Pine Belt Progressive

And ominous signs in other parts of the world as well.

International Herald Tribune — Hezbollah has apparently taken control of West Beirut. More in the SF Chronicle. It’s difficult to tell what’s really going on. Looks to me like a dispute over disarming Hezbollah between pro-government forces (backed by the Sunni states, the U.S., and Israel) and Hezbollah (backed by Iran, Syria, and the Lebanese parliamentary opposition), with the Lebanese army officially neutral.

The Lebanese government is calling the violence “an armed coup.” Syria is blaming U.S. and Israeli “adventurist interferances” for the violence. Condoleeza Rice is discussing how to support the Syrian government “in the face of illegal acts, by the armed gangs” with the secretary general and her French and Saudi counterparts. Hezbollah is handing over pro-government offices to the Lebanese military and says it will maintain roadblocks and control the route to the airport until the crisis is resolved. The White House is talking about “measures which must be taken to hold those responsible for the violence in Beirut accountable.” An unnamed source who supposedly speaks for the opposition says “all issues are linked. Beirut will remain shut until there is a political solution.”

This is oversimplifying just a bit, but this seems like spillover from the ongoing power struggle between the U.S. and Iran. I don’t think U.S. or Israeli bombs dropped from several thousand feet are going to resolve this, and I’d like to know more about where the population stands and how they’re faring.

Bush is headed to the Middle East next week. WaPo is quoting an “unnamed State Department Source” accusing Iran of giving a green light to Hezbollah. That official is probably right, but who can believe what the State Department says at this point? In fact, who can give the Post the benefit of the doubt and believe they’re actually quoting someone, instead of just making stuff up? I’m wondering whether or not the “green light” quote will make the Sunday talk shows. I’m guessing it will.

Elsewhere in the world . . .

Tanks and missile launchers made a return to Red Square for the inauguration of the new Russian president, Dmitri A. Medvedev, who gave a speech:

Medvedev said the history of World War II demonstrated that military conflicts are rooted in “irresponsible ambitions which prevail over interests of nations and entire continents.”

“We must not allow contempt for the norms of international law,” he said, in what sounded like veiled criticism of the United States and its Western allies.

I wouldn’t call that criticism “veiled.”

You’ll want to read this article in the Asia Times from earlier this week about Douglas Feith’s new book (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON - Three weeks after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, former US defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld established an official military objective of not only removing the Saddam Hussein regime by force but overturning the regime in Iran, as well as in Syria and four other countries in the Middle East, according to a document quoted extensively in then-under secretary of defense for policy Douglas Feith’s recently published account of the Iraq war decisions . . .

. . . Feith’s account further indicates that this aggressive aim of remaking the map of the Middle East by military force and the Feith’s book, War and Decision, released last month, provides excerpts of the paper Rumsfeld sent to President George W Bush on September 30, 2001, calling for the administration to focus not on taking down Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network but on the aim of establishing “new regimes” in a series of states by “aiding local peoples to rid themselves of terrorists and to free themselves of regimes that support terrorism”. . .

. . . General Wesley Clark, who commanded the North Atlantic Treaty Organization bombing campaign in the Kosovo war, recalls in his 2003 book Winning Modern Wars being told by a friend in the Pentagon in November 2001 that the list of states that Rumsfeld and deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz wanted to take down included Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan and Somalia.

So, instead of focusing our efforts on apprehending the person identified as responsible for the attacks on our country, and dismantling the network that carried them out, Rumsfeld and his generals decided to make a list of countries and overturn their governments under the guise of “helping” them. That’s the real war on terror. So I guess at this point we can conclude that Iran and Syria are next, and we can probably expect the administration to take action against one or both before the election. We’ve been warned.

Sorry posting has been so light this week. It probably will be light this weekend, as well. I have lots of irons in the fire right now, and won’t have much time to write on Saturday or Sunday.