Daniel Lubetzky

With regards to the Hezbollah-Lebanon-Doha debacle, and the article by Barry Rubin that I blogged about here, I received some interesting comments from Ami Isseroff, who runs MideastWeb and who I consider one of the most thoughtful and thought-provoking analysts on the Middle East:

There is no use comparing everything bad that happens to Munich. This was more like Abbyssinia – including the toothless sanctions. Iran can only be stopped in Iran. Nothing could be done in Lebanon. As for us [in Israel], we have Iran in the north and Iran in the south. There cannot be peace as long as Hamas exists. Your Gaza correspondents are right, and the Palestinian public opinion surveys confirm that Hamas have little support. But in elections, it doesn’t matter what people think. It matters who has the most guns and counts the votes. Read the book Point of No Return about Iran/Hezbollah by Ronen Bergman . …Iran cannot be negotiated with. They will not give up until they are confronted with overwhelming and decisive force. A blockade by sea and air at least,

[Read more →]

A major challenge to letting democracy and freedom take root in the Middle East is that the region’s politics are submerged in an overwhelming culture of resistance.  For decades, Arab rulers have fed the Arab street with anti-American, anti-Western and anti-Israel epithets to such pathological degree that now every movement is defined through this prism.  Those who oppose or attack Israel and the US are instant heroes of the street.  It is hard for progressive reformers to gain traction in Arab elections.  It is either the status quo of corruption and authoritarianism or revolutionary anti-Western opposition.  Thus, according to Yasser Abu Hilala writing in Al Ghad, in Kuwait’s recent elections, the winners were Salafis and Shiia candidates who eulogized Hezbollah’s Imad Mughniyeh.  The situation is so extreme, that reporters who even just interview President Bush are considered infidels and threatened with their lives, and calls abound for countries like Egypt to break all relations with the US and Israel.

A Palestinian truck packed with 4 tons of explosives rammed into the Israel-Gaza border crossing and caused an explosion that was heard 12 miles deep into Gaza and out to Israel.  By miracle or defensive design, the bomber was the only immediate casualty as the crossing includes a long tunnel that acts as a buffer (see last picture of this post).

(this picture is of a getaway car that was destroyed by an IDF missile; no pictures were allowed to be taken at the checkpoint/crossing)

Given the war with Hamas in Gaza, I should not be surprised. 

But I was sobered up.  Darya Shaikh, our US Executive Director, and I were planning to be exactly where the explosion occurred the following day to meet Ezz and Mowaffaq, Palestinian Executive Directors of OneVoice Gaza.  They had not been able to get a permit to join our Board meeting, so we were going to meet at the Erez crossing to bring them up to date.  I have not gone back inside Gaza since the Hamas coup 11 months ago, but we had received permits to go through the Israeli checkpoint and meet at the end of the tunnel with Ezz and Mowaffaq.

This is the tunnel between Erez/Israel and the Gaza entrance, which was targeted by the Palestinian terrorist, apparently from Islamic Jihad, a 22 year old recruited into a suicide mission.

Barry Rubin writes a scary article about the implications of the Doha Accords, and the capitulation on Lebanon’s future made on May 21st to Hezbollah, and by extension to Iran and Syria.  The capitulation came not only from the Sunni Arab world but also from France, which  Rubin notes, similarly ceded Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany.  Like Lebanon now, the Czechs had hoped to rely on France’s help.  Another culprit is the UN, which blessed this agreement even though it contradicts prior UN resolutions requiring Hezbollah to disarm.  Many more parallels to appeasement of Hitler and Winston Churchill’s observations at the time are stark.  I hope Rubin is wrong about the situation, but I am afraid (as indicated earlier) that the writing is on the wall.

[Read more →]

M.J. Rosenberg wrote an excellent column on whether it is dangerous or wise for Israel to even negotiate with Syria for a possible peace agreement.

[Read more →]

A lot of people are worried that 2008 will pass without an agreement among Israelis and Palestinians to define a Palestinian State – and presumably and hopefully start implementing such vision.  I, too, get worried about this, every day.  But listening to Tzipi Livni is quite reassuring.  She genuinely speaks with the OneVoice language and framework and today recommitted herself and the Israeli government to the timeframe and the goals set out in Annapolis.  Most important, she was asked tough but valid questions by Palestinians, and she treated them all with respect, without dismissing any of the human pain inherent in the questions.  I need to check with those who asked the questions, but my impression was that, even though they hate the Israeli government, they recognized a sincerity and goodwill on her part.

Egypt does indeed have someone firmly at the top.

Here is how my taxi driver related to world leaders and movements, which I found to be quite akin to the heartbeat of the Arab street from conversations over the last few months (and years). 

Mohammad Ali (not the boxer who serves on our board – the other one!) knew I was born in Mexico and a US citizen.  I asked him to rank people or countries, thumbs up or thumbs down.  Here were his rankings on 24 questions from Bush to Ahmadinejad, from Olmert to Nasrallah, from Bin Laden to Anwar Sadat:

[Read more →]

This column by David Brooks is quite provocative and interesting. 

He writes:

[Read more →]

How bad is the situation for the Lebanese? This is how bad:

1. Hezbollah’s militia is destabilizing in and of itself – no State in History has ever been able to call itself a stable State if there is a non-State-controlled militia that challenges the authority of the State;
2. For years the UN and the world have indicated that all Lebanese militias had to disarm, in order to allow Lebanon to evolve into a vibrant integrated country; Hezbollah is the only militia that refused to turn in their arms and allow re-integration; even though Israel fully evacuated from Lebanese territory according to the UN and all observers, Hezbollah used its "struggle" against Israel as an excuse not to disarm;
3. Hezbollah continues to smuggle arms from Iran and Syria and send its fighters to train in Iran; it uses the Beirut airport with impunity, and effectively controlled it, along with a separate communications infrastructure;
4. The Siniora Government sought to prevent the continued smuggling of arms by firing the Airport manager that was following Hezbollah’s guidance.  It also sought to ban the separate communications network
5. Hezbollah responded with a semi-coup – attacks against other Lebanese and against Government ministries and employees.
6. The Lebanese Army stood by; now, in which country is it considered normal for the Army to be required to stay "neutral" when a militia initiates attacks against the Government? The Lebanese Army stood by because a) they are too weak against Hezbollah’s passions, training, and weapons; b) they sense in the winds that Hezbollah is becoming stronger and the ruling government is going to fall;
7. The gutsy Hezbollah shiite fighters give their lives to the Movement and will go to the streets or to wherever their admired leader Nasrallah sends them; the Westernized Sunni and Christian moderates on the other side would like to live a fun life and hang out in bars and restaurants, or pursue greater education in the US or Dubai, and they have no undying allegiances to their leaders;
8. Now the "compromise" to prevent further fighting cemented Hezbollah’s control of the airports and their communication network, as well as a change in the government laws; General Suleiman, the head of the Lebanese Army, who was once seen as the only possible candidate for President capable of being responsive to both sides, is increasingly seen as tilting to the Hezbollah side;
9. Iran and Syria have been emboldened by this development and will further invest in their proxy Hezbollah; Saudi Arabia, Egypt, other Arab states and the Unite States, seen as the counterbalance to the Iranians, do not have legitimacy on the street, or the stomach or roadmap to invest themselves into strengthening Lebanese civil society and investing in the people.
10. Hezbollah’s leader Nasrallah has built a mythical reputation as a direct and straightforward and humble leader (it still confounds me how he achieve this, but he did), seen as a model in the Arab world, not just by Shiites loyal to him, but also by Palestinians and Sunnis across the Arab world;
11. The epicenter of struggle is now moving from Iraq to Lebanon; Iraq, even if stabilized, is already Shiite-controlled and significantly influenced by Iran; there is still hope the Iraqi Shiites will demand openess, stability, and progressive policies towards the world, in contrast to the Iranian regime’s apocalyptic totalitarian revolutionary zeal; but they are certainly not going to be any counterweight against Iran; now the threat is that Lebanon will become as oppressive and regressive as Iran;
12. This may be the most alarming development even for Israeli-Palestinian relations; the hope of a two-state agreement between Israel and Palestine is dimmed by the prospects of interference and destabilization from the North and from Iran, via Islamic Jihad and Hamas.  It is now far less likely that Hamas will agree not to to be a spoiler in the negotiations between Abbas and Olmert.  It sees it can become the Hezbollah of Palestine.
13. Lebanon’s dream, and with it the dream of a peaceful Middle East based on harmony, respect, tolerance, economic liberalization, democracy and openess, is in greater jeopardy than it has ever been.