Israel and Lebanon

The current Israeli military actions in Lebanon are thought by many to be a disproportionate response to the recent Hezbollah provocations. The world community, except apparently for Israel and the Bush Administration, seems to believe an immediate cease fire is in order. Even Bush’s buddy, Tony Blair, thinks the UN should arrange a cessation of hostilities monitored by an increased UN peace keeping force.

I previously admitted my ignorance of much about the middle east. Last March, I posted an article saying the demonstrations in Lebanon to send Syrian forces home seemed a little suspect to me. Since then, I have thought that article proved my ignorance. But now, I think I might have been at least part right in my suspicions. The Syrian forces were supposedly in Lebanon to protect against Israeli aggression. Now, after they were withdrawn, Israel has found it much easier to take hostile action against Lebanon, something the Bush Administration supports. So maybe it was not so far out to suspect that the CIA might have been involved in the assassination that triggered the uprisings in Lebanon last year.

Now Bush is saying Syria needs to exert restrictive control over Hezbollah in Lebanon. It seems that would have been easier to do when Syrian forces were stationed in Lebanon - in fact, it seems like the removal of Syrian troops may have made it easier for Hezbollah to use Lebanese soil to launch missions against Israel. Confused meddling in middle eastern affairs is a specialty of the Bush Administration. We foolishly increased the importance of Iran in the region when we removed from power their arch enemy, Saddam Hussein. We also seem to be playing a part in increasing the role of Syria.