Watching Lebanon, a tiny gem of a country, go up in flames is gut wrenching. Lebanon's 3.8 million people do not deserve this horrendous aggression. They've not only suffered a 15-year-long civil war, 22-years of Israeli occupation but also 29-years of de facto occupation by Syria.
How cruelly ironic that just as the Lebanese gained their sovereign independence, rebuilt their country and were poised to expect a record number of holidaymakers, along comes their neighbor to smash their dreams.
I know those dreams. In 2000, I spent 10 months in Beit Mary, a sleepy mountain village overlooking Beirut. I was there when the Israelis withdrew and participated in the ensuing joyous celebrations. I spoke with people who had spent years in bunkers and who now glimpsed a better life for their children.
I met businessmen who now had the courage to invest in their own country. I chatted with estate agents, who all said they were doing a brisk trade selling luxury apartments and shops. The city's downtown areas, lovingly renovated by the late Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, came alive before my eyes.
Swish Italian-style coffee shops were opening up everywhere, along with smart boutiques while curio shops stocked up hoping for a new wave of tourism. There were street parties, firework displays, barbecues.
Beirut had come full cycle, or so I thought, from "the Paris of the Middle East" to a rubble-filled, pock-marked war zone and back again...or almost. It felt like a miracle.
Israel's Chief of Staff, Lt. Dan Halutz warned, "we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years" and they have. Congratulations Israel! You must be so proud of your bloody handwork.
Israel pretends it has bombed bridges, highways, power stations, apartment blocks, resulting in the deaths of over 100 Lebanese, mostly civilians, all because Hezbollah grabbed two of its soldiers as barter for a prisoner exchange.
In reality, Israel's fledgling government wanted to display muscle for three reasons: To reinforce the myth of Israel's invincibility within the region; to send a clear message to the Palestinian National Authority that it has no powerful friends, and lastly, to convince Israel's voting public that Ehud Olmert and his sidekick Amir Peretz were worthy successors to the "butcher".
There could be another reason too. Olmert may have hoped to drag Syria, once considered "a low-hanging fruit" into the conflict for several reasons.
The US has made no secret of its desire to topple Syria's Baathist government, led by Bashar Assad ever since the young leader protested its invasion of Iraq.
To this end, Washington has seduced opposition groups in exile and accused Syria of a range of "crimes" from exporting weapons to the Iraqi resistance, harboring Saddam's mythical weapons of mass destruction, blocking democracy in Lebanon and assassinating Rafik Hariri.
Both the US and Israel have blasted Damascus for allowing Palestinian militant groups to maintain offices on Syrian soil and for supporting Hezbollah.
However, the White House cannot afford to embroil itself in yet another Middle East war due to a public disillusioned by the mess that is Iraq as well as fear of alienating the international community further, and provoking more anti-American feeling among Muslims. Moreover, it has no smoking gun to use against Syria and could not hope to gain legal cover from the United Nations.
Israel's actions, on the other hand, are sacrosanct. This is a country that doesn't give two hoots about legal niceties. It alone is allowed to have a massive arsenal of nuclear weapons that doesn't merit inspection by the nuclear watchdog, the IAEA. It alone is free to ignore a slew of UN Security Council resolutions and trample over the Geneva Conventions at will. So what better agent could the US have to attack Syria on its behalf?
There is just one problem.
Bashar saw the way the wind was blowing a long time ago. Syria asked for US help in monitoring its long border with Iraq and was refused. Syria withdrew completely from Lebanon but still couldn't gain acceptance into the fold. Syria protested its innocence with regard to Hariri's death yet even though a gang of Israeli saboteurs and assassins were discovered operating within Lebanon, Syria still couldn't get itself off the hook.
And so, with nowhere else to go, Damascus teamed up with Tehran, whose President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad makes no secret of the fact he blames Israel for all the region's ills.
It is no surprise, therefore, that Iran is now committed to defending Syria in the event it is attacked, and has said so publicly. This does not bode well for the ambitions of Tel Aviv and Washington, as nobody knows for sure what weapons Tehran has up its sleeve.
Returning to the current situation, it seems that Israel greatly underestimated Hezbollah's capabilities. It sent its tanks into south Lebanon and they were blown up. It rained down bombs on Beirut and Hezbollah responded by launching a guided missile to destroy an Israeli warship. It decimated homes in south Lebanon and attacked the resort town of Jounieh - hardly a hotbed of Hezbollah militants. Hezbollah responded with an onslaught of rockets into Tiberius and Haifa.
The pro-American Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Saniora has begged the US and the UN to implement a cease-fire and was ignored. A UN resolution in Lebanon's favor was vetoed by Washington. Saniora has learned a hard lesson: The US has only one friend and that is Israel.
Lebanese government figures have asked the Arab League to get involved. Its foreign ministers met, disagreed about who was to blame for the conflict, and a frustrated-looking Amr Moussa emerged with the message "Peace process is dead".
After some wrangling at the G-8 Summit held in St. Petersburg, attendees put out this joint statement: "These extremist elements (referring to Hezbollah) and those that support them cannot be allowed to plunge the Middle East into chaos." Hezbollah is urged to hand over the two Israeli soldiers, quit firing rockets into Israel and disarm.
Where was the input of French President Jacques Chirac who had angrily called the Israeli response "disproportionate"? Where was the voice of host Vladimir Putin who had previously accused Israel of "pursuing wider goals"? Why did the German Chancellor Angela Merkel feign amnesia when it came to the EU's condemnation of Israel?
In the end, there was only one voice that counted - that of George W. Bush, a man who is committed to defending the Jewish state come what may.
Where does this leave Lebanon? Now that Israel has decimated its infrastructure, destroyed its international airport and indiscriminately bombed civilians, both Muslim and Christian, this confrontation is more than Hezbollah versus Tel Aviv.
Lebanon's speaker Nabih Berri and President Emile Lahoud have urged the Lebanese to stick together and defend their land.
If Lebanon is forced to cave in this will represent a psychological blow for not only the Lebanese but also Palestinians struggling to survive in Gaza. At the same time, Israel will be validated and strengthened, its military off limits for all time.
To the Arab world I would say this: Stand with Lebanon in its hour of great need or feed the monster at your peril!
