« Media criticism and blaming the victims | The Non-Story: Arab Money, NY Banks... »


January 18, 2008

Lebanon as the new Iraq

Nir Rosen has an exhaustive article on the story of Fatah al Islam in Lebanon and the summer's battle in the Nahr al Barid camp. There's too much to summarize (frankly, I need to read it again to try and get all the moving pieces straight), but his basic conclusion as to who sponsored the group was that both the Syrian government and the Future movement tried to coopt it, but failed to do so, and that the group's real commitment was to an al Qaeda-style global jihad.

The whole article is worth reading (if slightly mind-numbing in its complexity), but I'm just going to quote the concluding paragraphs:

The Palestinians have been used once again by sectarian interests, and they have suffered the most. The situation will not change, says Rougier, unless refugees are allowed to work in Lebanese society and able to live under new and different influences rather than socialized only by religious clerics. He believes, though, that nothing should be done to naturalize them, because it could upset the Lebanese balance of power and leave Palestinian refugees, once again, caught in Lebanon’s inner contradictions. (Such naturalization would also dissolve negotiations about the right of return.) “So what needs to be done is to distinguish between the issues, between what is social (the right to work), what is political (and should be discussed at the regional level), and what is linked to the legal situation of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon,” says Rougier. “In order to do that, Lebanese parties would have to stop frightening the Lebanese society about the risk of tawtin.”

Until that happens, Palestinians and all of Lebanon are at great risk. As Iraq becomes a less hospitable place for jihadists and foreign fighters, and as there are fewer American targets to go after, these veterans, experienced at fighting the most advanced army in the world, will look for new battles. Andrew Exum, a former U.S. army officer who led a platoon of light infantry in Afghanistan in 2002 and Army Rangers in Iraq and Afghanistan, has been studying militant Islamist groups. “The fighting in Nahr al Barid is, unfortunately, just the first round in what I fear will be a series of battles fought in the aftermath of the Iraq War,” he says. “On Internet chat rooms, we’re seeing militants turn away volunteers to go fight in Iraq and promising the next fight will be in Lebanon and the Gulf. Lebanon, especially, is a magnet for Sunni extremists,” he says. “You not only have a haven for these groups in the Palestinian camps, with security services from rival Arab states competing for their loyalty and attention, you also have two tempting targets: both the pro-Western ruling coalition in Beirut, as well as the opposition, led by a powerful block of Shia parties. How can we not expect these Sunni militants, who have spent the past four years waging war on the Shia of Iraq, to try and carry that fight on to the large, politically active Shia population in Lebanon? Or on to the pro-Western regime that precariously hangs onto power?”

Posted by tomscud at January 18, 2008 04:18 PM
Filed Under: Levant , Terrorism

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.aqoul.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3562


Comments

Actually, I think this is the least mind numbing piece on this subject that I have read so far.
Its excellent. complex but very coherent. And the story comes together in a coherent way... accounting for almost all the varying data that has come forward previously... that just supported one view or another. Nir Rosen does a great job.

Posted by: Zenobia at January 20, 2008 02:11 AM

Dear Tom,

Swamped with work (what else is new?) & thus only a link to a pretty good analysis on Josh Landis' blog by a commenter who's probably one of the best analysts of the topic.

http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=566

Basically, Nir muddled a few things and is trying to push a "it's both the Syrian's & Hariris' fault" line. The article is interesting for people who are already deep in the subject, but quite misleading for the general public. Oh well, at least it's not on the Sy Hersh level of "analysis".

Ya Zenobia,

No idea where you got the "very coherent" impression from. Did you not read T_Desco's post before you commented on it?

--MSK*

Posted by: MSK at January 20, 2008 03:24 AM

Post a comment





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)

Comment Subscription

Email Address: