Recently U.S. Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA) used his power as Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee to block One Hundred Million Dollars of military aid to the Lebanese army. He placed this hold because he had been "concerned for sometime about reported Hizballah influence on the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF)." He was quickly supported by Representative Cantor (R-VA), who said the recent border skirmish between Israeli and Lebanese forces “demands a sweeping reassessment of how we distribute our foreign aid."
The assertion that the mild skirmish on the Israel/Lebanon border is justification for cutting aid is preposterous. Anywhere in the world where borders are contested or even just poorly demarcated border skirmish's of some kind are inevitable. Clearer heads don't always prevail and everyone is armed, sometimes lives are lost; these problems are more likely to escalate when the countries involved are adversaries. But this can't and shouldn't be seen as an act of policy from either side. If this was not an act of policy than what sense does it make to punish an entire institution? None.
Cantor thinks aid should be blocked until we "can certify that the Lebanese army is not cooperating with Hezbollah," as if antagonism towards Israel is unique to Hezbollah in Lebanese society. Being invaded and occupied by a country then invaded again tends to leave pretty broad based resentments Mr. Cantor, and there is no segment of Lebanese society that would willingly be branded Israel's ally right now. Not the Sunni, not the Druze, not even the Maronites. Viewing Israel as a threat doesn't mean the Lebanese Army has anything to do with Terrorists.
What's more important than the Congressmen's misperception with what they're decrying is the considerable damage that they may be doing. Whatever "influence" Hezbollah may have within the Lebanese army it's still a competing power base. The reason Hezbollah is so popular to begin with is that they were seen as defending the country when the official military was unwilling or unable to. Undermining the LAF does nothing but strengthen Hezbollah's position in the country. State department spokesman PJ Crowley explained that supporting the LAF is in the United States' interest because it It "allows the government of Lebanon to expand its sovereignty" and that means weakening militias and terrorists across the entire country, including Hezbollah. If Berman and Cantos really want to weaken Hezbollah then their policy is self defeating.
If they don't weaken the LAF they will at least weaken American influence in it and Iran is already picking up the pieces. Iran and Syria have both offered to help bankroll the LAF. With donations coming in from just a few select organizations and individuals like Defense Minister Murr the LAF may become a servant of their personal, perhaps sectarian interests.
The actions and words of Berman and Cantor are probably well meaning acts of incompetence; strengthening the very forces they are meant to weaken, but I fear the possibility that they may be all to deliberate. I fear that this comes at a time of heightened public xenophobia against Islam when playing "tough on terrorism" plays well in the polls. They can score political points by grandstanding over military aid to a Muslim country but only at the expense of American foreign policy and security priorities. The Representatives either don't know or don't care about the damage they're doing.
Well said.
ReplyDelete