Negotiating For What And With Whom?

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived in Beirut today and met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora. She went to Jerusalem next.

In a meeting that appeared tense, Saniora told the U.S. diplomat that Israel's bombardment had taken his country "backwards 50 years," the prime minister's office said. And Nabih Berri, a veteran Lebanese politician who is Lebanon's parliament speaker and Hezbollah's de facto negotiator, rejected proposals brought by Rice almost as soon as she left.

Berri told Rice that a cease-fire must precede any talks about resolving Hezbollah's presence in Lebanon, an official close to the speaker said. Rice, reflecting the U.S. view that a quick cease-fire would not be sustainable, had proposed that the fighting stop at the same time that an international force deployed in southern Lebanon, the official said. Rice also proposed that Hezbollah weapons be removed from a buffer zone extending about 18 miles from the Israeli border, said the official. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks were private.

This I suppose is all very well and good -- but is it?

I refer once again to the title of my post: for what is Secretary Rice negotiating, and with whom?

"Negotiating" with the Lebanese prime minister achieves what, precisely, when Lebanon has little or, truly, no control over Hezbollah?

In my opinion, this visit is solely a photo op for nothing and will achieve nothing. There will be no cease fire on any side, and Israel should be completely let alone to achieve its ends.

The fundamental problem is Iran. It is supplying the missiles, the money, the guidance. Intelligence experts believe that Iran is solely responsible for Hezbollah's raining missiles down on Israel in order to take world focus off the fact that Iran is moving forward with its nuclear weapons programs. This is, in truth, the Opening Act of Iran vs. The West. Syria is likewise a problem but taking its orders from Iran. Were Syria to be the subject of an incursion by Israel likely no one save Iran would come to its aid -- certainly not Egypt or Jordan or Saudi Arabia.

The larger and, yet, "smaller" problem is that the only way to attack Militant Islam or Islamists and specifically, in this case, Hezbollah, is to make seemingly-offensive step up in our determination to do what needs to be done and that, because of the nature of their cowardice insofar as their hiding weapons and firing from civilian apartments, homes, edifices, etc., and frequently hiding behind and firing from behind innocent civilians, there necessarily must be resulting civilian casualties.

"As long as people keep talking, people won't be dying," I've heard recently. In this ages-old case, I don't believe that to be true. Only actions will suffice.

We or Israel or other western nations either make this step or we shall surely fail. It is the nature of these heinous persons and of terrorists in general. "Negotiating" is NOT an option. There is no middle ground. We shall either win, or we shall lose. Israel either wins in this struggle or it loses its sovereign soil.

I am uncertain where this will all go. But as I've written before we are clearly at a crossroads; however, attempting to negotiate with Hezbollah, in this case, by way of the Lebanese PM will achieve positively nothing. The Lebanese government is a government in name only and it lives in fear of Hezbollah. How does one "negotiate" with such a loose, antiquated and dysfunctional "government" such as this?

In my opinion Israel has been very careful -- perhaps even too careful in its application of force. This "war" will be at a high cost to Israel -- and it appears Israel is hesitant to really pull off the gloves and apply heavy and overwhelming force. As it should. As we should.

At its base, the religion of Islam desperately needs a complete reformation. And it needs to have the discipline to achieve this reformation from within -- or it will have reformation forced upon it in ways it cannot imagine, and it will not be pleasant for the inflicter(s) or the recipient.

BZ