea that this dual understanding of freedom would help us understand Hezbullah's position regarding Syria, which only muddies the water, I suggest we apply Ockham's razor, and reduce this issue to its simplest. Syria is a key ally of Hezbullah, and without the Assad regime, Hezbullah's position will be very difficult to maintain and leave the group more isolated. Ergo, Hezbullah needs to support Assad and ignore the demands of the Syrian people to be free from oppression and free from the threat of oppression. .

Nasrallah and Events in Syria

Many people, including myself, have been very disappointed that Iran and Hezbullah have sided completely with the Syrian regime whilst also proclaiming themselves to be against Israeli and American oppression in the Middle East. At the same time, in London, I have heard news that the Bahraini opposition has sided with the Syrian pro-government 'protestors' and the Libyan pro-government protestors. So what do we make of all this?

Two Camps in the Middle East

As I've mentioned on previous posts, the revolutions in the region are not happening in a vacuum. There are two camps in the region, the pro-Western 'moderate' camp and the Iranian led 'resistance' camp. Whilst the Arab awakening has affected both camps, it is clear that each camp is only eager to support revolutions and unrest in the separate camp. So Iran, Syria, Hezbullah and Shia Iraqi's are eagerly supporting the Bahraini revolution and backing the Gaddafi regime, whilst the Gulf States, Jordan and the United States are supportive of the Benghazi government in Libya and the protestors in Syria. All of this means that what started off as a legitimate wave of Arab revolutions is now at serious risk of being subverted and manipulated.

Protestors in Syria are, quite rightly, becoming strongly anti-Iranian and anti-Hezbullah whilst you find intellectuals such as al Jazeera's Ghassan Bin Jeddo and popular leaders like Nasrallah are now siding clearly with oppressive regimes because it is far more important to them that the United States and Israel be resisted and defeated than that their people live dignified and decent lives. Nasrallah's recent speech was like a slap in the face for many Syrians who deeply respected him. But was it really necessary for him to comment about events in Syria? No, that was a bad move, just like his comments regarding what is happening in Bahrain. He should have kept quiet.

Resistance or a Decent life - Mutually Exclusive?

Obama, now emboldened after his soldiers killed Osama Bin Laden, now feels ready to start turning the tide in the Middle East. Ambitious financial packages for Tunisia and Egypt, a strengthened committment to the Israeli state (in spite of his '1967 borders' claim in his recent speech) and a belligerent Netanyahu who has made it very clear how the Israelis will continue to do business. Coupling this with the admission of the Moroccans and the Jordanians into the GCC can give the GCC a projection force of 10,000 additional soldiers and now means that the Gulf Cooperation Council is a club for the Arabian monarchies. We can see this confident Saudi-led foreign policy with their involvement in crushing the revolt in Bahrain.

Naturally this is making the 'resistance' countries of the region extremely nervous. But frankly this can never justify the repression of their own people's legitimate demands and grievances. There can be no reforms whilst people are getting shot in the street, imprisoned and tortured, and harassed by security services and paramilitary thugs. The clumsy reaction of the Syrian regime is tragic, and now there are 1,100 people who have been murdered, with an additional 10,000 Syrians being imprisoned and tortured in the name of resistance and national security. It didn't need to be that way and this will not be forgotten by the people. If the 'resistance' countries think they will make any progress against Israel or American-led designs for the region, they are mistaken if they believe that people will put up with corruption, a lack of dignity and police brutality in the name of resistance. By ignoring this very simple fact, they risk losing everything - and they will.

Universal Opposition to the Arab Awakening

One thing we can be certain of is that both the 'moderate' and the 'resistance' camps, as well as Israel, the United States and Tehran, are all deeply worried about the Arab Awakening, and will do everything possible to stop it. I don't think this is something they will be able to do. We are in for a very long period of unrest, surprises and revolution. The result will be virtually unrecognisable and there will sadly be a lot of suffering and bloodshed. This is only the beginning.

.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon and sanctions on Iranian officials - what does it all mean?

There is something particularly interesting about the coverage of Iran, Syria and Hezbullah in Western news media. In 2006 the media were near hysterical with their analysis of these key players in the stage we call the Middle East. Iran was ominous, threatening and dangerous. Hezbullah was almost terrifying in the mystique it exuded, and have-a-go analysts were falling over each other to give interviews about this movement. Yet in the last two years something has changed, particularly as Western impotence in the face of these countries and their growing power became more apparent. In 2008 America's stooges in Lebanon were utterly routed in less than 8 hours, in Iran the "Versace" activists and their Western cheerleaders learned the hard way that you cannot have a revolution using Facebook and Twitter, let alone with an absolute minority in a country which is still overwhelmingly pro-Ahmedinejad and pro-Islamic Republic. In Syria the idea of "regime-change" espoused by the Bush administration also failed, and the West's star player in Lebanon, Prime Minister Saad al Hariri, recently visited Damascus to present his credentials. Yet today, and across the Right-Left political spectrum that defines Western ideologies, newspapers deal with Iranian statements with an irreverance that borders on the comical. Articles regarding Iranian "boat-planes" are derided whilst statements by the Iranian president concerning the 9-11 attacks are, like his statements concerning Israel, taken out of context yet again. Statements made by Hassan Nasrallah are mostly ignored or treated with a certain contempt and skepticism, even Turkey's Erdogan is a subject of ridicule by the secular Turkish media, "Mr 1 minute", for his interjections with Shimon Peres, and for his principled positions concerning Gaza and the Palestinian people. In Syria, every now and then some silly article about silly Syrian activists is pushed to the surface of news coverage. In all fairness, Syria has received far less of the criticism, and this is mainly due to an excellent and politically savvy foreign policy that has defined this country as a player that can punch far beyond their weight.

So what can explain this change in the way the supposedly free Western media covers this Middle Eastern alliance? Well one possible answer lies in the dramatic shift in the West's psychology towards the region. People with a longer attention span than the last three months will recall the sheer terror and apprehension that the world felt prior to invading Iraq. Even within the region, the public stocked up on gas-masks, bread, supplies and water. Countries in Europe wondered if Iraqi missiles could reach their cities, the Israelis held their breath, and probably hovered a finger over their nuclear launch buttons. This awe with which an Arab and Muslim country was held with was eroded gradually over ten years of sanctions until the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which dissipated it completely. Apparently George Bush believed it was "Mission Accomplished". Since then, this healthy awe has been building up again and is now unchallenged. The bully recognises that they cannot hurt people without being hit back, and this makes countries like the United States, Great Britain, France, and Germany very nervous.

There will be a confrontation with Iran, Hezbullah and Hamas and this is unquestionable. This author firmly believes that prior to simply charging into battle with all guns blazing, there is a certain amount of preparation and public attenuation that must take place. Firstly, people are more at ease when they can ridicule that which once gave them fear. Secondly, generating weighty international legal paper-trails give military actions or sanctions an added justification. In this case we can see a meticulous construction of sanctions on Iran aimed at clearing the ground before the battle. Firstly there is the delegitimisation and ridicule of the regime, so that it would be more difficult for critics to oppose a war against that country; Secondly sanctions; Thirdly, targetting of key figures in the Iranian military-industrial complex in a list which, according to Secretary of State Clinton, will grow further with time; and finally, hard-biting international arrest warrants for key figures in Hezbullah through the politicised, and now discredited, Special Tribunal for Lebanon that was allegedly made to investigate the death of the Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri over five years ago.

What we are witnessing in effect is a tightening of the noose around the key players in the region. It is inevitable, and not just highly likely, that the future and shape of the Middle East will again be decided with arms as the West prepares a second attempt at beating the natives into submission. The only way to prevent a third attempt from ever being contemplated would be for Hezbullah, or Iran, to pull off a victory on a par with the Viet Minh's defeat of the French at Dien Bien Phu, a victory that would completely shock the political minds of the United States and her allies and impose a new political reality for the region, thus transforming it.

.

An analysis - Iran sanctions

The United Nations Security Council have voted in favour of a fresh round of economic sanctions against Iran, the BBC reports. This set of sanctions have been watered down considerably and interestingly aim at stopping the delivery of weapons such as helicopters and missiles from being delivered to Iran. This is curious as Iran actually builds its own missiles, though perhaps the sanctions also cover components that are vital for manufacturing them.

Furthermore, Turkey and Brazil are not happy with these sanctions, earlier Robert Gates expressed "concern" about the collapse of relations between Turkey and Israel. China and Russia helped to water down the sanctions considerably whilst Lebanon abstained from the vote, naturally. Will this affect Iran? Unlikely, the report quotes Ahmedi Nejad as saying that the sanctions were like a dirty handkerchief that needs to be thrown away.

This is just another sign of the tightening grip that the United States has been trying to impose on the Islamic Republic. Only recently Obama approved the increase of the reserve stock of weapons that the Israeli state can rely upon when it wages one of its wars. From around $800 million, this is now around $1.1 billion or so, an increase of about 50%. Israel has also asked for more JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) modules which are apparently very useful for transforming cheaper, "dumb" bombs into precision guided bombs. Israel dropped many bombs,with devastating effect, in Lebanon (2006) and Gaza, more recently, using this technology.

It's also noteworthy that Israel just finished the fourth major nationwide exercise only very recently and Hassan Nasrallah made his clearest warning yet on the 25th of May 2010 that Israeli shipping will be a target throughout the Mediterranean as well as the Red Sea if a naval blockade of Lebanon is put in place in the next war the Israelis wage against that small country. These are powerful words and although the world media have generally ignored this warning, I'm sure that the people who need to know about this in Washington and Tel Aviv have taken note.

Will there be a war this summer? I think the decision for war has always been with the Americans and Israelis. We probably won't see any steps towards it by Iran or Hezbullah as that would give the pretext to their enemies to begin massive attacks and might affect public opinion. Then again, the Israelis do not want a war before they are absolutely ready. If they fight this time they have to fight to win. I think Damascus and many cities in Syria will also be bombed if there is a war this time. The chances of this happening are not certain but it is more than likely.

The role of Syria in arming and assisting Hezbullah has not gone unnoticed. I doubt the Syrian front will hold up as strongly as the Lebanese south though, and this might be something Hezbullah will have to factor in. In 1967, the Israeli army attacked and conquered the Golan Heights precisely by going around them via weaker (at the time) Lebanon and then attacking the positions from the rear. This time a similar plan might be a wiser move for the Israelis regarding the south of Lebanon. However, if Syria has a surprise for the Israeli air force, like it did in the opening days of 1973, then the Syrian Republican Guard might just about be able to face off the Israeli army using the same tactics Hezbullah did. In 2006 tank hunter teams with missiles inflicted a heavy toll on Israel's Merkava tanks and the Israeli airforce was unable to dent Hezbullah's heavily dug in defences and tunnels. It would be stupid if the entire front Syria has with Lebanon right up until Damascus isn't already a patchwork ant's nest of tunnels, defence positions and ambush holes. Still, Syria has excellent planners who are qualified in spite of their lack of resources, and they are very good at keeping secrets, so one can only hope they have enough tricks up their sleeves.

One thing that might be possible, and unlikely, is that Israel might attack Syria via Jordan. The Jordanian government, along with that of Egypt, are now firmly allied with the Israelis and a discreet approval for the Israelis to do so, it would be hard to see what Jordan can do if it rejected this, would allow Merkava tanks to cross into the entire south of Syria, push through past Damascus and straight into Lebanon, but that is ambitious and stretches Israel's supply lines. What they might do is use it to overcome Syria's defences and then clear a path straight into the East of Lebanon, but they might as well send a postcard to Hezbullah telling them that this is what they intend doing. Also there are very difficult mountains to cross between Syria and Lebanon, meaning that this wouldn't be a wise move for the Israelis.

Invading Lebanon from the sea is not an option either following Hezbullah's clear message that they have the ability to hit any navy ships blockading the Lebanese coast. Iran most certainly has what NATO calls the Sunburn surface to sea missile. This missile puts the entire sea between Lebanon and Cyprus within range of Hezbullah's defences, if they have that missile, as it has a range of about 110km.

Whenever the next war the Israelis and Americans want to wage actually begins, what is certain is that this will be a very, very different type of war to anything the region has seen since the fall of the Ottoman empire. Ad nauseum, I repeat again my firm belief that it is not if, but when, a new war begins in the Middle East. Any "reality" of peace agreements simply cannot be imposed on the Arabs as long as Hezbullah and Iran are major players in the region. This is not something obvious to many people, but Israel's existence as an entirely Jewish state centered on the Zionist ethos is depends on Israel being able to destroy Hezbullah and Iran. If they don't, then they really will have to follow Helen Thomas' advice to pack their bags and move back to Poland, Germany or America.

.

A word on Gabi Ashkenazi

Mark my words, Gabi Ashkenazi is somebody we will be hearing a lot more of in the near future. He's tough, experienced and has a sensible head on his shoulders. Firmly rooted in the old school way of the early Zionists, he's not somebody to underestimate and well respected in Israel, he's probably one of the few members of the Israeli establishment that hasn't, to my knowledge, had a pulsa diNura (ancient Hebrew curse) done on him yet. Usually in Israeli popular culture that means he can't be a politician yet, but these are desparate times for the Jewish state and, jokes aside, his presence amongst the current batch of clowns running the show there has a soothing effect on the people and the soldiers. That's why he's been appointed to his current role as well as to prepare the IDF for the next war with Hezbullah and potentially Iran.

Ashkenazi is considered the right man for the job as he was also head of intelligence for South Lebanon during the time that Israel occupied it so he knows Hezbullah and knows what they are capable of. Of course Hezbullah know him well too...but they've already defeated the Israelis twice. Commemorating the tenth anniversary of liberating the south of Lebanon, Hassan Nasrallah played down some concerns about Ashkenazi's appointment, putting him in perspective with what were actually quite sensible arguments rather than bombast (not that Nasrallah has ever resorted to bombast to my knowledge). Still, Hezbullah will have to be careful, this guy will be a tough nut to crack.

.

"Leave no man behind" - the Revolution's promise

In line with the long list of concessions that Western governments have made to Iran, we now find another deal surfacing.

"An Iranian convicted of the 1991 murder of Iranian former Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar has been released from prison in France."

And from the same article:

"Iran recently freed a French teacher who had been convicted of espionage after the presidential election."

That's the student who was arrested shortly after the Iranian elections and I remember having wondered what had happened to her. It turns out she has been in Iran all this time. The wikipedia entry on her is quite interesting, she is alleged to have been "volunteering" information about the situation in Iran for some time- note that the French DGSE is like the CIA or MI6, responsible for intelligence outside of France. The poor girl was probably in the wrong place at the wrong time and she's hardly a Mata Hari. Still, she has proved useful in more ways than she expected or hoped for.

On a slightly different subject, Iran still holds three American students who stupidly wandered near the border. Whether by themselves or in conjunction with further prisoners the Islamic Republic will acquire, it is still not clear whose release they are being held for. Bear in mind that an Iranian nuclear scientist, Shahram Amiri, "disappeared" whilst performing the Hajj in Saudi Arabia earlier this year. Colonel Amir Mohammed Shirazi of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards also "disappeared" in Turkey in 2007.

There are unofficial claims that these men have been captured by the United States, although the Americans say that these have been defections. In all probability it is doubtful that the American claims are true, firstly because Colonel Shirazi is not just any figure, this man is a big deal. During the eighties he was a key figure in the formation and structuring of Hezbullah in South Lebanon. People like Colonel Shirazi do not "defect"; they are "believers" in their causes. You might as well shoot someone like him before they betray their cause. As for Mr Amiri, his defection whilst his entire family is still in Iran is also highly unlikely.

The message we get consistently from all these actions is simply this, no man is left behind. To support this, just consider how Hezbullah recently secured the release of Samir Kuntar, something that was considered impossible previously. In 2008, Kuntar was also awarded the Syrian Order of Merit, Syria's highest honour, for enduring the longest period of imprisonment in an Israeli jail (three decades).

This brings us to the final point I wish to make. If the Islamic Republic and Hezbullah have this much dedication and patience for securing the release of their people, then it is highly likely that the same can be said when it comes to avenging their champions. Hassan Nasrallah, in one of his recent speeches, pointed out that Hezbullah is seeking a response which is fitting for a man of Mughniyeh's stature, not just a knee jerk reaction. Watch this space.

.

The Israeli "Iron Dome"

The Israelis are now putting in place the "Iron Dome" in preparation for the upcoming war with at least Hezbullah, if not also Iran. The thing with missiles is that they are the great force equaliser for armies without an enormous budget to still be able to punch above their weight. Up until now the Israeli military strength, with its carefully cultivated image of invincibility, has been unable to defend both the northern and southern inhabitants of its settlements and cities. This is very important, because if the Israeli citizen does not feel safe and does not feel like his army can defend him, he will go back to Europe or America because deep inside he knows he does not belong there. Whereas the Arabs have mostly had armies which were good at killing their own people, and of course they live under the constant threat of Israeli "non-declared" nuclear missiles.

Iran and Hezbullah recognise this simple fact, and have so far known how to squeeze Israel where it hurts the most. The Katyusha was originally used by the Soviets in Stalingrad and it is as effective today as it was against the Nazis. The Qassam rockets cost only a few hundred dollars to make, as opposed to the "Tamir" rockets that compose the Israeli "Iron" dome and which allegedly cost between $30,000 and $50,000. Now because of the cost it will probably not be feasible to have this "dome" in place over every settlement near the borders. It will probably be linked with the major cities and important positions.

Crucially, this defence network will be centered around Israeli airforce airfields and runways. In the last war with Hezbullah, Israel was soundly beaten back on the ground level. The destroying of one of its gunboats off the coast of Lebanon was also a major surprise. As this blog mentioned many times, Hezbullah needed to find a way of defending Lebanon from Israel's devastating air attacks, which are responsible for the majority of Lebanon's over 1000 civilian deaths during that conflict.

Hezbullah today has rockets like no other fighting force in history. In addition, if war erupts then it is unlikely that Iran will not be involved. Iran also has long range missiles designed specifically to reach major Israeli cities. In the event of the Israelis beginning a fresh series of attacks, it is highly likely that the next set of surprises will involve some form of neutralising of Israel's air capability. After all, a plane needs to land somewhere and if the runway has been destroyed then the jetfighter will need to land on some highway, far from resupply and rearming or repair depots.

Now Israel's top generals know this and are trying to counter the problem. It would be a serious issue for them if they find that they cannot rely on airpower and will have to send their ground troops in. Apart from a core of highly trained troops, Israel's conscript army is no match for Hezbullah in an invasion. The issue is a qualitative one. That's why it is important for Israel to have some form of shield that works. So far the tests of this Iron Dome are "said" to be positive, but remember this technology has not been used in anger before. The one advantage Israel has is that it can choose the time of battle, whereas Iran or Hezbullah rely on a defensive strategy. If Israel feels confident enough to press on with another attack because of this dome, it will be interesting to see what happens if, yet again, the IDF is unable to defend its territory from attack.

.

Art meets resistance

Fantastic picture I got from Amal-Saad Ghorayeb, who I'm sure got it from somewhere else. It is now adorning one of my walls in full A4 colour glory.

أرضكم أرضنا .. دمكم دمنا .. قدسكم قدسنا .. أبناؤكم أبناؤنا. واننا على موعد مع الصبح !! أليس الصبح بقريب ؟

"Your land is our land, your blood is our blood, your sons are our sons and we are awaiting the dawn, is not the dawn drawing near?"

Sayid Hassan Nasrallah

.

Every cloud has a silver lining?

Nicholas Noe writes for the Guardian on what he thinks is the silver lining for what is currently a very dark cloud. He is right in thinking that Hezbullah and the Christian Free Patriotic movement are most likely to win the elections, but to think that this would pressure Hezbullah to disarm are naive. When he talks about a "strong" Lebanese army being an incentive for the Party of God to drop their weapons, he misses the point that the majority of the army would be Lebanese Shia. He will also be sorely disappointed to know that the very concept of this "strong" army, in the eyes of Hezbullah and all its supporters, is identical with the capability, position and effectiveness of the movement as it stands at the moment, and the government will also be this way - especially with regards to the Zionist state. Washington and Tel Aviv also know this so I doubt very much that anyone will be taking much attention of Mr Noe's opinion. What a waste of five minutes.

.

From Eritrea to Curacao, the great game continues...

Seventeen people were arrested in Curacao for alleged involvement in a drug trafficking ring with connections to Hezbollah, police in the Dutch Caribbean island said today.

The suspects detained yesterday include four people from Lebanon and others from Curacao, Cuba, Venezuela and Colombia, police chief Carlos Casseres said at a news conference.

Some of the proceeds, funneled through informal Middle Eastern banks, went toward supporting groups linked to the militant Hezbollah organization in Lebanon, according to Casseres. The smuggling ring also allegedly forwarded requests from Lebanon for arms to be shipped from South America.

"We have been able to establish that this group has relations with international criminal organizations that have connections with the Hezbollah," prosecutor Ludmila Vicento said.

Island officials said the US and the Netherlands are helping them to investigate the alleged Hezbollah connection.

Two shipments of cocaine totaling 2,000 kilograms (4,400 pounds) have been seized from the ring in Curacao since the beginning of last year. The traffickers used cargo ships and speed boats to import the drugs from Colombia and Venezuela for shipment to Africa and beyond to Europe, according to Curacao authorities.

Several countries including the United States participated in the investigation leading to the arrests.

Authorities with the Drug Enforcement Administration and the US consulate in Curacao said they could not immediately comment on the case.

.

It is so sad to see Egypt the way it is today. The country which shook the world with the Suez nationalisation, that gave birth to Gamal Abd al Nasser - today the errand boy for the West and Israel. So what if Hezbullah are arranging supplies and weapons to reach the beseiged Gazans? 

.

The Empire strikes back

The new emperor spoke today, about the challenges of the empire and which men and women he will appoint to deal with the more troublesome parts on its frontiers. John Mitchell gave a boring and irrelevant talk about how committed he was to finding a solution between the Palestinians and the Israelis. I caught his speech from the point where he was saying something about 800 years and how somebody had come over to him and ask him whether he had said 800 years, twice. After replying twice that same person said, "Pah, such a recent argument." I rolled my eyes at such stupid shows, not from Mitchell, but from the quite clearly Zionist charmer who had spoke to him. The Zionists love to orientalise themselves and make themselves to be part of the land. At any point in a conversation with somebody they are trying to impress they will love making some anecdote about how tough and prickly they are from the outside, but sweet on the inside, on how they deal with the harshness of deserts and so on ad nauseum. Forget the fact that they are originally Eastern Europeans or Ashkenazi Jews who are more at home in Europe and North America than in the Middle East. Anyhow, I digress. Obama's speech had nothing but praise for Mubarak's Egypt, he made the usual Israeli pledge of allegiance and reassurance, and he made a number of allusions to the troublemakers in the region, Iran and Syria. For Syria, it was the promise of a potential peace deal, for Iran, a warning against supporting "terror" groups, that is Hamas and Hezbullah, as well as the many armed groups in Iraq. There will be more of the same support for "moderates" in the region, a strong endorsement of Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority, and a reiteration of his "commitment" to a "two-state solution". No American president's speech would be complete without an 'acknowledgement' of the suffering on "both" sides of this conflict, Palestinian and Israeli. Duly noted Mr. President. [middle finger here]

Oh and of course he promised not to torture people anymore, ordering the closure of Guantanamo and saying something about the people of the United States possessing values of some sort. I haven't a clue what these are, but I'm sure it would be a good idea if they did. There was actually little mention of Iraq, in the part of the broadcast that I managed to catch, and this was a little bit surprising.

It was very interesting that there is now one vizier, Richard Holbrooke assigned for both Pakistan and Afghanistan. This shows how bad the situation is now and how clear it is that Pakistan is now sinking into the battle between America and whoever it is fighting there. I couldn't help but wonder how soon it would be before there was a full scale American ground assault in the North Western provinces of that country. This might not be Obama's style, I think massive aid to strengthen the government of Pakistan will probably be more likely, but who knows. The first one hundred days of a US presidency are usually the key ones which define what comes later so let us see. I noted with some interest how Holbrooke considered John Negroponte as his friend. Also he felt it very important to reassure listeners that he took Pakistan very seriously, respecting its culture and history and so on. There will be interesting developments there soon I expect.

Doesn't everybody think it very interesting that the United States, said to be the world's greatest superpower, is unable to subdue the people of an area from the Mediterranean to central Asia? A new era of American power is indeed emerging, the empire is gathering its strength for a renewed strike, with flowers and guns this time. When this does reach a good momentum, we will see many people who secretly idolise the United States in the Arab world start singing its praises again. There will be a resurgence of "moderation" again, up until now a dirty word thanks to the honest and frank brutality of the Bush administration. I have surprised many people in the past by saying I preferred John McCain or even George Bush as presidents. People saw the ugly face of America for what it was. Well, the mask is now on and the same fools who always wanted to believe will again believe, and those who always rejected the lies will continue to be steadfast. It will be good now that the lines have become clearer.

.

Mughniyeh's "new school of fighting"

The excellent Amal Saad Ghorayeb writing for the Electronic Intifada:

Hamas' fighting style also seems to bear the hallmarks of the military tactics Hizballah used during the July War such as its use of underground bunkers and tunnel networks, as well as adopting similar rocket tactics, all of which suggest Hizballah's extensive training of Hamas' military forces. Nasrallah came close to admitting as much when he claimed on 31 December that "the resistance in Gaza benefitted more from these lessons [from the July War] than the Israelis." More than simply receiving military training, Hamas's military strategy appears to conform to the "new school of fighting" founded by Hizballah's assassinated military leader, Imad Mughniyeh (himself rumored to have personally trained and equipped several Palestinian groups over the years), which combines conventional and non-conventional, guerilla warfare that functions not only to liberate occupied territory, but to defend it from aggression.

This article is actually extremely good, if read carefully. On a side note which made me more impressed, I had checked the Wa3ad website prior to reading it and had noted how the banner now had a picture of Imad Mughniyeh on it, and an article by Ibrahim al Amin on the legacy of Mughniyeh and the result we find in Hamas' much improved performance against the Israeli invasion. I have said before and I will say again, when Hezbullah make a promise, they will keep it. They have promised a retaliation for Mughniyeh's death and that still hasn't happened yet. There is much much more coming. It was also interesting to see Ghorayeb's comment that Hezbullah have been much more scathing of an Arab regime than ever before, it looks like the gloves are off and the battle lines have been drawn. Those who are against Gaza are enemies. 

.

Hezbullah's website, Promise, is back online. It had been taken down earlier today with only a message saying we will be back soon.

.

From Haaretz:

"It is safe to assume that Palestinian operatives, working in coordination with Hezbollah and sponsored by Iran, are responsible for the rocket attacks in Nahariya and elsewhere in the north. The rocket fire also places Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah among the list of top Arab militant leaders. He doesn't just talk, he acts."

.

The giant speaks...

Not even a fly can come into South Lebanon without Hezbullah's approval. The missiles fired this morning are a warning. Initially I thought Hezbullah were not interested in escalating the situation since it would have been almost certain that Israel had prepared plans for a massive assault and only needed a pretext. The pretext is there, let us see what Hezbullah announce and what Israel decide to do.

.

Just like the 2006 war against Lebanon, the Gaza invasion has been planned well in advance and Hamas ending the ceasefire was just the excuse. It is interesting to see how well the Israelis have learned from their 2006 defeat, so far they are applying the same methods they used against Lebanon, ie. inflicting massive damage to infrastucture and killing large amounts of civilians to attempt to draw a wedge between the resistance and the people. They've just started their ground offensive, but unlike in Lebanon, where almost instantly the resistance inflicted heavy casualties, Hamas seems keen on drawing them further into Gaza. They are keeping their cards very close to their chest...Hezbullah are also silent...

.

The Russians are back

I just watched the latest speech by Hezbullah's Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, as I'm sure most Western and Israeli intelligence agencies did, with great attention. He's made what is probably his most serious threat to Israel to date but one thing interested me in his speech and this was his mention of Israel's threat to both Syria and Iran and to "those who are behind them", meaning the Russians. The Russians are said to have already supplied Iran and probably Syria with it's Tor M1 air defense systems but if Hezbullah has them as well then this would be an amazing coup. During the last war with Israel the Israeli Air Force managed to wreak untold damage on Lebanon's infrastucture and is responsible for the deaths of over a thousand civilians. For Hezbullah to be able to shoot down Israeli planes and deny the enemy control of the skies is a frightening prospect for the Israeli, who is most comfortable fighting his enemy from afar. There is one thing which is worrying, and this is that a cornered and wounded animal can be extremely dangerous. Israel is armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons and it is not beyond these people to threaten the whole Arab world should the Israeli army be incapable of defending the borders. It worries and angers me that these invaders have introduced such destructive weapons into the region.

.