A Boatload of Trouble

Think Hezbollah was tamed following the 2006 war? The recent seizure of a cargo ship full of weapons intended for the organization proves otherwise.

BY MAGNUS NORELL | NOVEMBER 9, 2009

Ever since the end of the war in the summer of 2006 between Israel and the radical Lebanese Shiite organization, Hezbollah, there has been a major effort on the part of Hezbollah to rearm, especially with offensive weapons such as rockets and medium-range missiles. The organization has also rebuilt its bunker and defensive positions in southern Lebanon, despite the presence of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), which expanded following the 2006 war to its current size of 12,425 troops from 30 countries.  

In sheer numbers, this international force is much larger than the one I personally observed in southern Lebanon on numerous extended visits earlier this decade, when my own country of Sweden was actively participating in UNIFIL's mission. Yet the sad fact is that today, notwithstanding its greatly increased size and strengthened mandate, UNIFIL has consistently failed to hinder Hezbollah from regaining its position as the only serious political and military player in southern Lebanon. The organization has even been unable to stop continued shipments of arms to Hezbollah, despite UNIFIL's explicit U.N. mandate against them. These arms shipments come mainly from Hezbollah's leading backer, Iran. Since long before the 2006 war, the bulk of the weapons and munitions came overland through Syria -- where they were flown in from Iran -- but there have been attempts to smuggle weapons into Lebanon by sea as well.

Accordingly, it came as no great surprise last Wednesday when the Israeli navy seized an Antigua-flagged ship outside Cyprus carrying almost 400 tons of weapons originating out of an Iranian port and bound for Hezbollah, via Syria. The cargo is considerably larger than anything previously intercepted, demonstrating the degree to which Hezbollah, and to a lesser extent Hamas in Gaza, is being resupplied by their main backer, Iran.

The shipment, of course, contravenes recent U.N. Security Council resolutions prohibiting Iran's arms exports and U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war. The seized weapons -- including offensive ones such as Katyushas, intended to target noncombatants -- show, yet again, the failure of the international community to come to grips with Hezbollah and its intent to disrupt any peace process with Israel.

This incident also shows Hezbollah's continuing dominance of Lebanon's domestic political scene. Since the 2006 war, there has been a long series of failures in confronting Lebanon's truly divisive political issues, particularly the problem of militant Islamism. Hezbollah has been able to call the shots in Lebanese politics, hindering any attempts to put together a new government unless it restores Hezbollah's decisive influence and reverses the movement's electoral loss last June. The organization has also been able to keep the conflict with Israel alive and simmering, though avoiding any dramatic new escalation thus far.

MAHMOUD ZAYAT/AFP/Getty Images

 

Magnus Norell is an adjunct scholar with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a senior analyst at the Swedish Defense Research Agency in Stockholm. In 2000, he helped create a back channel between Hezbollah and Israel to facilitate the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

CHRIS_T

6:06 PM ET

November 9, 2009

Hello, google the word "blowback"

The fundamental problem, sir, is this: you will never eliminate terrorism while the US's foreign policy is unjust.

A Jewish pro-Zionist UN Jurist (Mr. Goldstone) has just found that Israel has committed war crimes in Gaza. And what does the US do? Bury the report.

Since IDF is now a confirmed War Criminal entity sending ANY US military aid to the Israelis is in DIRECT contravention of our Arms Export Control Act. Why do we still support these war criminals?

I am not saying that Hamas and Hezboillah are blame-free. But we don't give them cluster bombs to use on children either.

Since we support war criminals with helicopters and cluster bombs, is it a surprise that we get terrorism in return?

As soon as we stop messing around overseas (witness our clear involvement with the terrorist murder of 5 Iranian revolutionary guards recently) we will get blowback terrorism. It does not matter whether or not AQ has any safe havens or not or whether Hezbollah is rearming-- regular people -- heck, even US army officers, it appears -- can become radicalized by the sheer extent of our injustice abroad.

Force -- even when wielded by the seemingly strong against the nominally weak -- continues to be an exceedingly uncertain instrument. The United States' penchant for projecting power has created as many problems as it has solved. Genuinely decisive outcomes remain rare, costs often far exceed expectations, and unintended and unwelcome consequences are legion.

The pursuit of US military dominance is an illusion, the principal effect of which is to distort strategic judgment by persuading policymakers that they have at hand the means to make short work of history's complexities. The real need is to wean the United States from its infatuation with military power and come to a more modest appreciation of what force can and cannot do.

We have to come to the painful conclusion that we have created the terrorism that we are subject to via our terrible foreign policies. No interception of arms will protect us from our well-earned blowback.

Want to protect the US? Start with our deeply flawed FP.

 

PFNOVAK

1:01 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Protecting the US from blowback

"As soon as we stop messing around overseas"
I agree that the US government could pursue a foreign policy that would engender less hostility from the region. But where to start? The US has been stacking the deck in the region with pro-Western governments for a long time. The blowback extends far beyond Israel and Iraq. For instance, is US support of the Saudi government problematic and the direct cause of Al-Qaeda's declaration of Jihad? Absolutely. But what can the US do about it? As we saw in Iraq, the supposed moral victory of overthrowing a repressive regime is ultimately meaningless. The US has been "messing around overseas" since before the cold war, and such behavior, whether we like it or not, necessitates continued involvement that will likely bring more trouble. The illusion that there is a "reset button" on US-Middle East relations, a fiction perpetuated to great effect during the Obama campaign in '08, is rapidly collapsing.
I agree with you that the US needs to come to terms with the limits of what the use of force can accomplish. But continued strategic involvement in the Middle East, regardless of how unpopular or undemocratic it has been thus far, is unavoidable.

 

SCOTTGOOSE

2:37 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Oh come on

We finally get an objective article about Hezbollah and all the anti-Israeli horders swoop in with the equivocation between Israel and terrorist groups. Just appreciate the objective issues that Hezbollah presents and stop rationalizing terrorism just because you disagree with Israeli policies. This is a fantastic article and hopefully, people will take heed. Chris_T, your irrevocable deluded and I am wasting my time doing anything but concurring with the author. GREAT ARTICLE!

 

DAVE1995

10:08 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Thank you:

...Peace!

 

TOLO1987

5:00 AM ET

November 23, 2009

Peace....Really? Mike

Peace....Really?
Mike

 

CHRIS_T

8:13 PM ET

November 9, 2009

Do I care if Hezbolla attacks

Do I care if Hezbolla attacks Israel? No.

I am an AMerican, I am not an Israeli.

Let the Israelis and Palestinians fight it out with stones, with no military aid to ISarel or anyone else.

US taxes for US!

 

BETZ55

9:52 AM ET

November 10, 2009

Piracy - Israel illegally boarded ship in international waters

Hezbollah is a Lebanese nationalist organisation, which would not exist today had Israel not occupied Southern Lebanon for 18 years.

Hezbollah's crimes pale in insignificance alongside Israel's. No mention of the 11,000-plus Palestinians, including women and children, rotting in Israel jails, many without charges. Or the torture.If Israel was not simultaneously running the worlds only violently enforced colonial settler movement, you might have a point. Also, if, during the period between 2000 and 2009 that Hezbollah fought back against Israeli aggression and occupation and Israel had not shot 14500 mortars into Lebanon, you might also have a point. But you don't.

Oh, and by the way, it was illegal to forcefully board a ship in international waters. Another illegal action by Israel. Desperate criminals call for desperate measures, something Israel knows all about.

 

DEVINMACDONALD

2:40 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Right! shame on the jews who

Right! shame on the jews who illegally boarded the ship to confiscate weapons that would almost certainly used against them.

 

SCOTTGOOSE

2:44 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Your just being silly BETZ

Dude, ad-hominem attacks are completely innane. You circumvent the real issue by simply attacking Israel and attempting to displace blame, all the while ignoring Hezbollah's reprehensible acitivity. Israel shot RETALIATORY rockets into Lebanon. No IDF actions on Southern Lebanon was un-provoked. Side note, its absolutely legal to board a ship that crosses into your expanded economic zone (EEC) that is suspected to have illegal weapons. Even if the shop was not under an Antiguan flag, Israel can board any ship that passes within 250 miles (i believe?) of its borders. Save your illogical and flawed arguments for somewhere else.

 

SCOTTGOOSE

2:44 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Your just being silly BETZ

Dude, ad-hominem attacks are completely innane. You circumvent the real issue by simply attacking Israel and attempting to displace blame, all the while ignoring Hezbollah's reprehensible acitivity. Israel shot RETALIATORY rockets into Lebanon. No IDF actions on Southern Lebanon was un-provoked. Side note, its absolutely legal to board a ship that crosses into your expanded economic zone (EEC) that is suspected to have illegal weapons. Even if the shop was not under an Antiguan flag, Israel can board any ship that passes within 250 miles (i believe?) of its borders. Save your illogical and flawed arguments for somewhere else.

 

SCOTTGOOSE

2:48 PM ET

November 10, 2009

pardon me

Its an extended economic zone (EEC), and regards 12-200 miles. Irrespective of this, any country should have the right to board a ship that falls within its territory in which there is reasonable expectation that weapons will be found, period. Anybody who begs to differ simply wishes Israel to be vanished.

 

JACOB BLUES

3:24 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Actually, the issue is one less of jurisdiction than of policing

National navies are allowed to request the inspection of a commercial vessel with the approval of the ship's captain.

the Israeli navy made such a request of the Farncop and it was approved.

During their initial inspection, they found weaponry not registered as cargo on the ship's manifest . . . hence making it contraband (as well as illegal under normal shipping contracts).

Upon discovery, Israel took the ship to port to make a more thurough inspection, and removed all illegal weapons, as proper by law.

When finished removing the weapons, Israel returned the normal cargo to the ship and allowed it to continue on its way.

Sorry Betz, but that is not piracy.

 

JACOB BLUES

3:28 PM ET

November 10, 2009

As for the existance of Hizballah, Betz, you're splitting hairs

Prior to Israel's invasion of Lebanon in 1982, the Shia's primary militia was Amal. Hizballah split off from them due to their own internal issues.

Of course once Iran's Revolutionary Guards got their hooks into Hizballah, well, it mattered little whether Israel was there or not.

Mind you, Hizballah's issue wasn't with occupation per se, just Israel's existence. Remember, the Syrians had invaded Lebanon, and occupied the country long before Israel entered the country and remained long after Israel left (actually until forced out by the other Lebanese ethnic groups, despite receiving support from Hizballah).

 

JACOB BLUES

3:30 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Chris, as for US taxes for Americans, what's your opinion on

our funding of NATO?

Our 37,000 troops in South Korea for 50+ years.

Our military bases in Japan?

Our first invasion of Iraq to protect the Saudis?

 

CHRIS_T

5:30 PM ET

November 10, 2009

they are all wrong. Read the

they are all wrong.

Read the founding fathers documents: eg. Madison.

No money for Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi, south korea, etc.

As an American what the hell do I care if Hamas or Hezballah destroy Israel?? Is it the 51st state or what?

 

PFNOVAK

5:53 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Founding Fathers

The Founding Fathers were living in a different time. Our global strategic initiatives in the Cold War, which continue to haunt us and drag us back into conflict time and again, cannot simply be erased from history because they weren't what George Washington intended.

 

CHRIS_T

8:01 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Brilliant. What is the

Brilliant. What is the solution then? To let ourselves be dragged back??

The founding fathers were very smart. Listen to them.

 

MIKULASRING

10:00 AM ET

November 30, 2009

I wonder what will happen in

I wonder what will happen in the future. I need to learn something about this topic.
Mikulas the rrod fix dude.

 

LYSANDER

6:53 PM ET

November 10, 2009

Amazing that people are surprised by the existance of Hizbullah

The primary conflict between Lebanon and Israel is that Israel removed (some may say ethnically cleansed) large numbers of Palestinians from Palestine and forced them into Lebanon. Then Israel claimed that Lebanon was responsible for making sure those people it had removed never bother Israel again, on pain of mass bombardment, invasion, occupation, etc.

It is not surprising that there are those in Lebanon who were unhappy with that view of things and chose to resist it.

Yet for the author and a number of posters, the threat to peace and stability is not the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians or the invasions of Lebanon, but the resistance to such. Anyone not seeing things that way can only be a rabid anti-Semite.

 

MARTY24

5:58 PM ET

November 12, 2009

Ethnic Cleansing

Sorry Lysander, but you have your facts wrong.

Israel did not engage in ethnic cleansing. The area of Israel near the Lebanese border continues to have an extensive Arab population. These are the descendants of the Arabs who refused to heed the warnings of the Arab military commanders to get out of the way so they could destroy the Jews.

The principal ethnic cleansing in the Middle East has always been by Muslims targeting non-Muslims. This has been going on for more than a thousand years; it is one of the purposes of jihad. That is why today there are far more Arbas living in each of several towns in Israel than there are Jews in the entire Muslim world.

 

DECONSTRUCTOR

8:21 AM ET

November 11, 2009

What meaning shall a reader

What meaning shall a reader draw from from this one-sided article? One the one hand you claim that Iran is re-arming Hizbollah but missing the multi-bilion dollar military and monetary assistance to Israel by US on annual basis apart from the transfer of most advanced weponary as well. Why should Hizbolleh stop getting re-armed against the deadly threat from Israel given the numerious agressions and invasion of Lebenon by Israel from 1982.

You unacademic article means that one must not protect itself against existential threats to your life which does not stand a simple scrutiny.

 

MARTY24

6:09 PM ET

November 12, 2009

Hizbollah rearming

Deconstructor, it is your entry that does not stand simple scrutiny.

You have missed a central fact of the arms seizure mentioned in the article: sending weapons to Hizbollah is in violation of Security Council Resolution 1701. Since the UN has been largely controlled by Muslims for several decades, the adoption of this resolution means that the Muslim countries don't want to see Hizbollah rearmed. Try to understand what this means: they see a powerful Hizbollah as a threat to themselves, and not just to Israel.

Israel would like to have peaceful relations with Lebanon. It is Hizbollah that prefers that the relationship be based on violence. Hizbollah and its Iranian patrons have been explicit about their existential threat to Israel. If you support the genocide they espouse, then have the integrity to say you're advocating it. But recognize that that makes you guilty of a crime against humanity.

 

XMAGINE

10:42 AM ET

November 11, 2009

Hizbollah begone

Apart from themselves and a few vacillating internal allies, we Lebanese do not want Hezbollah undermining our security and would be more than happy if they were to take themselves and their toys off to Iran. They are nothing short of a destabilising group of warmongers and troublemakers who want war with Israel, not peace. They only use the Palestinian issue as another excuse to exist and have no more care for them than the average Israeli. They conveniently forget the reason why there was a war in 2006 - it was because they kidnapped two Israeli soldiers, on Israeli soil. They high-jacked downtown Beirut for 18 months which sent many businesses to the wall and the tourist industry took a dive. Then they had no compunction at turning their weapons on Lebanese civilians in May last year when the elected people’s representatives wanted to pull their optic fibre telecommunications network. No one else could use that fibre optic network, only Hezbollah. That in itself illustrates that they are not genuine citizens of Lebanon and have no wish to be, but a state within a state. The author is correct. They are a law unto themselves and do no serve the best interests of not only Lebanon, but the region as a whole. If anything, they pull the country down.

 

FG

5:51 PM ET

November 11, 2009

This is what most people here support

Hezbollah's genocidal hatred:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1257770024277&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Just like the non-American, anti-American old British bi**h "Betz 55", Chri_T etc.
Clearly mentally deformed psychopats...

 

FG

5:56 PM ET

November 11, 2009

"Lysander"

Your last sentence aptly describes who and what you are -- and your almost de rigeur total mindlessness and ignorance about the situation -- Are you Hezbollah's stooge, secret internet-agent or just a placid two-bit primitive fa-left radical flunky with piercings in your nose and ears who is inevitably incapable of grasping historical MidEast issues? Which is it?

 

TIPAPIG

4:52 AM ET

November 13, 2009

Unfounded Facts

It is no surprise that Norell is supporting his weak argument with the claim that the recent shipment of weapons seized illegally in the Mediterranean was from Iran and destined for Hizbollah. Regardless of the fact that this is pure speculation, and none of the news agencies nor countries have come out and said this statement is definitely true.

Norell, as an adjunct scholar for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy is essentially on AIPAC's payroll, as everyone knows this alleged think tank is essentially run by AIPAC, and tries to push the extreme right of Israeli policy under the guise of academic work.

This article is just one of many pushed by Israeli hawks with the goal of clearing the ground for future offensives against Hizbollah and Iran.

 

BESTACNEPRODUCTS

4:19 AM ET

December 17, 2009

Great Article

That's a real good piece of information. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Best Acne
Treatment