What further hell may follow the latest killings in Lebanon?
JVL Introduction
This furious, if despairing blogpost from Jonathan Cook may well provoke further fear. What are the lessons we are supposed to draw from Israel’s actions in Lebanon along with its ongoing destruction of Gaza, its attacks in the West Bank and, indeed, the not so veiled wider threats from Netanyahu in his speech to the United Nations on September 27th 2024?
Calling for an end to the killings in Gaza and in Lebanon does not mean support for Hamas or/and Hezbollah but a concern about human lives and also for future peace. A Ceasefire plan for Gaza would impact on a ceasefire plan for Lebanon (and reduce if not eliminate the attacks from the Houthis) but Israel, certainly the political and military leaders of Israel, seem uninterested in peace.
Cook felt obliged to write a disclaimer “Nothing in this post, in line with Section 12 of the UK Terrorism Act, in any way indicates, or should be seen to be encouraging, support for any group designated as a terrorist organisation by the British government.” We are obviously in the same position and we oppose all forms of terrorism, including that from a recognised State as well as that from non State players. How can we make this stop?
LL
This article was originally published by Substack on Sat 28 Sep 2024. Read the original here.
In killing Nasrallah, Israel chose to open the gates of hell. We'll all pay the price
The West, via Israel, is fomenting for Hezbollah and the Shia resistance their own ISIS moment. Moderates are once again losing the argument – because we lost it for them
Loading article text…
Surely Israel’s actions – in this case the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah – are attempts to widen the war – in this case by bringing in Iran. Netanyahu sees the continuation of war as his only way to keep hold of power and I guess – “guess” because I have no way of assessing the mood of Israeli Jewish citizens – he feels he’s in a win-win situation, whereby either he succeeds in widening and continuing the war or he succeeds in humiliating Israel’s enemies for their failure to respond with equivalent terror and equally bloody consequences.
This is not one of Jonathan Cook’s better posts. It serves no purpose to pose the problem in terms of ‘moderates’ v ‘extremists’ (terrorists). A Shi’ite version of ISIS is highly unlikely,
No one can doubt Israel’s tactical victory, first with the exploding pagers and now the assassination of Nasrallah and Hezbollah’s entire leadership. However if Israel goes ahead with the ground offensive and attempts to colonise South Lebanon it will turn victory into defeat.
The real question is why Hezbollah walked into this. In playing with the tiger Hezbollah gave Israel time to plan its counter attack. If Hezbollah was going to attack Israel it should have done what Israel has done when it had the chance to do so, which is to launch an overwhelming offensive at the beginning after having demanded Israel cease its genocide in Gaza. Instead it acted as Iran’s proxy and Iran is nothing if not cautious.
Hezbollah’s other problem was that it was part of the corrupt, confessionalist and nepostic Lebanese state. It is a problem of politics. Neither Hamas nor Hezbollah have sought the overthrow of the existing Arab regimes. Hamas quashed the initial protests against Mubarak in 2011 in Gaza. Hezbollah went to the rescue of the Assad regime in Syria.
Both organisations are limited by their Islamist politics. Israel exists to defend and support the existing American client regimes in the Middle East and that should provide a clue. Building a region wide movement aimed at their overthrow. Islamic politics is incapable of that which is why both have acted as proxies of the repressive Iranian regime which has proved to be a paper tiger.
Whether or not Hezbollah recovers from the devastating Israeli attacks in the short-term is doubtful However Israeli hubris is also likely to embroil it in further adventures which will prove its undoing. Israel has succeeded only in the short-term in staving off its own demise.
It is a simple, if understated fact, that Zionists – both Christian and Jewish – are not interested in a peace that leaves non-Jews in possession of any part of ancient Zion / The Holy Land. Christians believe the End-of-Times prophecy that having Jews once more in possession of “The Promised Land” will pave the way for the Second Coming, (along with the Third Temple being built on Temple Mount, for which plans are advanced). All this ignores the fact the God gave the Promised Land to ALL the descendants Israel who almost certainly include Palestinians. Even Jews intermarried, (certainly the aristocracy), before the formalisation of Judaism after Exile in Babylon forbade the practice.
The US has been angling for an excuse to attack Iran for decades as they have Russia, they just need the rest of the West to give them the nod. Israel is a willing catalyst.