Hezbollah, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran - Just as Predicted
Hezbollah and Shiite Muslims stormed Beirut, the capitol city of Lebanon, the other day and demanded at least one-third of the Lebanese government be composed of Hezbollah supporters so Hezbollah will have the power to veto any legislation that does not suit their needs. The recent rally and predicted continued occupation of hundreds of thousands of Lebanese Shiite Muslims from the south to demand a change in the Lebanese government is the latest fractionation and destabilization of a Middle Eastern democratic government to take place. Who, you may ask, is it that might be supporting this destabilization? Well, the answer to that is Iran and Syria, through arms (provided by Syria and its allies and smuggled across the Syrian border) and money (provided to Hezbollah by Iran to help refugees displaced in the latest Lebanese/Israeli skirmish).
Seems that neither Syria or Iran are enamored of the US-backed and installed government in Beirut and that both are determined to bring it down surreptitiously or by whatever means necessary (i.e., assassination, destabilization, radicalization of Shiite youths, etc.). Lebanon, like Iraq, is an ethnically and religiously diverse country that has suffered from over a thousand years of disharmony due to rampant "tribalism" and the willingness of the people to bond more tightly with their "tribes" than with the national whole. As a result, since the French colonialists pulled out in the middle of the last century, the Lebanese political landscape has been fraught with an uneasy truce (or sometimes outright civil war) between Christians and Muslims and between Shiites and Sunnis. Given this political landscape and the now emboldened Hezbollah initiatives against Israel (that, by the way, were not sanctioned by the government in Beirut) and Hezbolla's intention to strengthen its stranglehold on parts of Lebanon north of its traditional seat of power in the impoverished south of the country, it is likely that the present Lebanese government could fall within the year. One might ask, what will happen then? Will Syria once again step in to bring order and install a puppet regime? It worked once before. Or will a charismatic strongman or Iman take over and turn the country into another fake-democratic theocracy, a la what we see in Iran. I'm putting my money on the latter.
Given my last blog on this site, I thought: "Why is it that the most stable Arab countries in the Middle East are not democracies and why are these US-backed "democracies" so pathetic in dealing with their country's internal disputes. After some meditation, I think I can tell you why. Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia, and the other monarchies (with the only exception of Jordan perhaps), suffer no fools or dissenters. Anyone who does not support the regime in place is arrested and, after that, god-knows what happens to them; their families and friends are intimidated; and the bad things that happen to them are set up as public examples to what will happen to anyone who questions the governing authority. Saddam Hussein used to operate in that mode and look how well he held Iraq together. I mean, there were some minor insurgencies here and there, especially in the north, but those were squashed immediately and did not cause much disruption to the overall country.
If you look at history, people in the Arab countries have been ruled in this "strongman/tribal" manner for millennia and are accustomed and acculturated to that kind of rule. Because, just as in Iraq, if the government shows even the smallest sign of lack of machismo, the country's tribes rise up, tear the government to smithereens, battle each other to the death to step into the void (and therefore into power and money), and in the process destroy most of what was built or accomplished by the previous government. This tends to knock their country back another 10 to 50 years each time it happens. Incredible!! Can't Arabs see the damage they are causing to themselves? It's like bulemia. The out-of- control gorging makes vomiting and purging almost seem like a relief, even though you know what you are doing is killing you. It is something you just can't stop. Not without serious psychological intervention. I say, what is needed over in the Middle East is not a cadre of military people, but an army of psychiatrists and social workers who can get those people to recognize what they are doing to themselves and get them to realize they have to stop their self-destructive behavior.
It is my studied opinion that the West is going to have to let the Middle East devolve into its natural state and then allow those fractious parties to draw their own boundaries and install their own governments of choice. Most likely we will be looking initially at a lot of chaos and going back to the old sheik/ruler days of pre-colonialization. Those days were considerably different from those ruled by the despots of today because the old Sheikhs, for the most part, were more or less benevolent and, although they may have been personally religious, they realized that ruling people needs more than the rote following of antiquated religious texts and requires a mixture of firmness and kindness. Religion in those days had its place, an important one, but not an overwhelming one. As the world moves closer and closer to a global culture (and no country or leader can stop that juggernaut from happening now with the ease of international travel, communications, and the wealth of knowledge on the Internet), the small Sheikdoms will have to move along with it and they will finally be assimilated. This is because you can only control a people for so long, their children will always look at others and covet what they do not have (or think they have). It is a natural instinct. The West has to remember it has time on its side and has to just sit back and let the evolution happen in its natural time. This is something that cannot be forced with "democracies" that are not tailored to the culture, religion, and divisiveness in this part of the world. The installation of true "democracies" in this part of the world is folly.
How long will the transformation take? Well, I would guess that on the inside it will probably take about 500 years, but could take as few as a couple of hundred and maybe as much as a millennium. Take a look at how long it took Britain to evolve to a "democracy" from its times of Celtic and Anglo/Saxon tribes. None of us are going to live to see the Middle East at peace and with democracies as we know them in the West, so we should just stop messing with the situation and let the people in that region do what they have to do.
Seems that neither Syria or Iran are enamored of the US-backed and installed government in Beirut and that both are determined to bring it down surreptitiously or by whatever means necessary (i.e., assassination, destabilization, radicalization of Shiite youths, etc.). Lebanon, like Iraq, is an ethnically and religiously diverse country that has suffered from over a thousand years of disharmony due to rampant "tribalism" and the willingness of the people to bond more tightly with their "tribes" than with the national whole. As a result, since the French colonialists pulled out in the middle of the last century, the Lebanese political landscape has been fraught with an uneasy truce (or sometimes outright civil war) between Christians and Muslims and between Shiites and Sunnis. Given this political landscape and the now emboldened Hezbollah initiatives against Israel (that, by the way, were not sanctioned by the government in Beirut) and Hezbolla's intention to strengthen its stranglehold on parts of Lebanon north of its traditional seat of power in the impoverished south of the country, it is likely that the present Lebanese government could fall within the year. One might ask, what will happen then? Will Syria once again step in to bring order and install a puppet regime? It worked once before. Or will a charismatic strongman or Iman take over and turn the country into another fake-democratic theocracy, a la what we see in Iran. I'm putting my money on the latter.
Given my last blog on this site, I thought: "Why is it that the most stable Arab countries in the Middle East are not democracies and why are these US-backed "democracies" so pathetic in dealing with their country's internal disputes. After some meditation, I think I can tell you why. Syria, Iran, Saudia Arabia, and the other monarchies (with the only exception of Jordan perhaps), suffer no fools or dissenters. Anyone who does not support the regime in place is arrested and, after that, god-knows what happens to them; their families and friends are intimidated; and the bad things that happen to them are set up as public examples to what will happen to anyone who questions the governing authority. Saddam Hussein used to operate in that mode and look how well he held Iraq together. I mean, there were some minor insurgencies here and there, especially in the north, but those were squashed immediately and did not cause much disruption to the overall country.
If you look at history, people in the Arab countries have been ruled in this "strongman/tribal" manner for millennia and are accustomed and acculturated to that kind of rule. Because, just as in Iraq, if the government shows even the smallest sign of lack of machismo, the country's tribes rise up, tear the government to smithereens, battle each other to the death to step into the void (and therefore into power and money), and in the process destroy most of what was built or accomplished by the previous government. This tends to knock their country back another 10 to 50 years each time it happens. Incredible!! Can't Arabs see the damage they are causing to themselves? It's like bulemia. The out-of- control gorging makes vomiting and purging almost seem like a relief, even though you know what you are doing is killing you. It is something you just can't stop. Not without serious psychological intervention. I say, what is needed over in the Middle East is not a cadre of military people, but an army of psychiatrists and social workers who can get those people to recognize what they are doing to themselves and get them to realize they have to stop their self-destructive behavior.
It is my studied opinion that the West is going to have to let the Middle East devolve into its natural state and then allow those fractious parties to draw their own boundaries and install their own governments of choice. Most likely we will be looking initially at a lot of chaos and going back to the old sheik/ruler days of pre-colonialization. Those days were considerably different from those ruled by the despots of today because the old Sheikhs, for the most part, were more or less benevolent and, although they may have been personally religious, they realized that ruling people needs more than the rote following of antiquated religious texts and requires a mixture of firmness and kindness. Religion in those days had its place, an important one, but not an overwhelming one. As the world moves closer and closer to a global culture (and no country or leader can stop that juggernaut from happening now with the ease of international travel, communications, and the wealth of knowledge on the Internet), the small Sheikdoms will have to move along with it and they will finally be assimilated. This is because you can only control a people for so long, their children will always look at others and covet what they do not have (or think they have). It is a natural instinct. The West has to remember it has time on its side and has to just sit back and let the evolution happen in its natural time. This is something that cannot be forced with "democracies" that are not tailored to the culture, religion, and divisiveness in this part of the world. The installation of true "democracies" in this part of the world is folly.
How long will the transformation take? Well, I would guess that on the inside it will probably take about 500 years, but could take as few as a couple of hundred and maybe as much as a millennium. Take a look at how long it took Britain to evolve to a "democracy" from its times of Celtic and Anglo/Saxon tribes. None of us are going to live to see the Middle East at peace and with democracies as we know them in the West, so we should just stop messing with the situation and let the people in that region do what they have to do.
of course let them do what they do right???? NO!!!! because we all know what they do is form terrorist and terroist have a mission in life and thats to kill. we cannot stand by and let these countries do their thing because their thing is to kill our innocents. this is why you are not president.
Posted by rufrider118 | Thu Dec 14, 05:56:00 AM EST