More on Hizbullah

My thoughts on the alleged administration plan to confront Syria and Hizbullah remained jumbled, but Oxblog's Patrick Belton points toward this MEIB report on the organization which is worth reading. A key point that comes through in the piece is that Syria has been as much a hinderance to Hizbullah in Lebanon as a supporter. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard also plays a role, and I've blogged before about how weapons for Palestinian terror groups are probably being laundered through Hizbullah and the IRG. This article is also a good profile of the group and its role in keeping the border hot so as to pressure Israel on Syria's behalf, and predicts an American move against Syria in Lebanon. (It was written in May 2003.)

One thing I take from all this is that fears of an Iraq-style invasion of Syria are alarmist. I think it more likely the U.S. wants to boot Syria out of Lebanon and end Hizbullah's role in terrorism. If that is the case, they might actually take a complete Syrian crackdown on Hizbullah's terrorist-related activities. What I don't get, though, is the overall strategic reasoning. The two things we're hearing is that Hizbullah has al-Qaeda connections and that the famous Iraqi WMD may be in Syria. However, Hizbullah actually condemned the September 11 attacks, and would appear to have little interest in a grand war against Western civilization. Their interests lie primarily in Lebanese politics, and attacks on Israel are mainly to keep up support from Syria and Iran which they parlay into grassroots political support among Lebanese Shi'ites. Syria is actually helping us torture people in the war against al-Qaeda.

I'm also uncertain what the consequences would be if Syria suddenly withdrew from Lebanon. One school of thought is that Lebanon would become a stable democracy. The other is that you would shortly see a resumption of the civil war which the Syrian occupation helped end. Bear in mind again that Syria may boost Hizbullah militarily, but it curtails them politically. Seeking to rid the world of all terrorism is a fine thing, but needs to be done carefully and with an understanding of all the different local situations. Based on what happened in Iraq, I really don't trust neoconservative thinkers to think these things through on the level necessary to guarantee success. But, of course, for all I know they could be sitting on a pile of intelligence that Hizbullah has formed links with al-Qaeda and is planning to do evil things.

A final possibility is that this relates to the Middle East peace process. Reining in Hizbullah would help both the Syrian and Palestinian tracks by reducing terrorism and aiding the rise of pro-peace sentiment in Israel, as well as cutting a channel of outside support to militant elements of the Palestinian Authority. If the administration is making that a priority, this move would almost certainly boost Israel's security.