War on Terrorism (Politics)

[Mick Harper]

It’s Peace in Lebanon!
But Lebanon is in pieces.

The peace deal, Israel vs Hezbollah, has introduced a new player to the Levantine intaglio. The Lebanese army. Who they? Quite. Some of us thought Lebanon had taken a leaf out of the Costa Rican playbook and dispensed with an army.

Not so. It has always been there. It’s just the Lebanese army has always been small, weak and uninvolved in politics. This does not presage success when it comes to policing the area south of the Litani River but that is inconsequential. Either Hezbollah and Israel agree to stay at arms length or they won’t. There’s nothing the USA, France and UNIFIL can do about it, so the Lebanese army won’t have much of a role one way or the other.

But they could have a new one.
The Lebanese army has one crucial asset:

It is non-sectarian.
That makes it unique in Lebanese public life. So?

So mount a military coup.
Not the normal kind. The ‘agreed’ kind.

Lebanon is in a total mess. It ought not to be, it didn’t use to be. Lebanon has all the makings of a stable, prosperous little country. It used to be a stable, prosperous little country. It has ceased to be any of these things because of outside forces entirely beyond its control and the consequent growth of domestic sectarian forces that have proved not only beyond its control but ruinous for Lebanese life as a whole.

* This peace treaty might, might, provide a window for everyone to draw back, draw breath and draw up a new blueprint.
* Those outside forces might, might, see this as rather a good thing. Or, if not, something they can’t do anything about given the straits Iran, Israel, Hezbollah, Syria, the USA and the UN are presently in.
* The Lebanese might, might, have reached the stage of ‘anything’s better than what we’ve got’. They have shown beyond peradventure they can’t do anything about it themselves using the normal levers of political life.
* The international community washed its hands of Lebanon long ago but might, might, back a whole new set-up with wholly new money.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

Yes, yes, this is all well known. The present government wouldn't dream of going rocket-for-rocket with Hezbollah and nor would my new military government. But it could dream of going social services-for-social services. Hezbollah, like all such groups, is absolute crap at this kind of thing but gets plaudits just for attempting it.

When there is a state-within-a-state you have to change the state not the state within it. There is a world of difference between one overmighty faction versus a government of factions and the factions versus the nation. But if it means civil war I would advise against.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Wile E. Coyote]

Hezbollah has promised Hamas to continue their resistance whilst agreeing a ceasefire with Israel, which leaves Hamas now fighting on their own.

This is a standard case of breaking off a relationship and pretending you can still be good friends.

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

The analysis I heard, and which seemed pretty switched on to me, is that essentially all Assad's former enemies--the Arab League, the West, even Turkey--had decided to let bygones be bygones and back Assad on the proviso that he eased himself away from Iran and Russia. And who wouldn't prefer that line-up to that line-up?

But everyone, as usual, had underestimated 'the street' which keeps on insisting they prefer the Muslim candidate, whoever that is. There really isn't anything to do long term but accept the Afghan solution. They'll just have to work it out for themselves no matter how deplorable the topdogs are.

PS The whole thing is being held up anyway because--for reasons I find inexplicable though I welcome it--the Americans won't let go of the Kurds. And that puts them on the other side to everyone.

[Wile E. Coyote]

The thing that Wiley noticed on Syria is that Assad did nothing when Israel was bombing Hezbollah targets within Syria, to that extent his regime is as weak as Lebanon. Hezbollah gave military support to Assad, but when they came under attack he has nothing to give back. Assad didn't even threaten future revenge on Israel.

Assad's response so far is more Russian bombing, plus Iranian advice to help defend key cities now Aleppo is lost. His own army is ineffectual. Assad is making noises about retaking lost territory, but for comparison, a well organised Russian army, logistically supported by a rail network, has taken months to retake only some of the ground in Kursk. The Islamists because of their speedy rate of advance have taken lots of Syrian/Iranian/Russian weaponry. Iran will prioritise supplying Hezbollah, not Assad. What does Russia have to give?

[Mick Harper]

It has to be remembered that the Assad regime--father and son--has always lacked legitimacy. They are Alawites ruling over a nation of Sunnis and Shias. Secularists in a country of religious devotees. They stay in power by being nasty, brutish and not belonging to the other side. Papa Assad managed to do this because of his efficiency. He did a Stalin in the Baath Party. Assad Junior inherited the throne as the last son standing, being an ophthalmologist in west London.

He has stayed on the throne because (a) Iran and Russia came in (b) the west was trying to get out and (c) the opposition is hopelessly divided. The actual local Big Powers--Turkey and Israel--can't make up their mind what to do but, generally speaking, are content for chaos to reign.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

Rebels Capture Syria’s Largest City
The Islamist militant group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and allied factions have seized control of Aleppo (Agencies)

HTS may be an acronym new to you. There may be a number of things new to you since your attention switched to Gaza and Ukraine, and Syria fell out of the news cycle. You may though remember the last time Syria was in the headlines.

[Wile E. Coyote]

I think it might have more to do with the fact that Turkey has taken in 2-3 million Syrian refugees as a result of Assad's human rights abuses. Erdogan is a tad more creative in terms of his immigration policies than most western do-gooders. He has pledged to return 1 million Syrians and appears to now be ensuring a (ahem) right of return to enlarged so-called safe rebel areas.......

[Mick Harper]

It is true Turkey has more 'migrants' per head of (native) population than anyone else in the world. And by a long way. And seems to have avoided a native backlash more successfully that anyone else too. It's all a bit of a mystery to me.

Turkey's relationship to the Idlib enclave is hard to fathom too. She had the power to eliminate it, at least in the early days, by not allowing relief in. But fought stubbornly to keep it open. Then, as you say, occupied a chunk of northern Syria to ensure Idlib couldn't join up with other rebel areas. And, at least in the early days, to provide 'safe areas' for Syrian refugees to return to.

It was also the site of the strangest of all recent demarches when (a) Turkey was at daggers drawn with Russia (b) Turkey shot down an overflying Russian jetfighter (c) they were on the brink of war but (d) became firm friends instead.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Turkey is realist, ie a super hard negotiator. Whilst the west weeps that sanctions are not working, Erdogan is happy to develop Turkstream 2, his conditions are a one-year payment delay for already delivered gas, a 25% future discount, and the transfer of all Russian and Azebaijani gas at the border to Turkey's ownership, with Turkey then selling the the gas on to Europe.

Turkey is Russia's friend if Russia lets Turkey secure its own cheap supplies and become the World's energy selling hub.

Maybe Putin doesn't like the fact that Erdogan, until this is negotiated, is insisting that Crimea is Ukrainian, but then why shouldn't Turkey have a view, the surrounding Seas are international.....

It is Russia's choice, if Gazprom goes bankrupt so be it.......