http://www.foreignpolicy.com

Posted July 19, 2006

As the conflict between Israel, Lebanon, and the Palestinians escalates, FP spoke with Rami Khouri, editor at large of the Daily Star, Beirut’s largest English-language newspaper, for some perspective on Hezbollah’s tactics, Iran’s role in the crisis, and whether there’s any end to the fighting in sight.

Shock and awe: Will Israel and Hezbollah fight to the death? AFP/Getty Images

FOREIGN POLICY: You’re stuck in Amman trying to get back into Lebanon. What have you heard from your colleagues at the Daily Star about the situation in Beirut?

Rami Khouri: The whole civilian infrastructure is being knocked out. Many roads and power plants are being destroyed. Normal life is pretty impossible. Electricity is being cut, transport is stopped, and normal commercial systems are not working well. But most people in Beirut are not in danger of being killed in their homes.

FP: The Israelis have said that they want to destroy Hezbollah in Lebanon. Is that possible, without destroying Lebanon itself?

RK: I’m not sure what they mean when they say they want to destroy Hezbollah. Hezbollah is not like a Rotary Club, where you can get their files and destroy their meeting place. Hezbollah is a mind-set more than anything else. And when things quiet down, they will just go back to doing what they were doing before.

FP: How much of the current situation in Lebanon is a result of Iran’s desire to create a distraction from its nuclear program by pulling on its strings with Hezbollah?

RK: I think this idea is pretty standard Israeli spin-doctoring, which is repeated, parrot-like, in the United States. Clearly, there’s a relationship between Hezbollah and Iran. Nobody doubts it. They’ve been very close for many years, and the relationship is a complex one. But Hezbollah is primarily a Lebanese organization. Iran has some influence on it—there’s no doubt about that—in the same way that the United States has influence on some of its smaller allies. This is how power relationships work. The idea that Iran could just order Hezbollah to [attack in order] to divert attention is simplistic. But being simplistic is a tradition of American analysis of the Middle East, unfortunately.

The reality, I think, is more complicated. Iran has been getting stronger. It’s got allies that it works with in the Middle East, of whom Hezbollah is an important one. It probably feels that creating more pressure for the United States and Israel is something that is good for Iranian foreign policy. I’m sure that’s the thinking going on in Tehran. But Iran is not stupid. If Hezbollah gets beaten badly, Iran’s position suffers. They don’t want to weaken their assets; they want to strengthen them.

FP: Israel has said that it is doing the job the Lebanese government can’t, in “ridding Lebanon of Hezbollah.” What’s your reaction to such a statement?

RK: That’s nonsense. Right now, the Lebanese government can’t just go and take over the south of Lebanon and tell Hezbollah to go home. The Lebanese government is weak, in large part because of the policies of Israel. Israel has been attacking Lebanon for the last 30 years, destroying its airport, attacking its water systems, roads, bridges, schools, and hospitals. That’s why Hezbollah was created by the Lebanese people in the south, to protect themselves, because the Lebanese government couldn’t do it.

FP: Is any blame for the current fighting being placed on Hezbollah by people in Lebanon—or is it all directed at Israel?

RK: The majority of people blame Israel more. They say if Hezbollah kidnapped two Israelis, then let Israel kidnap two Hezbollah guys. Nobody would have had a big problem with that. But the massive overreaction by Israel is really seen as too much. You do get criticism of Hezbollah, and people are speaking out more and more about it.

FP: Will Israel agree to a prisoner trade?

RK: It will at some point. There’s intense diplomatic efforts going on now, and we’ll probably see some kind of deal in the next week. It will likely include elements of a cease fire, an international military presence between the warring parties, and the release of prisoners. The Israelis are going to have to realize that their overwhelming use of military power is increasingly less effective over time. They’ve used tremendous power and destroyed much of Lebanon’s civil infrastructure, and all they’ve done is gotten more and more Lebanese angry at them. Of course, some people will also say Hezbollah has no right to bring about this kind of Israeli retaliation. Hezbollah will certainly get criticized.

But I think Israel will have to switch to a political strategy at some point—and address the core issue, which is Palestine. Any successful diplomacy has to take a look at the bigger picture and figure out how to combine the short-term efforts of a cease fire with the longer-term diplomatic solution of achieving a comprehensive settlement.

FP: How can the peace process be restarted?

RK: You have to look for the point at which the futility of fighting—on both sides—gives way to a more rational appreciation for the need to engage in diplomatic solutions. In the end, this is a political problem; it’s not a military problem. What we’re talking about here is political conflict: about land, about rights, about identity, about nationhood. And that can only be resolved politically.

The only way to resolve it politically hasn’t been tried yet, which is to have a negotiating process predicated on the equal rights of both sides. That means the Palestinians, the Lebanese, and the Israelis must be treated with exactly the same rights. If Israel’s security is the predominant focus of such negotiations, they aren’t going to work.

Rami Khouri is a syndicated columnist and editor at large of the Daily Star in Beirut.