« Thoughts on Prejudice, 3rd World etc. | Joint Venture »


July 30, 2006

Sadly Predictable: Transforming Leb Land by Bombing Backfires

The campaign against Hezbullah turns on itself, and American "diplomatic efforts" continue to exist in some strange, delusional world of wishful thinking, where by some magical intervention from on high Hezbullah caves, and again somehow military force magically re-arranges inconvenient political realities. A queer belief system, to be sure, given it is so clearly divorced from reality, but it is the operating one for the US government as it blunders from one PR disaster to another.

[link corrected]

Meanwhile, polling (although the numbers must simply be taken as indicative of a trend, given the situ), places pan-sect support for Hezbullah at around 80 percent. One should not take the 80 percent figure too literally to be sure, but as I expected, the reaction against the simply stupid and in the end counter-productive Israeli airstrikes across Lebanon has turned against the foreigners over one's hated "cousins. " Very predictable. I add reference by the way to this fine Al Arabiyah report on Jumblat: the wily old Zaim smells which way the wind blows: حزب الله انتصر بسبب صموده..ولكن لمن سيهدي انتصاره؟ - that is Hizbullah is winning becuase of its staying power or persistance. Should actually do more of this arty later.

This should not be in any way a surprise.

Nor the fact that the Israelis have been unable to "destroy" or "crush" Hezbullah with airpower and raids. That did not work for 15 odd years of bloody face to face combat during their occupation, with local allies (the South Lebanese Army, their pet militia of deluded largely Xian fools). It certainly is and was not going to work with purely airpower and incursions.

Meanwhile, as clear targets disappear and 2nd, 3rd, 4th and so on order targets are attacked in a fruitless attempt to address the problem of guerilla warfare with airstrikes, the politically disastrous (for the Americans more than the Israelis, but not really helpful for them either) results come in, women and children blown to smithereens. Well, of course, in the more hysteric and deluded circles of commentary on the Lunatic side of the Atlantic, entirely valid targets, but for the rest of the world....

At some point some thoughts should be put down on how Israel and the US blundered into this entirely predictable predicament, one made entirely I might add, by completely idiotic framing of the initial reaction to Hezbullah's own blunder - which ended making a potential Hezbullah own-goal into an own goal by the Israelis and the Americans.

Well, I am off to the sea-front with the Woman's family and like. Am sure I will hear lots of unhappy commentary, and I can say my impression from this past week of intermittantly watching the Sats, Euro and Arab, is that the US has definatively fucked its reputation into a cocked hat and managed to really very much end up looking right incompetent (and then, so has Blair whose servile Poodleness seems to have become a congenital problem, not realising that he'd serve the Americans far better by trying to knock some sense into their deluded khayali magical worldview. Of course he never did it with Iraq, so it's perhaps foolish to expect any change, but hope does spring eternal. Who else would Rice and Bush even perhaps listen to?)

Posted by The Lounsbury at July 30, 2006 01:07 PM
Filed Under: Politics - Foreign Policy , Politics - Other FP , Politics - US FP , Sham-Levant

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/2847


Comments

There's a long interview with Jumblatt in Shadid's latest Washington Post article as well.

Posted by: Tom Scudder at July 30, 2006 02:54 PM

I agree; this was a terrible day for the US. Depressingly obvious that US will be blamed for death of all the kids from a precision israeli strike given how clearly US diplomacy has been designed to give the israelis a few more days (or weeks) to bomb. 80% of Lebanon presumably doesn't particularly like the US right now.

to top it off, it sure doesn't look like Israel's ground campaign has been very much more effective. I understand the right to self defense, but this whole operations looks like a double disaster. Civilian deaths from the bombs. And a ground fight that Hezbollah can claim as a victory unless something changes ...

Posted by: bws at July 30, 2006 10:42 PM

The WP piece appears to be more or less a translation and elaboration on the same material as the Arabiyah arty I linked. Perhaps the same interview.

Posted by: The Lounsbury at July 31, 2006 12:05 AM

My working assumption has been that Hizbullah did indeed score an own goal with their initial unprovoked attack, but that the response has negated that and then some, and finally that a cleverer response would have saved lots of lives and property, and weakened Hizbullah considerably. I haven't seen much from non-Lebs about this though. I'd love to see an elaboration on this by you.

Posted by: pantom at July 31, 2006 02:23 AM

Well, I have my instincts....

I also note this piece of depressing but entirely unsurprising news:

"But a recent survey of college students in the region -- done before Israel's re-invasion of Lebanon -- says U.S. policies on Israel and in Iraq are such that "these networks may be completely unable to change opinions on these two issues."

The survey, an unscientific sampling of attitudes of 394 university communications students in such places as Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Morocco, found that these young people listened to Radio Sawa's pop music, but there was "no significant relationship between the frequency of listening to Radio Sawa and favorability toward US foreign policy." The same held true for al-Hurra.

Worse yet, the more they listened, the less they liked us, according to the new study, "U.S. Public Diplomacy in the Arab World," published in the current Global Media and Communication. "One significant finding," said author Mohammed el-Nawawy of Queens University of Charlotte, "is that respondents' attitudes toward U.S. foreign policy have worsened slightly since their exposure to Radio Sawa and Television Alhurra."

I frankly don't listen often to either, but certainly impresionistically it always felt - as I have long noted - as if they were merely translating American points of view, not interpreting them in such a manner as to convince. The difference between making an engaged argument to win over the listener and merely talking at someone.

Incompetence. Incompetence from too much self-regarding navel-gazing whanking on for self-pleasure.

Posted by: The Lounsbury at July 31, 2006 02:41 PM

Comment Subscription

Email Address: