www.thetrumpet.com

The Danger of an Israeli Cease-Fire

Friday, August 4, 2006

International pressure is mounting on Israel to stop its attack on Hezbollah. If Israel gives in, it would play right into Hezbollah’s hands. Israel has few friends in this world. In the current flare-up of hostilities, only America and Britain have provided any meaningful support for the Jewish state. These two nations, however, face increasing public and international pressure for that support. First Britain was swept away by the world-opinion tide against Israel, demanding an immediate cease-fire in the Israel-Hezbollah hostilities before Israel has had the chance to neutralize Hezbollah’s ability to fire missiles into Israeli cities. Now, it appears the United States is weakening in its support of Israel. “Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice expressed support Thursday for an immediate cease-fire in Lebanon as the first phase in ending the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, in the most concrete signal yet that the U.S. may be willing to compromise on the stalemate over how to end the fighting” (Associated Press, August 3). Rice predicted a UN Security Council resolution would be agreed upon within days that would include an immediate cease-fire demand. Why would this not be a desirable move? After all, who could possibly be in favor of continued fighting? On the surface of it, the argument for an immediate cease-fire may sound good. But, of course, one must go way below the surface to accurately analyze the complex battle Israel is involved in. Israel is, in fact, involved in a dangerous struggle over the future of the Middle East. At stake is the preservation of world peace. The reality is that Iran—the group that controls Hezbollah and who unleashed it in this present war—will stop at nothing until it controls Jerusalem and Israel is wiped off the face of the Earth. So, should Israel engage in a cease-fire agreement without solving the Iranian problem, it would merely be a short-term fix. But Israel’s sights are set far lower than that. “[Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert told his security cabinet Wednesday [July 26] that he intends to clear Hezbollah positions from a strip of southern Lebanon, then hold it until a multinational peacekeeping force can be deployed” (Washington Post, July 27). Hardly a goal to strike fear into the Iranian regime. Daniel Hannan of the UK-based Telegraph sees that solving the sum of this equation must include the Iranian quotient. He wrote in a July 31 column: “The Iranian Hydra has many heads. The mullahs sponsor militias and political movements across the Muslim world, in the old Silk Road Khanates and as far afield as Bosnia. You can lop off the head called Hezbollah. You can even cauterize the wound, by demilitarizing southern Lebanon. But, as long as the monster’s heart continues to beat in Tehran, the head will grow back.” Indeed, that is something the Trumpet has stated since 1992. And that, precisely, is the problem: The beating heart of the Hezbollah problem lies in Tehran, not Lebanon. This means that whenever Israel stops its offensive against Hezbollah, this terrorist group will still be in a position to reemerge. The Washington Post article continued, “The Hezbollah guerrilla fighters are mostly local Shiite youths who know the terrain and, in ordinary times, work and live among the population. The Shiite theocracy in Iran is the group’s chief financial sponsor, and Israeli officials say much of its arsenal arrives with Syria’s blessing. In recent years, its members have rarely carried arms or worn uniforms, except when called on to participate in an operation. They are trained to retreat back among their civilian neighbors when the firing dies down. … “The loose structure has helped prevent Israel’s intensive bombing over the last two weeks from disrupting communications or lines of command and control. With guerrillas fighting in their home villages and arms cached in tunnels and underground shelters, there are few vital command lines to attack.” To be sure, Hezbollah’s military power is being reduced, but this has not stopped its missile attacks on Israel (which have actually increased)—and Hezbollah does not seem to be in short supply of manpower. There are even reports that suicide fighters from Iran are being sent to Lebanon to assist Hezbollah. So while in the short term, a successful cease-fire may give Israel a temporary respite from Hezbollah rocket attacks, the long-term picture remains the same, if not worse. Hezbollah will rearm and regroup during a cease-fire. And if a multi-national force is slotted in between Israel and Hezbollah, Israel is almost guaranteed to be limited in its ability to strike at Hezbollah. Incidentally, a cease-fire would fall right in line with Hezbollah’s plan. In fact, Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah implicitly called for a cease-fire in a televised address on August 3 in which he said Hezbollah would cease rocket attacks on Israel if Israel stopped its airstrikes. By doing so, Stratfor states, “Nasrallah is revealing a shift in Hezbollah’s strategy in an attempt to throw a wrench into Israel’s military campaign” (August 3). Nasrallah “is monitoring the pace on the diplomatic front as pressure mounts on Israel to wrap up the military campaign. It is in Hezbollah’s strongest interest for a cease-fire to be drawn up at this stage of the war. … By making an implicit offer for a cease-fire before Israel charges forward with its ground assault, Nasrallah is attempting to swing the diplomatic pendulum in Hezbollah’s favor.” Moreover, a cease-fire would mean Hezbollah’s prestige would grow because it would be able to claim it faced down the “Zionist infidel” and won the war. “The Shiite militant movement has skillfully maintained its command-and-control structure and has managed to sustain the heavy barrage of rocket attacks into northern Israel. If the war ended within the next few days, Hezbollah would be re-legitimized as a potent Arab resistance movement, and the weakness of Israel’s armed forces would be exposed” (ibid.). The lesson for Hezbollah and Iran would be that Israel is too weak to counter their designs for the Middle East. “Moshe Arens, a hawkish former Likud defense minister, issued a stark warning that Hezbollah and its leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, could emerge from the conflict without being beaten. ‘This will be a disaster for Israel,’ he told the Ha’aretz newspaper. ‘Nasrallah will be seen as someone who fired thousands of Katyushas at Israeli communities for weeks and came out unscathed’” (Mail and Guardian Online, July 30). At home, with more than 80 percent of Israelis currently supporting the offensive against Hezbollah, a cease-fire that offers no tangible progress toward peace and safety for Israel would be a big blow to Olmert’s government. Should Israel end up in a worse position than when it started, it will further weaken the nation’s will to fight. Israelis will lose confidence in their government and military’s ability to protect them. But among the greatest problems facing Israel with a cease-fire is what a European multi-national force portends. Not only does it dim the prospect for peace in the Middle East—since the problem requires overwhelming force and complete victory over the enemy—but it opens the door to a European army placing its own brand of solution on the problem between Israel, Hezbollah and Iran. What may be baffling is, how can a country with overwhelming military might have such a struggle against such an inferior enemy? Although the Arab nations of the Middle East contest Israel’s right to exist in the Promised Land, it is just that: promised land. It was promised to the descendants of Abraham. The inhabitants of the tiny nation of Israel (Israel is primarily of the tribe of Judah today) are among those descendants. The Jews should have a special relationship with the God who promised and gave that land to them. The Old Testament, especially the book of Joshua, explains how Israel came to claim the Promised Land. As Psalm 124 states, if it were not for God, Israel would have perished. Continually, when the people of ancient Israel were in obedience to God, He would fight and win their battles for them. Yet as the book of Judges explains, as Israel rejected God, wars with its neighbors flared up, threatening its national life. However, God would hear their cry for help, and send them a judge who would lead them back to Him and deliver them from their enemies. Today, the times and dates have changed, but the story is still the same. Today, God is Israel’s forgotten man of war. If the Jews would only turn to God and repent of their national and personal sins, God would hear their cry and deliver them from all their enemies. That is the only durable and sustainable solution to Israel’s problems. A cease-fire is just another curse.