Wednesday, July 19, 2006

A cease-fire in Lebanon is a terrible idea

OpinionJournal - Federation :: Lessons Learned : "Hezbollah is not some small, ragged band scattered around Lebanon. It is a huge terrorist structure, built over decades, that includes thousands of men, weapons, positions, offices and everything that enables it to control southern Lebanon. Israel is now destroying that infrastructure. A cease-fire would benefit Hezbollah and threaten Israel. It would protect both Hezbollah and the nations that support it--Syria and Iran--as well as the Lebanese who have accepted the terrorist organization as a legitimate part of their government. A cease-fire would allow Hezbollah to rebuild its power base and enable it to resume its attacks whenever Damascus and Tehran desired. For Israel, a U.N. force would create no security whatever against future attacks.

The Israeli response to the attack by Lebanon-based Hezbollah terrorists was much more violent and effective than Hezbollah, Iran or Syria expected. The Olmert government failed to make any significant response to previous raids from Gaza and Lebanon, which encouraged both terrorist regimes. The Syrian and Iranian regimes practice brinksmanship as their foreign policy. They attack as often as they can in as aggressive a manner as they believe will not trigger a decisive response. Iran wanted to distract the G-8 summit from agreeing to do anything about its nuclear weapons program, so it apparently told its Hezbollah surrogates in Lebanon that the time was ripe to begin a major offensive.

The Hezbollah attacks began about two weeks after Israel suffered the usual international condemnations for its response to the Gaza-based Hamas kidnapping of an Israeli soldier. Even after the Gaza incursion, Iran and Syria--emboldened by international condemnation of Israel's "disproportionate" response--were convinced that Israel would do no more than make token raids into Lebanon. For the first time, Israel has acted in accordance with what used to be President Bush's theory: that a government that contains, supports or harbors terrorists is responsible for their actions. Israel is now demonstrating that there is a price to be exacted from nations who collaborate with terrorists. The reason Israel must not agree to a cease-fire now, and why a U.N. force must be rejected is the fact that the Arab nations may be starting to open their eyes."

Mr. Babbin was a deputy undersecretary of defense in the George H.W. Bush administration. He is a contributing editor of The American Spectator and author of "Showdown: Why China Wants War With the United States" (with Edward Timperlake, Regnery 2006) and "Inside the Asylum: Why the U.N. and Old Europe Are Worse Than You Think" (Regnery 2004). This article appears on RealClearPolitics.com.

No comments: