Behold, a blog

Alright....here goes. The title of this blog is not just an incomplete sentence, but the title of an old Buffalo Springfield song. I once saw Neil Young play an acoustic concert when I was about 12. I think I cried because he wasn't very good.

Anyway....let's talk about freedom and stuff.

I hope I don't make any ridiculous factual and/or spelling errors. (Note: the spell check built into this blog does not recognize "blog.")



Everyone is Being Stupid and I am Sad

For observers of the Middle East, the past week has been a depressing display of death and violence that threatens to postpone sustainable Middle East peace indefinitely. On June 25, an Israeli soldier was abducted from Gaza by Palestinian militants, including members of Hamas. On July 12, Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli soldiers on the Israel-Lebanon border. Israel has responded with strikes on Palestinian Authority buildings, including Foreign Ministry offices, a number of homes Israel believed hosted Hamas meetings and power stations. In Lebanon, targets have included the Beirut civilian airport, a number of port cities, highways and suburban Beirut, where Hezbollah has its headquarters. Hezbollah and Palestinian militants have both sought the release of prisoneers held by Israel in exchange for the captured soldiers; Israel says that to acquiesce to such demands would only encourage more kidnappings. Instead, Israel aims to destroy Hamas and Hezbollah.
Though its stated aims are justified, Israel’s methods arecontemptiblee. Aside from the plain collective punishment of the destruction of power plants and bridges, because both Hezbollah and Hamas exist interspersed among civilians, any military attempts at their destruction cannot help but destroy the surrounding society. Israeli arguments that residents of Gaza and Lebanon will hold their governments accountable for the destruction of their society—rather than the nation whose army is dropping the bombs—and compel the dismantling of Hamas and Hezbollah is (far) more fantasy than reality.
A more cogent explanation for Israel’s response is its designs to forgo negotiations to unilaterally draw its borders. With Hezbollah and Hamas engaging in terrorism and soldier kidnappings while also participatingLebanesenese and Palestinian governments, Israel is left without “negotiating partner,” leaving little choice but to go it alone. Though this logic is somewhat dubious, as the loyalty of militant elements of Hezbollah and Hamas to their political and governing wings is uncertain, Israel’s case for unilateralism can be bolstedestabilizeilizing the entirety of Lebanese and Palestinian governments. Hardly stable to begin with, these governments may not be able to withstand Israel’s assault.
Hamas and Hezbollah, for their parts, are hardly acting as noble warriors, reluctant but willing to enunsparingunsavory deeds to achieve nationalist ends. Hezbollah’s rockets (Israel claims they are Syrian-made Iranian designs) sit in densely populated areas before they are shot at patently non-military targets like the resort town of Tiberias and the Haifa train station, gorged with commuters on their morning commute. Though local events and conditions are primary motivators, regional dynamics are important as well. Exiled Hamas offiDamascus Damascas, such as Khaled Meshaal, further marginalized with the election of Hamas to the PA government earlier this year, are plenty busy fomenting conflict from abroad. Public distance from military activities suits Hamas politicos as well, allowing them to absolve themselves of responsibility for violence. Syria and Iran, increasingly isolated and Iran facing possible punitive Security Council action, have little to lose in renewed violence. Israeli action can be served as evidence of Western bullying, with Syria and Iran as the vanguards of the struggle against Western and Israeli oppression. While Syrian and Iranian regimes increase their domestic support, international attention turns todestabilizeabilizing policies rather than their own.
Only the United States has a stake in immediate peace—Bush’s vision of a stable, democratic Middle East, a desire to keep international pressure on Iran, aversion to increases in oil prices, a distaste for anything that could further incite anti-Americanism in Iraq or even dreams of a flattering paragraph in history textbooks and are all plausible motives—and the influence--billions in aid and military equipment-- to effect meaningful change. American officials, though, have been sadly predictable in their public comments regarding the situation. Preferring to cast the conflict in terms of a worldwide war against terrorism, no American has been critical of Israel’s escalation. Both President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asserting Israel’s right to defend itself while “urging restraint.” In private, reports have surfaced that Rice has been a bit more forward in urging Israeli restraint, only to be successfully rebuffed by Israeli Prime Minister Olmert with a simple “back off.” Rice has resisted calls for personal diplomacy. To now, the world’s only superpower has been impotent, dithering in the distance as innocent lives are destroyed and another generation’s hopes for peace literally explode before the world’s eyes.