Reality Check

While the war between Hezbollah and Israel seems to be on an increasingly temporary hiatus, the public relations battle over who actually came out ahead in this latest Arab-Israeli conflict seems to depends on whether or not you give military successes or temporary political successes more weight.

Leftist poster boy in favor of Islamic oppression, Robert Fisk:

The truth is Israel opened its attack on Lebanon by claiming the Lebanese government was responsible for Hizbollah's attack - which it clearly was not - and that its military actions would achieve the liberation of the captured soldiers.

This, the Israelis have signally failed to do. The loss of 40 soldiers in just 36 hours and the successful Hizbollah attacks against Israeli armour in Lebanon were a disaster for the Israeli army.

The fact that Syria could bellow about the "achievements" of Hizbollah while avoiding the destruction of a blade of grass inside Syria suggests a cynicism that has yet to be grasped inside the Arab world. But for now, Syria has won.

Was Lebanon's government—the same government which refuses to disarm Hezbollah—aware of Hezbollah's plan to kidnap Israeli soldiers?

Fisk says they weren't complicit.

Hasan Narallah, leader of Hezbollah, indicates otherwise (my bold):

I told them on more than one occasion that we are serious about the prisoners issue and that this can only solved through the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. Of course, I used to make hints in that respect. Of course I would not be expected to tell them on the table I was going to kidnap Israeli soldiers in July. That could not be.

[Bin-Jiddu (Al-Jazeera)] You told them that you would kidnap Israeli soldiers?

[Nasrallah] I used to tell them that the prisoners' issue, which we must solve, can only be solved through the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers.

[Bin-Jiddu (Al-Jazeera)] Clearly?

[Nasrallah] Clearly. Nobody told me: no, you are not allowed to kidnap Israeli soldiers. I was not waiting for such a thing. Even if they told me no you are not allowed [nothing would change]. I am not being defensive. I said that we would kidnap Israeli soldiers in meetings with some of the key political leaders in the country.

To call Robert Fisk a liar would be redundant.

Is the loss of 40 soldiers in 1 1/2 days a "disaster" as Fisk states? To the family members of the soldiers it undoubtedly is, but otherwise, the lost of 40 men in a close quarters ground assault against the entrenched positions is hardly a disaster, even if the overall outcome of the battle was not the total destruction of Hezbollah in South Lebanon. "We won because we didn't all die" is hardly the most convincing victory speech for Hezbollah and their Syrian and Iranian patrons, not matter how the politics of the situation are spun.

Of course, that is just the political angle played up by Hezbollah's supporters.

Let's look at another view, based on the facts:

Hizbollah suffered a defeat. Their rocket attacks on Israel, while appearing spectacular (nearly 4,000 rockets launched), were unimpressive (39 Israelis killed, half of them Arabs). On the ground, Hizbollah lost nearly 600 of its own personnel, and billions of dollars worth of assets and weapons. Israeli losses were far less.

While Hizbollah can declare this a victory, because it fought Israel without being destroyed, this is no more a victory than that of any other Arab force that has faced Israeli troops and failed. Arabs have been trying to destroy Israel for over half a century, and Hizbollah is the latest to fail. But Hizbollah did more than fail, it scared most Moslems in the Middle East, because it demonstrated the power and violence of the Shia Arab minority. Sunni Arabs, and most Arabs are Sunnis, are very much afraid of Shia Moslems, mainly because most Iranians are Shia, not Arab, and intent on dominating the region, like Iran has done so many times in the past. Hizbollah's recent outburst made it clear that Iran, which subsidizes and arms Hizbollah, has armed power that reaches the Mediterranean. This scares Sunni Arabs because a Shia minority also continues to rule Syria (where most of the people are Sunni). The Shia majority in Iraq, which have not dominated Iraq for over three centuries, is now back in control.

Hizbollah did enjoy a victory in its recent war, but it was over Sunni Arabs, not Israel.

Two different reactions, one based in leftist cant sympathetic to terrorists, and another based on the actual physical damage and the political resonance felt throughout the region. At the end of the day, I think the Israelis came out far better in their "defeat" than did Hezbollah's military wing in their corpse-riddled "victory."