Middle-East Mess

Pretty much most commentary that appears realistic is calling the Israeli/Hezbollah conflict a loss for Israel. I think it's not quite that clear, but voices like Krauthammer and Thomas do have some cogent points. This from Thomas:

Fighting to obtain a cease-fire is not likely to encourage Israeli soldiers who have given their lives and limbs to defeat a mortal enemy. And turning to the United Nations and its anti-Israel secretary general to monitor the cease-fire is not exactly a confidence builder, given the U.N.'s record in the region.

Who believes the United Nations has the guts or other necessary body parts to disarm Hezbollah, as a previous U.N. resolution required the terrorist organization to do? When arms and missiles continue to flow from Iran and Syria, will the United Nations shout, "halt" and apply the necessary force to stop them? They didn't before. And what makes anyone think that Hezbollah is about to disarm? The Jerusalem Post reported recently that: "The Lebanese government was scheduled to meet on Sunday to discuss the disarming of Hizbullah south of the Litani River, but postponed that meeting following indications by the guerrilla group that they would not do so."

And

At best, Hezbollah has been hurt enough to buy Israel time to rebuild its damaged towns from the hundreds of rockets fired indiscriminately at civilian targets with virtually no outrage from the international community, whose fire is reserved for Israel's unintentional strikes on civilians (many of whom may not be civilians at all, as we have learned from some doctored photographs). At worst, Hezbollah will regroup to fight another day with even more dangerous weapons and stronger resolve.

The failing here is clearly the UN. Still viewed as weak and ineffective. Funny how the Islamic states cry that the UN is so much a US and Israeli pawn, when they so effectively used the UNSC to enact a toothless resolution that received far too much support from the western powers.

Of course, Syria's Assad now finds a voice once the cease-fire is in place.

Syrian President Bashar Assad today said that America's plan for a "new Middle East" had collapsed after Hezbollah's successes in fighting against Israel.

Assad said the region had changed "because of the achievements of the resistance (Hezbollah)".

"The Middle East they (the Americans) aspire to has become an illusion," he said in Damascus.

And

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on Tuesday told an opening session of a journalists conference that Israel's war on Lebanon was a "planned aggression".

"The Israeli aggression against Lebanon was not connected with its kidnapped soldiers (by Hezbollah), but had been pre-arranged for a period of time," Assad said.

Lots of noise, not much content. Is the American Middle-East Illusion now done? I don't think so. The damage to Hezbollah was substantial, and Israel won partially in its damage to Hezbollah, though the PR damage it took was substantial. Now the UN is coming in and this may help Israel in its long term security, if there is sufficient pressure placed on the UN to uses its peace keepers in a useful manner. I won't hold my breath on that.

There is also the war on terror that people keep forgetting. The US has made forward motions in some countries like Saudi Arabia and Yemen to control their more radical groups. This is having an effect, though most people are ignoring it. Note that most of the recent international terrorist plots have been coming out of Europe. This indicates a shift in who the active mujahedin are. Now let's see if Lebanon can live up to its international responsibilities and get control of their home grown terrorists. Though this seems less likely with this:

Hizbullah will not hand over its weapons to the Lebanese government but rather refrain from exhibiting them publicly, according to a new compromise that is reportedly brewing between Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Seniora and Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

The UN cease-fire resolution specifically demands the demilitarization of the area south of the Litani river. The resolution was approved by the Lebanese cabinet.

In a televised address on Monday night, Nasrallah declared that now was not the time to debate the disarmament of his guerrilla fighters, saying the issue should be done in secret sessions of the government to avoid serving Israeli interests.

"This is immoral, incorrect and inappropriate," he said. "It is wrong timing on the psychological and moral level particularly before the cease-fire," he said in reference to calls from critics for the guerrillas to disarm.

According to Lebanon's defense minister, Elias Murr, "There will be no other weapons or military presence other than the army" after Lebanese troops move south of the Litani. However, he then contradicted himself by saying the army would not ask Hizbullah to hand over its weapons.

Hard to take Lebanon seriously when they can't seem to figure out what their place is. I'd also be suspicious in any contention that the Lebanese military is an independent force. I'm willing to bet that there is a Hezbollah presence in that establishment.

The stability of the region just doesn't appear to be getting better, but then, sometimes things get worse before they can get better.