Ten days ago, Israel’s leaders were out to crush the Lebanese resistance no matter the cost so sure were they of their military’s overwhelming power. No one then was interested in a cease-fire or a prisoner exchange. The public was overwhelmingly gung ho according to polls. The usually forthright Israeli media morphed into a state propaganda arm deaf to global outrage. What a difference a week makes!
With more than 30 Israelis dead, sirens screaming over Israel’s northern towns, and soldiers failing to return from border incursions, Israel’s mood has changed from ebullience to concern.
Peretz is now urging the international community to approve a NATO force in the south of Lebanon — the brainchild of Kofi Annan, Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac.
A week ago the Israeli government opposed it, saying such a force would obstruct Israel’s military retaliation capabilities.
On Sunday, Washington Post staff writer Robin Wright told us that the US, the EU, the UN and Israel have concluded, “that despite punishing military attacks, Hezbollah is likely to survive as a political player in Lebanon.”
“Israel now says it is willing to accept the organization if it sheds it military wing and abandons extremism,” says Wright.
The Israel daily Ha’aretz reports that Israeli ministers and Knesset members are beginning “to express reservations” over a ground operation while other ministers are dissatisfied “that a diplomatic initiative had not yet been presented.”
An Israeli columnist, Yossi Sarid, writes: “With eyes wide shut, Israel once again blunders into Lebanon’s trap of fools starting a ‘ground activity’ that it may not be able to get out of for a long and bloody time.”
What happened? Why the dramatic turnaround?
For starters, it doesn’t look as though the US has had much to do with it. Washington is expediting delivery of precision-guided bombs to Israel and had to be dragged kicking and screaming behind the idea of a peacekeeping border force.
What about global public opinion? Could this be curbing Israel’s swagger and strut?
It’s doubtful that even the sight of angry protesters flooding the world’s capitals last Saturday brandishing swastikas, burning flags, and hoisting coffins draped in black would deter Israel from its greater goals.
Could it be worried about worsening international relations?
Certainly it must have punctured Israel’s balloon somewhat to hear the British Junior Foreign Minister Kim Howells on Saturday describing Israeli tactics as indiscriminate.
“These have not been surgical strikes,” he said. “It’s very, very difficult to understand the kind of military tactics that have been used. You know...if they’re chasing Hezbollah, then go for Hezbollah. You don’t go for the entire Lebanese nation.”
It must have been uncomfortable listening for Israelis to hear the condemnation of UN Emergency Relief Chief Jan Egeland describing the destruction of Beirut as “horrific” while suggesting it could constitute a violation of humanitarian law. But then again, Israelis have always believed the UN is inherently anti-Israel.
Could Israel’s conscience have been pricked at the sight of so much death and devastation wrought by their bombers? Probably not! Scenes of children’s burned and broken bodies are barred from Israeli television and newspapers.
How many Israelis saw the hopelessness etched on the faces of a Lebanese pharmacist trying to get a lift out of Tyre with his heavily pregnant wife and toddler?
How many heard the gut-wrenching pain of a hospitalized man who had just lost his parents, wife and elder son to missiles scrawled on by Israel children “to Lebanon with love”?
How many witnessed the charred corpses of an entire family that having read Israeli leaflets warning them to leave their homes were subsequently targeted in their vehicle?
And out of those who did, how many truly cared?
Israel calls these “surgical strikes”, almost laughable if it wasn’t so horribly tragic.
How “surgical” are strikes that have demolished an entire neighborhood in south Beirut, factories producing milk for babies, a Proctor and Gamble plant that manufactures detergent, a glass-making factory, an airport, ports, bridges, high-rise apartment blocks and cars carrying desperate families to safety?
Back to the question: Why the U-turn? Incredible as this might sound, Israel has received an unexpected bloody nose. The Western media, which invariably cozies up to the US/Israeli party line in times of conflict, doesn’t put this view into so many words like many of the Arabic networks are doing.
Firstly, Israel claimed it had struck at a bunker housing the Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah but its hopes were soon dashed when Nasrallah appearing calm and collected spoke on air. Secondly, Israel has struck again and again at Hezbollah’s network Al-Manar and blown up its communications mast. But Manar has kept up its broadcasts virtually uninterrupted.
Thirdly, Israelis were dumbstruck when Hezbollah hit one of their warships with what is now believed to have been a guided missile.
Lastly, despite Israeli tanks rumbling into the border villages around south Lebanon, they very quickly rumble out again, minus members of their crew or carrying the dead and the injured. And Hezbollah’s rockets are still firing from south of the Litani River into Israel in undiminished numbers.
Just to put the icing on the cake of this analysis, I’ll quote from Debka.com, a Jerusalem-based news website thought to be run by foreign correspondents with close ties to the Mossad.
Debka, which goes without saying is fiercely pro-Israel, quotes their military sources as suggesting the fight for border villages has illuminated the shortcomings of the Israeli Defense Forces used only to fighting badly equipped “Palestinian terrorists”.
While Debka naturally heaps praise on the bravery of Israeli soldiers it also notes that these are mostly young men in their 20s unused to fighting tough, highly trained guerrillas on unfamiliar terrain. It maintains Israel is wary of using helicopters in case they are shot down, while tanks risk being blown up by either roadside bombs, rockets or mortars.
Moreover, because the combat is so close up, aircraft cannot drop bombs on the resistance for fear of taking out their comrades.
Israeli soldiers, says Debka, are returning from the battlefield amazed at Hezbollah’s complex, well-armed and well-stocked web of tunnels, bunkers and caves.
It is looking more and more as though Israel has bitten off more than it can chew, which seen from the prism of an early end to the bloodshed has to be good news.
From Israel’s perspective, however, the myth of its power and invincibility has been smashed, while all the nuclear weapons in the world cannot constitute a deterrent when it is waging war on its own borders.
But it could be that I’m speaking too soon. Israel believes the US has given it carte blanche to do its worst for another week until Condoleezza Rice rides in waving her magic wand. Let’s wait and see.
