Mark Byron

Going Forward

President Obama and PM Netanyahu might not agree on much, but Forward seems to be popular with both of them. It's the theme of the Obama reelection campaign; if I can borrow from the old Nixonian acronym, they'll CREEP Forward, which makes more progress than MSNBC's "Lean Foward" or Newt's Lean Six Sigma.

Over in Israel, Netanyahu was seemingly all set to call early elections when he instead brought Kadima, Arial Sharon's old centrist party, into the fold; Kadima means Forward in Hebrew, the Forward is also the name of a noteworthy Jewish-American magazine.

Surpringly, Sharon's still with us, but just barely. I hadn't recalled an obit; that's because he's hanging in there in a mostly vegged state, with enough there to not pull a Shaivo on him. The party he created is on shaky turf as well, as they're expected to lose ground in the next election when it is held.

However, Kadima's blend of hawk and dove would be a good cover for Bibi as he goes forward, especially as they mull a preemptive move against Iranian nukes. If Kadima is on board with a strike, it will gives him some street cred in diplomatic circles, as Kadima often tries to cast itself as the good cop opposite Bibi's bad cop.

Bay of Halal Pigs?

The Syrian civil war is taking interesting turns, as we saw an amphibious raid by rebels; I can't recall seeing that anywhere in my adult lifetime, which has to go back to the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba by dissidents with US help for a matching reference. Somehow, using "Bay of Pigs" in a battle between Muslim factions has a bit of irony.

Syrian rebel gunmen in inflatable dinghies have attacked a military unit on the Mediterranean coast, with deaths on both sides, state media report.

It is thought to be the first rebel assault from the sea. Separately, Lebanon says its navy has seized weapons destined for the rebels.

Clashes between security forces and deserting troops left heavy casualties near Damascus and Aleppo, reports say.

The issues are beginning to take a regional angle, as the rebels have support in northern Lebanon, where Tripoli's Sunni majority is often at odds with its Alawite minority; that enmity might well extend to fighting the Alawite Assad clan running Syria. The containers of arms was heading to Tripoli and thence to the rebels, something that the pro-Syrian Lebanese government would like to stop.

The good news for the fans of the rebels is that support is getting in. The bad news is that the Lebanese government is trying to stop things, which might wind up turning the fight into an international one.

When Doves Cry

A bit of sniping in Israel, were some former intelegence officials are questioning the wisdom of an anti-nuke attack on Iran. The headliner in this BBC piece is former Shin Bet boss Yuval Diskin, making critiques that echo the post-Iraq war debates in the US; Dishin thinks such an attack would backfire and make an Iranian nuke more likely and is accusing the current regime of making up things and being "messianic."

There may well be a hawk-dove divide with Diskin being a dove. Diskin's Wikipedia has him doing a stint as advisor to then-Mossad boss Meir Dagan. Dagan was a Arial Sharon appointee who was kept on by Sharon's successor Ehud Olmert; Sharon was on the dovish side in his latter days, as was Olmert. Dagan had a falling out with PM Netenyahu and has been critical of his Iran policy for the last year and a half since leaving his Mossad post.

Just like Paul tells us to test the spirits, we need to test expert opinions; folks of the left can be right on the follies of war, but they can also give too rosy a view of human nature, espcially those who aren't interested in playing nice. Of course, the BBC will eat such stuff up, so take it with the proper grains of salt.

Mecca for Post-Moderns

I recall the end of a current ad where the head of the household is in the process of eating his daughter's goldfish as sushi. When the fishies turn up AWOL, the dad says "whadya gonna do?"

We're much in the same predicament as the tweenager in the ad with Iran right now. There isn't a lot that can be done about the attempted assassination attempt on the Saudi ambassador. Any diplomatic solution by the US seems trite and any military solution seems overkill.

The best solution might come from the Saudis themselves. They have something that Iranians are keenly interested in... Mecca. Were the Saudis to declare the Haj off limits to Iranians, it would get the Iranian's attention in a hurry. It would inflame Sunni-Shia relations in hot spots like Iraq and Lebanon and possibly result in at least one civil war breaking out or resuming.

There are a lot of interesting sub-plots here if this isn't just an Amateur Night sting of a Iranian would-be spy. If the Iranians were actually thinking of recruiting the Zetas as hit men, it might start a major US intervention in Mexico, as the drug war and the "War on Terror" get a quick and dirty merger.

The Zetas are likely smarter than that; being caught helping the Iranians would make them Public Enemy #1 in the US and bring a US response that would militarize northern Mexico beyond the flawed run at Villa in the 1910s. Thankfully for them, it was a US agent posing as a Zeta.

Not Yo' Promise Anymore

Here's an interesting flak going on between Israel and Arab Catholics. I'm not sure how much of this is Catholic doctrine and how much of it is convenient application of hermeneutics-

Archbishop Cyril Salim Bustros, head of the commission which drew up the statement, went one step further, saying: "The theme of the Promised Land cannot be used as a basis to justify the return of the Jews to Israel and the expatriation of the Palestinians."

"For Christians, one can no longer talk of the land promised to the Jewish people," the Lebanese-born head of the Greek Melkite Church in the United States said, because the "promise" was "abolished by the presence of Christ."

That sounds a bit like Replacement Theology, where the modern Church takes over the role of Israel in prophecy. Either that, or you have an amillennial approach that throws any future role for Israel out the window.

Or, it's just bad theology where Jew-bashing is the coin of the realm. A lot of folks on the left wing of the Church are pro-Arab to the point of being anti-Israel as Israel becomes seen as a colonial menace; that's going to be heightened by having Arab churchmen playing to the crowd back home.

I don't think that's Vatican doctrine. Both popes John Paul II and Benedict have been polite towards both Jews and Israel, so there will likely be some feather-unruffuling between Rome and Jerusalem.

"But what will we do after lunch?

That's the punchline of an old IDF joke where one soldier proclaims "Today, we take [fill in neighboring capital]!"

However, they are literally talking like that about Lebanon after a border scuffle earlier this month-"Israel was ready to implement a plan to destroy within four hours all Lebanese military infrastructure, including army bases and offices, should a similar confrontation occur in the future."

Yes, that does fall short of actually wrapping up Beirut by noon, but give us some poetic license.

Veiled Threats

Veil-banning countries now include France, Belgium and... Syria? It is worth a statist chuckle to note that is was the higher education minister of the Syrian government that announced the ban of veils in college classes- over here, we question whether we need a federal education department, and there it gets broken into more than one free-standing agency.

One of the things that people forget about Syria is not just that the government is secular and nationalistic in nature, the Baathists that gave us Saddam Hussain and company in Iraq, but that the Assad clan is part of the heterodox Alawi branch of Islam. While the Alawi are moving back towards a more orthodox view of Islam, a move towards a more radical Islam might turn their attention to their half-infidel leaders.

Israeli Jew Review

Here's some interesting legislation in Israel that could have a major impact on US-Israel relation, especially with American Jews. The Knesset is looking at a law that would give the chief rabbinate authority over determining whether a conversion to Judaism is valid.

The problem with that, from an American standpoint, is that the rabbinate is skewed to the theological right. The vast majority of Israeli Jews are Orthodox, even though many, if not most, aren't all that observant; thus you have those devout rabbis who oversee things labeled "ultra-Orthodox" by less devout folks.

However, Orthodox Jews only make up about 20% of the Jewish landscape, with Reform and Conservative branches making up the majority. If the Orthodox can be compared with Evangelicals in their small-o orthodoxy, Conservatives are moderate main-liners and Reformed are your liberal mainliners.

Like many evangelicals looking down their noses as "nominal Christians" in the mainline denominations, Orthodox Jewish Israelis tend to dismiss their Reform and Conservative counterparts as fake Jews and not entitled to Israeli citizenship. That will make relations between American Jews of the center-left and Israel and may make US foreign policy interesting, as Evangelical Christians might be more pro-Israel than liberal Jews.

Meanwhile, the politics of Israel might be driving things. A number of devout Orthodox parties, including the Shas party catering to Sephardic Jews of Arab origin, make up the swing vote in the current coalition. This might be a way for their more secular kin of throwing Israel's religious right a bone, but it is one that American Jews might wind up choking on.

Time to Deep Six NATO

The current flap over Hamas fans trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza has shown a major geopolitical problem for the US- Turkey is not helpful on that issue. They are taking the Hamas-fans side of the story to the point of talking about sending Turkish warships to escort the blockade-runners.

That would essentially destroy NATO, for the US government would have to tell the Turks that they take on the Israelis at their own peril and that we'd not have their back. If anything, we'd be rooting for the Israelis on that one.

Blogger Andy Jackson proved to be right about the Turkish government; they are more nastily Islamic than I thought as it plays out in anti-Jewish thought. That might not lose points with people in Europe, but it will in the US.

This will make getting Turkey into the EU harder and might be the final straw of NATO. Without a major Russian threat to fend off, NATO has little purpose in the 2010s other than being a non-UN way to get the developed-world's armies to band together for an international project. When a NATO member is this close to getting shot at by Israel, it's time to pull the plug, even if it makes Iraq a bit more problematic without Turkish airfields.

Net a Yahoo?

That's the question before the movers and shakers in Israel. The Obama administration might be nervous about a Netanyahu government, preferring that they net a yahoo before he screws up the peace process. I'm reminded of a 2002 post:

There is always a call for an extra round of diplomacy, even when neither side is ready to talk. We haven't "exhausted all diplomatic options" yet, even if those options aren't going to get up anywhere, as diplomats will always want to "do something" before letting the generals have their way. Diplomacy's dead for now, but no one wants to face up to it.

"Give him an enema!"

"Ma'am, the man's dead. An enema wouldn't help."
"It wouldn't hurt!"

Just like Dubya grabbed for the saline solution bag in 2002 (I forgot to throw this blog a seventh birthday party last month), Obama's looking to give that dead man a liquid goosing.

However, it looks like Bibi will get another whack at being prime minister. Here's the BBC's breakdown of Knesset seats.

Kadima's in at 28; that's the center-right party that Ariel Sharon set up before going down for the count with a stroke; foreign minister Tzipi Livni (sorry, her name looks like two bad Scrabble racks; well, one good and one bad, since you can do Ziti and Zip out of her first name) is the current Kadima leader.

Likud, from which Sharon bolted, is in at 27; they're the traditional party of the secular right. Even though they're in second, both are very far away from the 61 seats that would make up a majority.

In the second tier, we have secular hawks Yisrael Beiteinu with 17, Labor (their traditional party of the left) with 13 and Shas with 11. Shas caters to devout Sephardic (Jewish folks from Arab countries) voters, who have traditionally been poorer than the Ashkenazi (Jews of European descent); that often makes Shas very pork-driven (in the political sense; they wouldn't touch unkosher pork or other pig meat), siding with the factions that will direct more government aid to Sephardic neighborhoods.

Thus, you could get to a grand coalition with Kadima, Likud and one of the second-tier parties. Labor is not interested in a coalition; they just had their clock cleaned and need to be in the opposition to get their sea legs back. So, such a three-way coalition would either include Shas or Yisrael Beiteinu, both of whom would me more interested in a PM Netanyahu than a PM Livni. Once the election rhetoric dies down, you could see Foreign Minister Livni figure that hanging onto her job in a Likud-led government beats leading the opposition; the leader of the junior partner generally gets the foreign portfolio.

That would give a moderate face to a not-so-moderate government, selling a more unilateral implementation of a two-state solution to the rest of the world. YB is open to a Palestinian state but would like to move a lot of Arab communities in Israel proper over to the the new state and annex Jewish parts of the West Bank; Livni might wind up being the sales rep for that package.

What if there's too much bad blood for a Likud-Kadima coalition? There isn't a clear center-left package for Kadima to head. Arab parties snagged 11 seats and the socialist-leaning Meretz bagged 3, which would bring the coalition to 42, well short of a majority if Labor holds to its pledge of being on the outside. Even with Labor, a coalition of the left would need to pry one of the parties of the right over.

For Likud, a majority without Kadima is feasible. A Likud-YP-Shas package gets them to 53 seats; they would need two of three Ashkenazi religious parties (United Torah-5 seats, National Union-4, Jewish Home-3) to get to 61. However, such a coalition would be rather unwieldy, with YP wanting a separate Palestinian state and a more Arab-free Israel and the smaller religious parties wanting to annex the West Bank and encourage the Arabs there to leave. Also, YP is rather secular and may lock horns with the religious parties.

Thus, a Likud-YP-Kadima package seems the most viable. It will take a few days for Kadima to understand that despite their plurality, they'll be junior partners in the next government.

A Two-State Solution?

Bangladesh doesn't come to mind too often, but it did just now as Hamas has effectively assumed control of Gaza.

When colonial India was divided up into Pakistan and India, largely along religious lines, the original Pakistan had both east and west sides divided by India proper; the east side declared independence, with Indian help, as Bangladesh in 1971, with the west side soldiering on as Pakistan. The failure of the Pakistani government to recognize a Bengali-majority government elected in 1970 was cited as one of the triggers of the move to independence.

I didn't remember that part of history about the unrecognized election, but it has echoes here. Hamas has essentially been denied leadership after winning elections last year, and now has taken matters into their own hands. Gaza and the West Bank are separated by Israel, and it may well be natural for the two segments to be separate countries.

Israel may well be in favor of a two-state solution finally, two Palestinian states, with a somewhat moderate Fatah-led West Bank government that they can talk to and a Hamas-led Gaza government that they can bomb back into the Stone Age if needed. The sites of interest to Israelis are in the West Bank and little historical roots lie in Gaza, so a partition of Palestinian territory would suit Israel just fine.

Taking it to the Streets

We're seeing some interesting brinkmanship in Palestine. President Abbas has announced new parliamentary elections which Hamas, the current majority in parliament, has vowed to boycott. Tony Blair is cheering Abbas on.

Hamas has no good move but to boycott the election. If they run and win, we're back to an untenable square one. Abbas needs Hamas to vow to play nice with Israel in order to get US and European help, and Hamas is genetically incapable of doing so. Like the Croc in Pearls Before Swine, their primary platform is Keel Joos, which they seem unlikely to alter.

If they run and lose, they lose street cred. If they run and win, they don't get to govern. Why bother running?

Hamas is more than just a terrorist machine; they also have a formidable charitable arm that buys support on the street. They don't need to be in government to have support. In fact, a impotent government gives them more power, for their charity doesn't have to compete with government aid.

Their next move is to make life miserable for Abbas and whoever wins the Hamas-free elections. If they can keep Abbas from taking control and getting significant US aid, they can become a de-facto government on-the-street without a capital that the IDF can bomb or raid. If they can keep Abbas from getting effective control, then Hamas can run in the next presidential election and win, or merely seize power as the Abbas government becomes a non-entity.

If Abbas is going to run an effective government that can become a coherent Palestinian government that can co-exist with Israel, some sort of civil war with Hamas seems likely. The problem is, I don't like Abbas' chances right now. A Hamas-Fatah civil war will be very messy and has a high probability of Hamas winning.

If Hamas wins, the Palestinian Civil war merely becomes the semi-final for an ultimate IDF-Hamas final, with the strong possibility that the US might weigh in with Israel if Hamas is getting significant outside help.

If Abbas wins, we'll have a shot at a two-state solution that a center-left Israeli government could live with. The question remains whether such a government will be around when the dust settles; we could very well see a center-right hawkish government in a year or so.

We live in interesting times.

Where's My Robust Peace?

Fragile is the word of the day. The BBC headline is "Fragile Truce Holding in Lebanon" while CNN has "Fragile peace, skirmishes holding in Lebanon."

You're not likely to have a robust truce in that fight. Hezbollah's raison d'etre is to wipe Israel off the map, and Israel's not likely to take up the comic's suggestion to relocate to the western US and create Jewtah. Somethin' gotta give here.

It's unlikely that a Lebanese-UN force has the muscle and desire to disarm Hezbollah; the UN's track record of forging peace where the locals don't really want it isn't good. Cambodia is one rare example of UN success, but most of the parties were tired of fighting and wanted to go back to normalcy.

The UN's like the addled Boy Scout; it's hard to help an old lady across the street when the old lady doesn't want to go. Hezbollah really doesn't want to go across Disarmament Street. It would take a rather buff Scout to pick that old lady up and frog-march her over to the opposite curb. Sorry, but these scouts don't spend near enough time in the gym.

This peace isn't shalom. Not yet. If things stay quiet through Labor Day, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

Peace in our Time?

There's two good pieces of news on my TV this evening. The first is the Lions offense; they're up 10-0 early in the second quarter against Denver, as Martz's Greatest Show on Turf seems to have translated into Honolulu blue and silver, as both Kitna and Orlovsky were doing great Kurt Warner imitations. Yes, I hear from the back of the Peanut Gallery, one quarter of pre-season shouldn't say much, but it's the best offensive quarter I've ever seen the Lions have in ages.

However, the bigger news comes from the UN this evening; both Lebanon and Israel have verbally signed off on a peace framework. The UN Security Council just passed it 15-0. The framework will have a 15K UN force go into southern Lebanon with the Lebanese army, disarm Hezbollah and keep them disarmed. Israel will hold fort until they come in.

The kicker here is whether that UNIFIL-on-steroids will have the mandate and the will to kick butt and take names with Hezbollah. If not, what went down in New York just now will be as worthless as Neville Chamberlain's trip to Munich in 1938, as my title alludes to.

It is possible to put together a can-do peace-making force with an attitude; however, it's not been the UN's strong suit, especially in south Lebanon. As I was working the remote earlier, O'Reilly was grilling Tony Snow on that point, and Snow was trying to assure Bill that the force would be tough enough to do the job, that the President wouldn't sign off on anything less.

This is put-up-or-shut-up time for the UN. Kofi Annan can drone sanctimoniously about peace, but can he oversee a force that can actually kick butt and take names in south Lebanon. Will he throw a cagey touchdown pass like Orlovsky threw to start the second quarter, or lob up an interception like Orlovsky did on the next possession (the offense looked a bit less stellar as I've been writing this)?

His track record leans to the latter, but if the Bush team and their allies (and they do have them) keep Annan's feet to the fire, we might actually see a functional UN. Otherwise, they might as well build their new digs in Geneva, for the US won't be interested in supporting a joint that is all talk and no helpful action; Annan might sound real dignified, but he needs to show that he can make the world a better place rather than just a better-sounding place.

Chicago-on-the-Med

It might sound trite, but the current Israel-Hezbollah war reminds me of that Sean Connery line from The Untouchables.

You wanna know how you do it? Here's how, they pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way, and that's how you get Capone!

Richard Cohen managed to get it right for a change and pointed out that the charge of disproportionality is not fair, since the response to a terror attack isn't to merely return the favor and lob a few missiles back into southern Lebanon.

The dire consequences of proportionality are so clear that it makes you wonder if it is a fig leaf for anti-Israel sentiment in general. Anyone who knows anything about the Middle East knows that proportionality is madness. For Israel, a small country within reach, as we are finding out, of a missile launched from any enemy's back yard, proportionality is not only inapplicable, it is suicide. The last thing it needs is a war of attrition. It is not good enough to take out this or that missile battery. It is necessary to reestablish deterrence: You slap me, I will punch out your lights.

However, Israel has unleashed a can of worms in this one. They'll need to severely cripple Hezbollah before they turn things over to some sort of international peace-making force (not just peace-keeping but with the teeth to go after Hezbollah if they start to re-militarize southern Lebanon) or else we'll be right back here in a few months or few years. The part of the Connery line that preceeds that paragraph I cited above is informative-

Malone: You said you wanted to get Capone. Do you really wanna get him? You see what I'm saying is, what are you prepared to do?
Ness: Anything and everything in my power.
Malone: And then what are you prepared to do? If you open the can on these worms you must be prepared to go all the way because they're not gonna give up the fight until one of you is dead.
Ness: How do you do it then?

How? They fire a Katusha, you take over a village. They fire a missile at Haifa, you send ten planes to southern Beirut. That's the IDF way, and that's how they get Hezbollah.

It's not quite as simple of 10x quids for each pro quo; they have to work at hitting Hezbollah military targets and hold the collateral damage to a minimum, but given the blending of civilian and military, that's going to be an inexact science. They'll also have to know that there's a big hunk of the Shiia population that likes them and won't take kindly to their presence.

Nonetheless, the days of proportional whack-a-mole are over. The Bush team seems to be looking not for a cease fire but shalom, a lasting peace. "I support a sustainable ceasefire that will bring about an end to violence... Our mission and our goal is to have a lasting peace, not a temporary peace." Quite a few folks will find their way to morgues before everything's over; pray that it be done, but with a minimum of carnage.

Shake, Saniora

Somehow, I had the Harry Belafonte song from the last scene from Beetlejuice stuck as an earwig when I saw today's news of Condi's trip to Beirut to meet with PM Saniora. I'm not sure I agree with the take of the AP writer who said that Señorita Rice was there "in a show of support for that country's weakened democracy, which is struggling to contain the fighting between the Hezbollah militia and Israel."

Frankly, outside of feeble squawks to stop fighting, the Lebanese government hasn't done squat to get between the two camps or to actively oppose either of the two combatants. The reason Israel's in there is because there's little the Lebanese government can do about Hezbollah without a civil war, so Israel's doing the civil war for them.

The democracy in Lebanon should be strengthened when all is said and done; it's weakened only as in a patient on an operating table is weakened while undergoing surgery. However, that metaphor of Hezbollah as a cancer ignores the fact that the "cancer" has the support of a big hunk of the Shiia community in Lebanon as a political party, social-service provider, and paramilitary bad-boy all in one. Thus, it's not just a matter of cutting out tumors (bases, weapons caches, etc); there will need to be cultural/spiritual chemotherapy for decades to truly rid the joint of the hostility built up within that community.

I'm not quite sure what all Israel's up to; not everything seems to be playing the role of oncologist. However, I'm not a cultural oncologist, either; I only play one on TV. For now, the Bush team seems to be right in letting things run their course for the moment; it's bringing one of Iran's proxies down multiple pegs.

This Cain't Be Good

At least not in the short term. Things are looking rather dicey in Lebanon; Israel is going after Hezbollah and the Shiite hard cases are returning the favor. Israel bombed Hezbollah HQ and the leader's apartment, while Hezbollah managed to come up with a remote-control plane and bombed an Israeli ship off of Beirut. "Open War" is the Hezzie motto of the day.

On the upside, if Israel does manage to run Hezbollah and Hamas out of business, things will be better for that neck of the woods in the long run. The short run's going to be a she-dog.

Oil's hit record highs, since there's a non-trivial chance that Iran could be in on the mix before all's said and done. Israel hasn't had a full-scale army-vs-army war in a third of a century (Yom Kipper '73) and we might just be staring one in the face if Syria and Iran step in to aid Hezbollah.

This might not turn into WWIII, but it may well turn into the nastiest slugfest in a generation; a Israel/US versus Syria/Iran tag-team death-cage match will have a clear winner on the battlefield, but with a lot of economic losers, especially if Persian Gulf oil goes off-line for months in the process. We're about one or two bad moves by Syria of seeing that happen.

Even if gas hits $3/gallon, top off the tank, 'cause it will probably get higher before it gets lower.

Operation Baathwater, Part II?

Earlier today, I was skeptical about Israeli moves against Hamas and Lebanon/Hezbollah. However, I've changed my mind in the intervening 12 hours. This piece helped settle things a bit.

I was expecting Foggy Bottom's "both sides in the conflict need to exercise restraint" macro hotkey to be hit. Other countries reached for that macro (the headline was "World leaders urge restraint after deadly Middle East flare-up") but not Dubya; he was giving not only Hezbollah but Syria both barrels.

"Hezbollah doesn't want there to be peace, the militant arm of Hamas doesn't want there to be peace, and those of us who do want peace will continue to work together to encourage peace," Bush said.

Israeli war planes carried out at least 50 raids across Lebanon on Thursday, including on Beirut airport, a day after the killing of eight Israeli soldiers and the capture of two by Hezbollah guerrillas.

Bush, speaking on a visit to Germany, also urged Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad to help pressure Hezbollah to release the Israeli soldiers, adding: "Syria needs to be held to account."

What was even more surprising was that the macro wasn't quite working in Germany, either.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, at a joint press conference with Bush, called for a "de-escalation", stressing the starting point had been the capture of the Israeli soldiers.

"The attacks did not start from the Israeli side, but from Hezbollah's side," she said.

The president's got more data at his disposal than I do. It might just be that it's time to take out Hamas and Hezbollah, with a possible side-trip to Syria and even Iran. If the IDF hostages show up in either one of those countries, then we might see an all-out war between the holders and Israel.

The Israeli blockade of Lebanese by air and sea means the one way to get anyone out of the country is through Syria. That means that Israel will either isolate and degrade Hezbollah (which the Lebanese leadership wouldn't mind that much; it would take a civil war for them to do it themselves, and they've been there, done that, got the T-shirt and post cards) or give enough of a moral high ground to go after Syria if they do take shelter there.

Iran's a different matter. Syria is right next door, but the Israelis are either going to have to fly through Saudi or Iraqi/US airspace to get at Iran. If the hostages do head that way, it might give the US the high ground to go after Iran.

If the Israelis and US take out the Syrian and Iranian leaderships, the funding for many of the bad actors in the region will dry up. That might be where things end up by the end of the summer. At minimum, Hamas and Hezbollah will be knocked down a few pegs. If the ball takes a funny bounce, the same could be said of the Syrian Baathists and the Iranian mullahs.

Prayers are an order. This will be messy and needs to be done right, not for revenge, but to make the world a better place. Sometimes you have to apply the board of education to the seat of learning, and this might well be one of them.

Grab Your Partners, Dosey-Do

The returns are in, and the next few weeks will be interesting in Israel. Here's a breakdown of the seats.

Party	Seats	Description
Kadima	28	Hawkish Centrist
Labor	20	Main Liberal Party; more dovish than in past
Shas	13	Devout Sepharics
Israel Beitenu	12	Very Hawkish Russian Immigrants
Likud	11	Main Conservative Party
National Union	9	Very Hawkish Settler's Party
Gil	7	"AARP" Party
Torah Judaism	6	Devout Ashkenazi
Meretz	4	Dovish Left
Arab Parties	10

The big surprise is the takeoff of Israel Beitenu, largely at the expense of Likud. The other surprise is Gil, who ran on a pensioner's rights platform. Shas did well, but they're around their usual numbers; they've typically been a distant third behind Labor and Likud. The libertarian Shinui party imploded when Kadima took over its political ecology.

The math essentially requires that Kadima be part of any workable coalition; the Arab parties are traditionally off-limits for coalitions of either right or left.  Even if the hawkish parties of the right, (Israel Beitenu, Likud, and National Union) hook up with the Orthodox parties and Gil, they'd only add up to 58 seats; given the 120-seat Knesset, you'll need 61 for a majority. Likewise, the left could only get up to 50 seats if they had the Orthodox parties and Gil on board.

The conventional wisdom has a center-left coalition with Labor as Kadima's primary ally. That seems to be easiest route to a majority. Kadima, Labor and Shas adds up to the bare majority of 61. However, Shas is not the most stable coalition partner; they're prone to walk out if slighter or if the right amount of spending on pet (I'd say "pork barrel", but that doesn't quite work for very kosher Jews)  projects like schools or seminaries isn't done.

While Gil and Meretz seem to be possible coalition partners, they aren't needed to get to a majority. A secular center-left combo of Kadima, Labor, Gil and Meretz adds up to 59; they'll need at least one of the unhawkish "ultra-Orthodox" parties (Torah Judaism or Shas) to put together a center-left coalition. Shas would make Gil and Meretz redundant. However, Gil and Torah Judaism would get to 61 when added to Labor and Kadima; that's an option if Shas is not cooperative.

Another possible scenario is for a center-right coalition. A package of Kadima, Gil, Torah Judaism, and Shas adds up to 54 seats. If Bibi can swallow his pride, Likud could bring that package up to 65 seats. It would mean extra spending on the elderly and on religious schools to keep the partners happy, but it would insure a Palestinian policy that would err on the side of protecting Israel.

Chances are that the small-ball approach of having Labor and Shas as junior partners would be the path of least resistance for Kadima. However, don't be surprised if we get a Kadima-Likud-Orthodox package.

The Peace of Jerusalem

While I was running some errands earlier today, I was driving behind a car with a "Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem" sticker on the back. No other stickers were to be seen, so I can't tell whether he's a peacenik, a evangelical Zionist or what.

I'd like to say I was in one accord with the guy, but I was in a Buick and he was driving the Accord. Thank you, I'll be here all week.

A lot of thoughts went through my head; the first was that someone would get the Roadmap to work and have peace in the Middle East. Good luck, Huck.

The second thought was more messianic; the only way that you'll really have peace in Jerusalem is for Jesus to come back. It's millennialistic at minimum; one could see a peaceful Jerusalem in a postmillennial universe as well.

The third thought was to actually read the Bible verse that it comes from-Psalm 122

⁶ Pray for the peace of Jerusalem:
       "May those who love you be secure.

⁷ May there be peace within your walls
       and security within your citadels."

⁸ For the sake of my brothers and friends,
       I will say, "Peace be within you."

⁹ For the sake of the house of the LORD our God,
       I will seek your prosperity.

In context, that has more of a homeland security vibe to it than anything, especially when you look at the broader meaning of shalom. I've heard it said that there's a sense of order, everything in its right place, implied in shalom. That's more than just a lack of combat.

David's asking for prayers for the capital and the nation's security. It's tempting to make a nationalistic hermeneutic and translate that to "pray for the peace of [insert your capital]."

But Jerusalem's more than where the king hangs out; it's the spiritual center of their faith. As believers, it's more appropriate to be translating it to "pray for the shalom of the Church." That's a lot harder than the nationalistic hermeneutic, for fixing up the Church will be harder than beefing-up customs and loosening rules on wiretapping (or whatever your ingredients in your national security recipe are).

How does the Church get itself in order? Figuring out what all needs to be done is a prayer request in and of itself.

 

Honest Zealots

Holy holy sites, Batman! Hamas just snagged a majority; 76 of 132 seats, with Fatah garnering 43.

A few rhetorical bullets before the real ones start flying

• The "peace process" is six feet under; it was dead before, but it got buried today.
• Chuck the "road map;" you can't get there from here.
• Stick a fork in Labor. Well, they were done when Kadima got founded; they're crispy critters now.
• Bibi's the politically luckiest guy in town; the Likud hard-line looks a lot better now. It will likely be a Likud-Kadima coalition, but who comes in first may now come into question.
• Bugs Bunny with a yarmulke-"You do realize that this means war."

Now, to some more serious thought.

Are the Palestinians nuts? About as nuts as the Iranians when they elected Ahmadinejad.

Hang with me for a minute on this one. Ahmadinejad was running in part as the Iranian Shadegg, as the moderate clerics were starting to show signs of corruption. He was hard-core theologically, but at least he was and honest zealot; that's what went through some Iranian voters' minds. He was also running to the left on economics, becoming the champion of the poor.

Much the same pattern was in play in Palestine. Fatah makes Abramoff look like a choir boy and Hamas has a history of running hospitals, schools and other social programs. Yes, they're terrorists, but terrorists with a jihadified social gospel; half Salvation Army, half special-ops army. In a populous trained to dis the Israelis, both are selling points.

We'll now see how Hamas blends its private finances with governmental ones and how it blends its private paramilitary power with governmental military and paramilitary power. It may opt to lay low for a while, or it may decide to give Israel the middle-digit sal-oot right off the bat.

Will the Europeans back Hamas? Good question. A tortured "no" is likely.

Will the US give the Israelis the green light to play whack-a-mole with Hamas if they get frisky? Another good question. Likely yes.

Will Israel reoccupy the West Bank? Yet another good question. Likely yes.

Things won't be pretty for a while.

[Update 9PM 2/1-I deleted a comment that seemed to be comment spam. It didn't seem likely that this guy would be running this site, so I deleted the comment. Yes, that still gives him the link he seems to crave; I e-mailed the professor just now to check.

That means that Mr. Bauer's comment doesn't make much sense.]

There's a New Sharif in Town

The prophecy geeks will have a field day with this; Hamas looks poised to take over Palestine. The final results won't be out until noon EST, but the Fatah-centric government has resigned. Exit polls had Fatah leading 46%-40%, but exit polls aren't always the greatest; ask President Kerry.

More on this after breakfast.

Sharon Musings

Things aren't looking good for Ariel Sharon, who had more brain surgery today. It's unlikely that he'll be able to serve as PM; to be honest, he'll be lucky to survive at this point.

The usual jihadi suspects are cheering his demise, including Iranian president Ahmadinejad; they've got some bad blood with Sharon that goes back to his days as defense minister in the 80s, when, during their invasion of Lebanon, the IDF seemed to look the other way while some "Christian" militias did a massacre at two Palestinian refugee camps.

The jihadis didn't like him for being too Zionist; Rev-run Pat doesn't like him for because he's not Zionist enough- "The prophet Joel makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who 'divide my land.'" That's the latest of a long line of head-shakers from Robertson and brought about the ritual denunciations we see every time he has a case or recto-cranial inversion.

However, Robertson probably has quite a bit of company in dispensationalist territory. I can picture a couple of judeophile pastors from my past read Sharon the Riot Act for being accommodating to the Palestinians.

Here's what Robertson was riffing on-it's Joel 3(ESV)-

¹For behold, in those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, ²I will gather all the nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, on behalf of my people and my heritage Israel, because they have scattered them among the nations and have divided up my land, ³and have cast lots for my people, and have traded a boy for a prostitute, and have sold a girl for wine and have drunk it.

I don't think that this is that time. That time is yet to come; the enemies of Israel will get theirs, but today is not that time.

Also, I'd be hard pressed to label Sharon an enemy of Israel. He's been trying to defend it as best he can. That might mean getting out of areas that aren't all that useful and are hard to defend, retreating to a defensible core. No, Sharon's no saint, but I think he's closer to getting it right than Peretz is or Bibi is.

The strokes are far more likely to be the result of being 77, badly overweight and with a flawed heart, not divine judgment. If God's got it out for Sharon for being insufficiently zealous, why the heck is Ahmadinejad still standing?

List Ariel Sharon

Not good news out of Jerusalem.

Israel's Ariel Sharon has undergone seven hours of surgery following a major stroke, and is now in a serious but stable condition, doctors say. Doctors managed to stop the bleeding in the 77-year-old's brain, the director of Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem said.
...
US President George Bush said in a statement he shared the concerns of the Israeli people "and we are praying for his recovery".

Roger, Mr. President. Prayers are on their way. That's a second stroke in the last week; prior to the new stroke, he was slated for surgery today to patch a hole in his heart

Here's the question on my mind- will the new Kadima party have any legs with its founder out of commission? Even if Sharon survives this stroke/cerebral hemorrhage, he may not be up to leading the party or the nation.

The situation reminds me a bit of Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn, who founded a libertarian assimilation-hawk party, only to be assassinated a week before List Pim Fortuyn made its electoral debut. The party did well in its first outing, but quickly disintegrated without its charismatic leader; another assimilation-hawk, Geert Wilders, is filling LPF's spot in the Dutch political ecosphere.

Could a Sharonless Kadima have the same fate? Without Sharon, Kadima's a muddled middle who's not as hawkish as Likud but not as dovish as Labor, especially the Peretz Labor party. That might express the view of the average Israeli, but without a face to put to it, folks may wind up gravitating to either one of the main parties or to the various religious/ethnic parties.

Sharon's good-fences-make-good-neighbors strategy seems to be Israel's best bet in the long term; my prayer is that he recovers enough to see it through.

Syria- On Top of the S*** List

It looks like the folks responsible for Friday's nightclub bombing are Syrian-based Islamic Jihad (not to be confused with Methodist Jihad).  After the Hariri assisination and this, the Syrian leadership has risen to be the top of the Lord High Executioner's very small list that never will be missed. The Israeli government seems to be taking the line that it was externally-based Palestinians that were responcible.

One thing that folks should know by now is that it's not a cool career move to PO the Israelis; they can play by Hama Rules almost as well as the Syrians can. Many a terrorist has met an untimely demise at the hands of the Mossad and the IDF isn't bashful about letting the missiles fly when needed. The US still cares about world opinion and is slower to anger, but the Israelis are treated like crap in most places anyways, so they are free to play bad cop.

Once they have a target to strike at, don't be surprised to see them do so. The question is "what would the target be?"

Coming Down From the Summit

This is encouraging; a summit between Sharon and Abbas which includes a ceasefire. However, Hamas and other Palestinian hard-cases aren't signatories.

This will be interesting to watch. Will Abbas be able to sell the 80%-of-a-loaf proposal that is likely to flow out of the Israeli side? Will Abbas want to sell it? Will Sharon be able to sell such a plan? Will Abbas be around long to sell it? Might a Hamas-friendly faction win a Palestinian election? It the last one is the case, all bets are off and all-out war might be the result.

What may have to happen is a civil war between the Palestinian government and Hamas and the other hard-cases. Does Abbas have enough popular support to pull that off? My answer is no, but stranger things have happened. Arafat never had the interest or the ability to reign the hard-cases in; is Abbas that much different?

Over on the Israeli side of the border, we have Sharon patching together a center-left coalition to push a peace package through; that's a sentence that I never thought I'd be writing, for it's an odd universe where Sharon is a centrist. However, this Michael Oren piece (I first saw that through someone else's link, but I forget who; take a bow, someone) points out that Sharon's more of a nationalistic leftist than a conservative (Scoop Jackson, anyone?) with a bit of an authoritarian streak; his hooking up with Begin to form Likud was a marriage of convenience.

What could wind up happening is that we'll wind up seeing a Labor-Sharon coalition for a while. Whether Likud sticks together or not is a good question. The anti-accomodationist wing of Likud might bolt; if the majority of Likud opposes him, Sharon could start a center-right party that might pick up some hawkish Laborites or other centrists. However, there seems to be a majority of the Israeli public that is backing Sharon's good-fences-make-good-neighbors meme.

The bigger question is whether Abbas can get a majority of the Palestinian will on board. That one's delicately phrased; it's not just getting 50% of the vote if a modest majority isn't really juiced about it. If you have 60% of the Palestinians reluctantly willing to go along and 40% vehemently opposed, you have the recipe for civil war, with the hard-cases possibly winning if they make up the majority of the fighters. That is the bigger question; even if we start getting a functioning Palestinian democracy (big if), a militant minority might make enforcing majority rule very difficult.

However, we're at a point where things might progress. Iraq may give the Palestinians a model of how to run a somewhat functional democratic government in the face of ongoing violent opposition; Arafat's passing combined with Iraq might just make a sufficiently moderate Palestinian leadership plausible. Not likely, but plausible; I'd love to be proved wrong. Hamas and company seem too well entrenched to make things work.

Realpolitik Zionism

Back when the news of Arafat's bad health broke, I had this comment-

Things might actually get worse in the short term if a more jihadist leadership takes over in Palestine. However, Arafat's deteriorating health and the moves by the Israeli government to retreat from Gaza makes the dynamics of the neighborhoods very fluid. Stay tuned.

Bibi sees that fluidity, and is backing off staging a Likud rebellion for now.

He had threatened to resign unless the plan was put to a referendum.

He told Mr Sharon he changed his mind because the death of ailing Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat could create a "new reality", Israel Radio reports.

Mr Netanyahu said a new Palestinian leadership could open the way for negotiations with the Palestinians on what has been a unilateral plan to quit Gaza and parts of the West Bank.

"In this new situation, I decided to stay in the government," the radio quoted him as telling Mr Sharon.

What seems to be developing in Israel is a move towards a  realpolitik Zionism. It throws the hard-core Zionist parties overboard as well as the pacifist left and looks to set up a two-state solution on Israel's terms. Netanyahu must have realized that he could either be part of that governing coalition or be part of a right-wing opposition that stood little chance of being in power.

Things are going to be messy in Israeli politics. Old allies will become foes and old foes will become allies. There are plenty of hawkish Laborites and members of other non-right parties to make the Sharon vision work. It may make things worse in the short term, but I think the good-fences-make-good-neighbors strategy is a step in the right direction, even if it does a number on the Roadmap.

Flying Air Afat to Paris

Yasser's heading for Paris for treatment. There are plenty of possible snide comments about the French hosting him, but I'll pass.

For once, why don't we act like Christians and pray for our enemies? Let's say a prayer for Arafat's health. Two reasons: (1) It's the right thing to do and (2) The Palestinian leadership would likely get worse without him, not that it's all that great now.

No Gloating, Please

Yasser Arafat is on his last legs, and quite a few folks are happy about the prospect; here's two I saw on my wanderings this morning.

Damien Penny-"No word of his death yet. The champagne is still cooling."

Andrea Harris-"Die, you [person of illegitimate birth]."

This is another chapter in the ongoing series of whether to take pleasure at your foe's demise. He might be one of those people on the Lord High Executioner's little list that never will be missed, but taking joy in Arafat's demise seems unseemly at best.

Things might actually get worse in the short term if a more jihadist leadership takes over in Palestine. However, Arafat's deteriorating health and the moves by the Israeli government to retreat from Gaza makes the dynamics of the neighborhoods very fluid. Stay tuned.

The Israeli Radical Middle

This is a big story that might slip under our radar as we focus on next week's election; the Knesset passed a bill yesterday ordering the closing-down of Jewish settlements in Gaza, essentially ceding internal control of Gaza to the Palestinians.

The sub-stories are many. Sharon had to forge a center-left coalition to get things passed, as most of his rightist allies voted against him; it's a jaw-dropper to see "Sharon" and "forge a center-left coalition" flowing together in the same sentence. Even some of his conservative allies, such as former PM (and internal Likud rival) Netanyahu, voted for it, but vowed to walk out of the government if he didn't put the pull-out to a referendum.

What might wind up happening in Israel is the emergence of a coalition of center-left and center-right parties that can accept the "good fences make good neighbors" plan of Sharon as the least-worst plan for long-term peace. It will split off the hard-core leftists and the hard-core Zionists who don't want to give an inch, creating a governing radical middle of the pro-fence Likud, Labor and other centrist parties.

Likud might split in two, with Netanyahu leading a more hawkish branch and Sharon the more dovish (again, an seeming oxymoron), but we might actually see a pragmatic center that will give the Palestinians the lion's share (but not all) of the West Bank and then put a wall up around it. We shall see if it works.