Is Lebanon (Or Just Hezbollah) Defending Lebanon Against Incursions?

Question

Perhaps I missed it, but I keep hearing about how HEZBOLLAH is firing rockets; HEZBOLLAH is fighting Israel. I never hear about "regular" Lebanese troops, air force, etc. striking at Isreal.

Did I miss something?

If my understanding is correct, then one must wonder - why? If Canada (Mexico, anybody) attacked the US because an extremist group kidnapped someone (including rockets, bombs, and armed invasion), you can bet the George W would be attacking (and not just the extremist group that is targeted).

I understand that Lebanon is an American ally, but if my understanding is correct, won't this actually hurt the US? I can't but imagine that the general population will view the Israeli acts as an attack on their (Lebanese) territory, which should be defended by their government.

Won't this give HEZBOLLAH internal support -- at least they fought back?

The info I am looking for is not whether ISRAEL was justified in attacking, etc.

The question is whether LEBANON central government is defending its sovereign territory, or is it leaving those tasks to Hezbollah?

(Even if, for example, Canada were justified in trying to take out an extremist group in Michigan, if Canada marched into the US and fired missiles into US territory, I think Bush would defend our sovereign territory).

So, what I am inartfully asking is whether the Lebanon central government is doing any defending, or is it leaving that task to the terrorist organization.

Answer 1

Sorry, that was awful before. 2nd try: geez, you have too many questions ensnared together. I'll just try to answer the FIRST one re: "regular Lebanese troops". Must do it with an article I sent to a friend ages ago and was actually able to retrieve. Too tired to edit it for you but the long and short of it is: "The state is auxiliary to Hezbollah, which is really the army and the state." I apologize for its length but I think it offers great insight:

"The Nation of Hezbollah
The militants' raid is a sign that it sees itself as
an independent force in Lebanon and beyond."

By Megan K. Stack and Rania Abouzeid, Special to The
Times
July 13, 2006

BEIRUT — As Lebanon's largest political party and most
potent armed force, Hezbollah has long been described
as a "state within a state" — a Shiite Muslim
minigovernment boasting close ties to Iran and Syria.

But Wednesday's move across the border to capture two
Israeli soldiers went a step further: Hezbollah acted
as the state itself, threatening to drag Lebanon into
a war.

The country's elected government was still in meetings
Wednesday, arguing over what to say in public, when
Hezbollah chief Sheik Hassan Nasrallah went before
television cameras with a pointed threat for the
ruling elite.

"Today is a time for solidarity and cooperation, and
we can have discussions later. I warn you against
committing any error. This is a national
responsibility," the cleric said, looking every inch
the head of state.

Any criticism over the capture of the two Israeli
soldiers would be tantamount to colluding with Israel,
Nasrallah said, making it clear that he expected
citizens and officials to heed his orders.

"To the Lebanese people, both officials and
non-officials, nobody should behave in a way that
encourages the enemy to attack Lebanon, and nobody
should say anything that gives cover to attack
Lebanon," he said.

Nasrallah was careful to frame the raid — which
occurred less than three weeks after Palestinian
militant groups, including the Hamas military wing,
captured an Israeli soldier in a similar cross-border
attack just outside the Gaza Strip — as a noble strike
on behalf of Lebanon and Arab nationalism. Its goal
was to free Lebanese and other Arab prisoners, many of
them Palestinian, held in Israel by forcing Israel
into a prisoner swap, he said.

Nasrallah was unclear on how many prisoners he was
demanding be released.

Since Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000,
Hezbollah has generally limited its attacks on
Israelis to one small patch of disputed land known as
Shabaa Farms, which Hezbollah claims as Lebanese
territory.

But Hezbollah had long planned the audacious change to
a cross-border raid aimed at capturing Israeli
soldiers. The group failed in a similar operation late
last year.

"It's a very dangerous escalation," said Timur Goksel,
a former United Nations spokesman and advisor who
teaches at the American University of Beirut. "You
can't anymore claim it's an act of resistance. It's an
act of war."

The reasons behind Hezbollah's decision to flex its
muscle so aggressively may never be fully explained,
but the hostagetaking carried an unmistakable message
of defiance that seemed aimed not just at Israel, but
at fellow Lebanese, neighboring governments and the
West.

A Hezbollah spokesman in Beirut said the group had
seized the moment when it could.

"It's a military thing. It has nothing to do with the
political atmosphere," Hussein Naboulsi said.

"Catching Israeli soldiers is not a joke. It's tough
work, and it takes a lot of planning," he said. "They
found this moment, and they did what they did."

That may be so, but the timing of the move could prove
beneficial for Hezbollah and its allies.

In Lebanon, the action solidifies the group's position
as an armed entity independent of government control
at a time when it was coming under increasing pressure
to give up its weapons.

In the broader region, the move lends Hezbollah and
Nasrallah the credibility of taking up the Palestinian
cause as other Arab leaders are standing silently by.
Today's Tehran Times, for example, ran the story under
the headline "Hezbollah Rushes to Help Palestinians."

But the capture of the two soldiers Wednesday could
also force Hamas and Israel deeper into their
standoff. Some officials of the Hamas-led Palestinian
Authority had appeared to be edging toward a deal to
release Cpl. Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier seized
near Gaza last month. Now, it seems unlikely that
Hamas and Israel will be able to conclude any such
deal until Hezbollah is satisfied.

Internationally, the timing turns the captures into a
symbolic strike for Hezbollah's chief patrons, Iran
and Syria.


The raid comes as Iran remains locked in a standoff
with the West, particularly the United States, over
its controversial nuclear ambitions. The Bush
administration also has accused Iran of improper
meddling in the politics of oil-rich, war-ravaged
Iraq. The Hezbollah move into Israel may, at a
minimum, distract U.S. officials from their
confrontation with Tehran.

Syria was publicly shamed last year when it was forced
to withdraw soldiers from Lebanon. The product of
international pressure and an eruption of Lebanese
opposition, the Syrian withdrawal was widely seen as
the loss of the last piece of strategic value that a
weakened Damascus could claim — its last poker chip in
case of peace talks with Israel.


Last month, after Shalit was captured, the Israeli air
force further embarrassed the Syrians by plunging its
planes into Syrian airspace and staging a flyover of a
residence of President Bashar Assad. The buzzing of
the leader's home was widely interpreted as a warning
to the Syrians because of their support of Hamas.

Hezbollah's action Wednesday could be read, in part,
as Syria's response.

In Lebanon, ever since overt Syrian military control
was shaken off, pressure for Hezbollah's disarmament
has increased.

Dramatically linking Hezbollah with the cause of
freeing Lebanese prisoners may help deflect that
pressure. As the Israeli occupation of southern
Lebanon slipped into the dimmer reaches of memory,
many Lebanese had begun to suggest that Hezbollah's
weapons were more trouble than they were worth. The
guns drew scrutiny from the United States and a
warning from the United Nations.

Among Lebanese struggling to cast off the taint of
their country's 1975-90 civil war and steer the nation
back to prosperity, calls for Hezbollah to lay aside
its weapons and incorporate itself more fully into the
government and army have become increasingly vocal.

On Wednesday, despite Nasrallah's call for unity,
opinion in Lebanon was quickly divided.

Fireworks, cheers and cries of "God is great!" rang
through the pocked streets of the heavily Shiite
southern suburbs of Beirut as word of the captured
soldiers spread.

But in the polished eateries of Beirut's downtown,
newly rebuilt from the ruins of the war, some diners
grumbled through their lunch hour.

"What's happening now is dragging Lebanon into the
unknown. Nobody has the right to draw Lebanon into
such a conflict," former President Amin Gemayel, a
right-wing Christian, told the Lebanese Broadcasting
Corp. "This is unacceptable, and we reject it."

Last year, when Hezbollah abandoned its usual low
political profile to take over two ministries and seat
14 members of parliament in the current government,
some observers believed the Shiite Muslim militant
group was preparing to reinvent itself as a purely
political force. Those hopes flourished in spite of
Hezbollah's repeated insistence that it would keep its
guns and continue the fight against Israel.

Wednesday's raid made clear Hezbollah's position.

"Basically, they are saying, 'to hell with Lebanese
politics.' I never thought Hezbollah would disregard
so much the Lebanese politics and mood," said Goksel,
the former U.N. advisor. "It is certainly a very clear
message that they are not going to disarm. It's quite
a gamble for them."

Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, author of "Hezbollah: Politics and
Religion" and a professor at the Lebanese American
University, said it was apparent that Hezbollah had
never intended to give up its weapons.

"They joined the government for the exact opposite
reason — to shield the resistance. It becomes harder
now for the government to turn around and say, 'We
reject [Hezbollah's guns],' because they'd be
addressing themselves," she said.

"The state is auxiliary to Hezbollah, which is really
the army and the state."

Answer 2

If terrorists in Canada, Mexico, etc. attacked the US, I strongly expect you'd find the Canadians, Mexicans and so on dedicated to stopping the terrorists and swifting bringing them to justice. That's what's missing in Lebanon.

Suppose you were the Israeli prime minister. Hezbollah terrorists launch surprise attacks on your country. They kill and capture your soldiers, from out of the blue and without any provocation (other than that there seem to be unresolved border disputes, the kind we see all over the world but that do not lead to war anyplace else).

As prime minister, what do you do? Sweetly ask the Lebanese if they would be so kind as to arrest the terrorists? Not likely, especially since reports seem to indicate that the terrorists informed the pro-Syrian Lebanese president in advance that they planned to attack and kill or capture Israelis to hold as hostages, and he seemed to acquiesce.

Do you do nothing this time? How many Israelis are a suitable number to be killed and taken hostage before your government does something?

I agree with you about one thing: If terrorists attacked the United States (or Canada, Mexico, etc., etc.) from a foreign country which harbored terrorists, we (and the Canadians, the Mexicans, the French, the Russians, the Chinese, etc. etc. etc.) would act a lot more firmly than the Israelis did to protect their citizens. That's what governments are put there to do.

Answer 3

It's my understanding that Hezbollah has forced itself upon the Lebanese people. They have made civilian targets out of the Lebanese people because they house their weapons in HOUSES and SCHOOLS and anywhere where you and I would go on a daily basis. That way when Israel hits the targets Hezbollah can say Israel is trying to kill women and children. It's a fantastic strategy. As long as you don't care about the deaths of your own people. Unfortunately, Lebanon was forced into a horrible position by Hezbollah.
Imagine if a terrorist group hid weapons in homes and schools in Canada. We would go after the group, IN CANADA, full force if they ran onto American soil and kidnapped our soldiers? You better believe we would. And that would be interpreted as invading Canada. There would be Canadian casualties, but we would still do it.
The only people who want peace are people who don't understand the Muslim strategies and people who hate Jews.

Answer 4

An answer by a must-see news clip:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-galloway_060806,00.html