A gentlemen on the Bar recently asked, "What do we do about Hezbollah?"

Unfortunately, not very much.

Firstly, we really, really, really do _not_ want to be seen as a foreign power messing around in Lebanon's internal politics. (I know that Hezbollah represents a foreign power messing around in Lebanon's internal politics. We'll get to that.)

In the days after Hariri's assassination, the nascent Cedar Revolution wasn't using Iraq as a model, it was using the Orange revolution. And America was not much a part of that. Aside from a State Department warning telling Americans not to eat at parties catered by the Ukrainian intelligence services, we pretty much stayed out of that one until Yushchenko had become the legitimate president and could come to the White House for a nice pat-on-the-back from the president and sincere-yet-clammy handshake from the vice president. At the risk of sounding like a left-wing America-hater, I think there it's very, very good to have a genuinely democratic country that can't even be _accused_ of being an American puppet state.

Okay, you say, but that's a really tortured analogy: the phrase "Lebanon's internal politics" is as big an oxymoron as "military intelligence" or "good writing by Rick Berman." (What? He killed 'Star Trek.' I want blood.) It's true that the whole point of the popular riots in Lebanon was to kick out a foreign power, not a corrupt government. But the way the Lebanese identified with Ukrainians more than the Iraqis should be a clue that American interference with Hezbollah would not go over well at all.

Secondly, while I'm not the most qualified to speak to how much of a threat Hezbollah is militarily, it's not that big a deal in Lebanon politics. First of all, political parties in Lebanon, period, are less important than they are in most countries; especially with the way the constitution guarantees that Christians and Muslims must have equal representation. But even better, Hezbollah's new status as part of the government may put domestic pressure on them to spend more money building hospitals and less money firing rockets into the Golan Heights.

Not that Hezbollah will stop being a terrorist organization and preaching vicious anti-Semitic rhetoric. They won't. I'm just saying that, compared to Hamas and the Martyrs Brigade, they're aren't the biggest problem for Israel or for the U.S. I'm not saying it wouldn't be good to get rid of Hezbollah; just that they're not the number one priority. And the downside is huge. Appearing to mess around with Lebanon just as they're gaining some semblance of independence for the first time since the Carter Administration would be, um, bad. I told you I'd address the fact that Hezbollah is at times nothing but a proxy for Syria and Iran. Well, a proxy still has to be handled a little differently than actual direct interference from those countries. The Cedar Revolution has shown us that Lebanon has enough of a national identity to keep agents like Hezbollah from doing too much damage, as long as Syria doesn't send troops back in. (Hopefully, last week's apparently Syrian hit on columnist Samir Kassir will only galvanize Lebanon's outrage.)

In any case, the best thing we could do right now is to really pressure Syria to stay the hell out. A few statements from Scott McClennan are all well and good, but I would like to see Condi Rice head to the U.N. and give a big, epic speech about how it is the duty of the United Nations to ensure that Lebanon can conduct it's own affairs without the interference of Syria, Iran, Israel, or America. That would be the best possible way for us to keep the pressure on Syria without being seen as having imperialistic designs on Lebanon.

(Also, it would be a helluva informal kick-off for the Vote Condi 2009 campaign.)

Leaving Hezbollah alone is a small price to pay.

Post a Comment