"Throughout this now 16-day-old war, Israeli planes high above civilian areas make decisions on what to bomb. They send huge bombs capable of killing things for hundreds of meters around their targets, and then blame the inevitable civilian deaths -- the Lebanese government says 600 civilians have been killed so far -- on "terrorists" who callously use the civilian infrastructure for protection."
"But this claim is almost always false. My own reporting and that of other journalists reveals that in fact Hezbollah fighters -- as opposed to the much more numerous Hezbollah political members, and the vastly more numerous Hezbollah sympathizers -- avoid civilians. Much smarter and better trained than the PLO and Hamas fighters, they know that if they mingle with civilians, they will sooner or later be betrayed by collaborators -- as so many Palestinian militants have been."
(...)
"Although Israel targets apartments and offices because they are considered "Hezbollah" installations, the group has a clear policy of keeping its fighters away from civilians as much as possible. This is not for humanitarian reasons -- they did, after all, take over an apartment building against the protests of the landlord, knowing full well it would be bombed -- but for military ones."
"«You can be a member of Hezbollah your entire life and never see a military wing fighter with a weapon» a Lebanese military intelligence official, now retired, once told me. "They do not come out with their masks off and never operate around people if they can avoid it. They're completely afraid of collaborators. They know this is what breaks the Palestinians -- no discipline and too much showing off."
"Perhaps once a year, Hezbollah will hold a military parade in the south, in which its weapons and fighters appear. Media access to these parades is tightly limited and controlled. Unlike the fighters in the half dozen other countries where I have covered insurgencies, Hezbollah fighters do not like to show off for the cameras. In Iraq, with some risk taking, you can meet with and even watch the resistance guys in action. (At least you could during my last time there.) In Afghanistan, you can lunch with Taliban fighters if you're willing to walk a day or so in the mountains. In Gaza and the West Bank, the Fatah or Hamas fighter is almost ubiquitous with his mask, gun and sloganeering to convince the Western journalist of the justice of his cause."
"The Hezbollah guys, on the other hand, know that letting their fighters near outsiders of any kind -- journalists or Lebanese, even Hezbollah supporters -- is stupid. In three trips over the last week to the south, where I came near enough to the fighting to hear Israeli artillery, and not just airstrikes, I saw exactly no fighters. Guys with radios with the look of Hezbollah always found me. But no fighters on corners, no invitations to watch them shoot rockets at the Zionist enemy, nothing that can be used to track them."
(...)
"Hezbollah's political members say they have little or no access to the workings of the fighters. This seems to be largely true: While they obviously hear and know more than the outside world, the firewall is strong."
"Israel, however, has chosen to treat the political members of Hezbollah as if they were fighters. And by targeting the civilian wing of the group, which supplies much of the humanitarian aid and social protection for the poorest people in the south, they are targeting civilians."
(...)
"So the analysts talking on cable news about Hezbollah "hiding within the civilian population" clearly have spent little time if any in the south Lebanon war zone and don't know what they're talking about. Hezbollah doesn't trust the civilian population and has worked very hard to evacuate as much of it as possible from the battlefield. And this is why they fight so well -- with no one to spy on them, they have lots of chances to take the Israel Defense Forces by surprise, as they have by continuing to fire rockets and punish every Israeli ground incursion."
4 comments:
Do mesmo artigo:
"The locals knew that the 10-story apartment building had been the office, and possibly the residence, of Sheik Tawouk, the Hezbollah commander for the south, so they had moved their families out at the start of the war. The landlord had refused to rent to Hezbollah when they requested the top floors of the building. No matter, the locals said, the Hezb guys just moved in anyway in the name of the 'resistance.'"
"The almost nightly airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut could be seen as making some sense, as the Israelis appear convinced there are command and control bunkers underneath the continually smoldering rubble. There were some civilian casualties the first few nights in places like Haret Hreik, but people quickly left the area to the Hezbollah fighters with their radios and motorbikes."
Isto é: o hezbollah não se esconde no meio de civis, mas o artigo começa com a história de um edifício residencial tomado por ele. Mais tarde escreve "os bairros do sul de Beirute abandonados pelos civis aos guerrilheiros" O artigo nega-se a si próprio!
Quanto à parte civil vs. parte militar, já faz mais sentido, mas não é completamente claro que seja possível atacar uma organização militar sem atacar os líderes políticos. Não acredito que seja possível lidar com o Hezbollah sem passar pela parte militar, até porque o símbolo da organização é uma kalashnikov. A glorificação da guerra, do martírio, por parte daquela organização é demais evidente, mesmo para um turista acidental que vá ao Sul do Líbano (o Museu da Guerra em balbeq é um reliquiário dos martires, com uma grande estátua dum soldado com um pé sobre um capacete judeu com um buraco de bala. Há excepção do templo romano com dois mil anos, é o único monumento da cidade.)
(já tinha lido sobre isto, aqui: http://volokh.com/posts/1154314191.shtml)
O Salon era extremamente inteligente quando apareceu, mas foi-se politizando cada vez mais (não era político no início, não a 100%) e perdeu um pouco a auto-crítica que lhe era característica. Provavelmente por verificar que era o que vendia mais e quem sou eu para criticar esse tipo de escolhas ;)
mas gostava muito mais da revista quando era menos política. Eu deixei de assinar, mas de certo, muito mais gente assina agora que é "alinhada."
destaco este comentário ao texto referido pelo luis pedro:
http://volokh.com/posts/1154314191.shtml#128131
Mr. Bernstein, I suggest that you re-read the original article more carefully. Let's go through your accusation carefully, and I'll show you how you misread the article.
You write, "Is it just me, or does the first two paragraph of this articles directly contradict its thesis? Thesis: Hezbollah does not hide behind civilians. First paragraphs: A Hezbollah commander and other "Hezb guys" force themselves into the top floors of a ten-story apartment buiding, knowing that its likely to be targeted by Israel."
If you will consult the original article, you will find the following statement: 'My own reporting and that of other journalists reveals that in fact Hezbollah fighters -- as opposed to the much more numerous Hezbollah political members, and the vastly more numerous Hezbollah sympathizers -- avoid civilians.'
The reporter differentiates between Hezbollah fighters and Hezbollah political members. The Hezbollah people he describes in that paragraph are clearly political members, not fighters. You may claim that there is no distinction, but the reporter's writing is absolutely consistent with the distinction he makes. There is no contradiction -- merely a misreading on your part.
You write, "If the civilians "left the area" to "Hezbollah fighters," doesn't that mean that "Hezbollah fighters" were in the area mixed with civilians before that?" No, it doesn't mean that Hezbollah fighters were there originally. It means that civilians left the area. It doesn't even state that Hezbollah fighters were ever there -- it describes the thought processes of the civilians, not the facts on the ground. I'll grant that the thought processes of the civilians imply the possibility of Hezbollah being there, but at this point we're on some very thin conjectural ice. To suggest that this proves inconsistency in the article is not reasonable. Given the wording, I'd suggest we both chalk this one up as too messy to call.
Ainda que não seja muito claro se o "escritório do comandante do Hezbollah" é uma instalação militar ou civil.
Uma associação "civil" que ocupa um andar contra o desejo de proprietário e inquilinos certamente não terá grande nota em civilidade.
Post a Comment