Wednesday, August 02, 2006

More Thoughts on Lebanon and Israel

My good friend, Ali, offers his thoughts on the Israeli-Lebanon crisis:

It's impossible to argue that what just happened in Qana was not blatant terrorism, but we live in a hypocritical world. They'll think of a justification. They always do.

CNN Video (WARNING: Graphic content.)

Critically, the Lebanese government is sounding more and more anti-Israeli.

Here are a few counterpoints:

Lebanese civilians are warned to leave their homes because the IDF cannot guarantee that they will be protected from attacks on Hezbollah. They ignore these warnings, are accidentally killed, and Israel is blamed.

Israeli civilians are given absolutely no warning by Hezbollah of attacks, the aim of which is to kill as many innocent Israelis as possible. They leave their homes and go to bomb shelters to protect themselves, and so relatively few die.

But because they are not dying in the same numbers as Lebanese it is Israel that is accused of war crimes and disproportionate attacks.

Go figure, as they say.

Also, from Power Line:

Vital Perspective also notes Article 28 of the 4th Geneva Convention:

The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
So the civilian casualties are, under the Geneva Convention, Hezbollah's responsibility.

To underscore these points, here is video of Hezbollah launching missles from a civilian location, photos of them operating amongst civilians, and a cartoon illustrating why this is so bad.

Charles Krauthammer also weighs in with his thoughts in the Washington Post: 'Disproportionate' in What Moral Universe?

To be fair and honest with the facts, here is a graphical representation of the deaths so far in this conflict. Each coffin represents a single life lost. Regardless of what perspective you have on this issue, I think we can all agree that each loss of life is incredibly tragic -- be it Lebanese, Israeli, or UN.

There is no question about which side has suffered the greatest loss of life. The key point of disagreement is about who is ultimately responsible for those deaths -- Hezbollah or Israel?

Read some great and respectful discussion from both sides of this issue in the comments section of my post: "A Few Thoughts on Lebanon and Israel". I sincerely appreciate everyone's courtesy in discussing this heated issue.

Hattip garethrussell.net

2 comments:

Ali Hasanain said...

Brian: really liked the coffin depiction. I wish I knew TOTAL casualties in Israel and its neighbours going back at least ten years or so. I'm quite certain the trend of the last few weeks would be confirmed, if not amplified.

From our previous discussions, I conceded that the situation isn't perfectly black and white, though you're aware of my opinions too. However, it's ridiculous to suggest Hezbollah is willingly hiding among civilians: they are fighting a guerilla war against a massively well-outfitted army, one of the most advanced in the world, and as I mentioned on my blog, one that has been resupplied with the latest armaments in the last couple of weeks (AFTER the conflict was some ten days old). Given the weapons imbalance, all guerilla outfits rely on hit and run. To me, this is no less moral than Israel being equipped to the hilt.

Thought: As you mentioned, Israel could carpet-bomb Lebanon. Hezbollah can't carpet-bomb Israel (which, as the cold war taught us, is unfortunate because when armies are equally equipped, they are more restrained).

As for the Israeli ambassador's ridiculously bigoted remarks, they are simply untrue. Remember Timothy McVeigh, the KKK and a number of Irish parties a few years back, just off the top of my head (I'd suggest looking up firebombing on Wikipedia: the UK bombed civilians AFTER it was clear Germany was crushed and was about to surrender). Personally, I'd also argue that the bombing of Hiroshima, Hamburg and Dresden were blatant terrorism, to mention nothing of the occupation of big chunks of other countries' land as recognized by the UN, by Israel.

The West needs to recognize the motives behind the conflict many Islamic states have with it. It's useless, though convenient to dust off a Nazi term and attach it to what's happening in the world today, but that's not a particularly useful exercise to undertake if one is intellectually honest. What is "Islamo-fasicm"? WHY are so many muslims anti-west? It certainly isn't part of our religion, that much I can tell you. Having grown up in a mainstream islamic country, I can tell you that the hatred stems from self-interested actions that just happen to be hostile to muslim countries. I can assure you the Lebanese will be anti-US when they discover fragments from bombs the Israelis lob at them tomorrow and they read: "Made in U.S.A - 7/23/06" As I've argued before, a little sophistication would serve the west well.

Brian Hollar said...

Ali and “Thought”, thank you both for your comments. I appreciate you both sharing your thoughts on here. You are both great friends and I value both of your opinions and perspectives.

Thought, while I agree with most of what you wrote, I want to acknowledge that you and I both come at this with a different set of information and perspectives than a lot of other people around the world. That doesn’t mean our perspective is incorrect, but I do think it can be enhanced as we learn how this situation is perceived by others. I also think it’s good to temper our opinions a bit and try to glean the perceptions others have.

The more willing we are to engage in fruitful dialogue, the more we can learn and influence one another. I’d like to try to keep the tone of this discussion in terms of what our perspectives are and why we think the way we do. Ali is a good friend and he and I know we are each coming from very different perspectives on this. I hope to gain some understanding of where our differences in perspectives arise from and sincerely appreciate having the opportunity to discuss this with him.

Ali, with that being said, I’d like to make a few comments in response to what you wrote. First, a few thoughts on casualty statistics. I don’t know of any war by any nation in history to be fought with a keen eye to make sure you loose as many people as your enemy does. The main objective of any effective military in combat is to minimize their own losses while maximizing the losses of their enemy. Any disparity in casualties is likely an indication of the difference in effectiveness of fighting forces and not the morality of their cause.

What I think would be more telling are statistics for the number of intentional attacks against civilians each side has engaged in. What I mean by this is not how many civilians have been killed, but how often these types of attacks were attempted and committed. The frequency of these types of attacks would be indicative of if it was a systematic intentional strategy or unintentional accidents. Accidents are tragic, but intentional targeting of civilians when there is no probable military presence is evil. Would you agree with this?

Neither side is completely guilt-free in this regard, but my impression is that most of Israel’s attacks on civilians have historically been primarily accidental while many Arab attacks on Israeli civilians have been intentional and systematic, specifically against Israel’s unarmed citizenry during non-wartime and without warning. My guess is that you and I might have a different perception on this. Do you have a different perspective you can explain and can illustrate with information? I’ll try to find some more historical info to verify my impressions as well.

I can also try to look up how many suicide bombers have attacked Israel during their existence. Suicide bombs are a form of attack brought to the Middle East by Hezbollah, by the way. To a Westerner, an organization that engages in this type of warfare indicates they have little regard for human life and are considered to be morally perverse. (I’m trying to explain American perception, not make a defense for it.) For Hezbollah to intentionally draw fire into civilian areas in Lebanon is in keeping with this perception of them and makes reports of this easy to believe to us. Do you think the US is misinformed about the organization or about these reports? Do you have any news sources to counter this with?

In contrast to Hezbollah’s tactics, Israel warned everyone to get out of the areas they have been attacking and have done so many times in the past. This in no way makes the intentionally attacking of civilians acceptable, but to most Americans it puts them on superior moral ground to the fighting tactics of Hezbollah. I’m not aware of any of Israel’s enemies giving this type of warning in the past, although I’m not well informed on this. To Americans, this type of behavior goes a long way towards forming our impression of who are the “good guys” and who are the “bad guys” in this conflict. This is not meant as a defense of this perception, but as an explanation of it. Do you know the perspective of what many Islamic states are on this? (I use the term “Islamic states” collectively only because you did in your comment.)

Many people have argued that there are a lot of things going wrong in the Middle East and that it is the responsibility of the US to understand the perspective of the Arab community and why they are angry about US foreign policy. I do not deny that the US has been less than perfect in its foreign policy, but I would also add that the Arabs have a great responsibility to communicate and persuade the US and “world community” if they feel that they are being wronged. They too have been less than perfect and have used very negative foreign policy as well. They also need to realize how the US perceives them and take responsibility for shifting this perspective. That doesn’t free the US from responsibility in this area, but as “Thought” pointed out, it does mean the Islamic world has responsibility too.

Conversation has to be a two-way street, and I am not aware of much effort on the part of the Arab world to make themselves well understood and respected by the rest of the world. Unfortunately, many of the tactics they use are counter-productive towards these goals. Am I misinformed on this?

I think one of the biggest questions we could all consider is how can BOTH America and the Islamic world do a better job at understanding one another and fostering better relationships? Is there any hope for us? (Another, much more heated question is if there any hope for Israel and the rest of the Middle East to do the same?) What actions can we take to make the most positive changes on the margin?

Ali, please point out anything I’ve said you disagree with or facts you think I have wrong. I am fully open to correction on this and know that I am not fully informed on all of what is going on in the Middle East or of the history of the region. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on all this and discussing this more with you.