While much of India’s attention is devoted “excessive and disproportionate military retaliation by Israel which has targeted civilian infrastructure” as portrayed by the official statement, the ongoing violence in West Asia is far more complicated than normally recognised. The crisis underscores the perennial Lebanon struggle for independence and sovereignty not only vis-a-vis its power neighbours but also vis-a-vis militant groups inside.

Hezbollah, the Party of God, precipitated the crisis by ambushing and kidnapping soldiers from inside the Israeli territory partly to ward off attempts by the Beirut government to disarm the militants. Its volley of rocket and missile attacks deep into Israel exhibited not only its military capabilities but also its willingness to take political risks against possible Israeli retaliation. In this asymmetrical conflict Israel is fighting a military group that operates independent of the central authority in Lebanon.

By taking on Israel and its might, Hezbollah seeks to portray itself as a resistance force and thereby throttle any move by the Lebanese authority to exercise complete control over the southern part of the country, the traditional stronghold of Hezbollah. Even the resolution of the UN Security Council calling for the disarming of all militant groups remains on paper.

This defiance by the Hezbollah comes into conflict with the interest of Lebanon, which in the past endured the consequences of such adventures. At one level, the government of Fouad Siniora claimed it was not involved in the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers that precipitated the current crisis. At the same time, the international community cannot ignore that Hezbollah lawmaker Mohammed Fneish holds the Energy portfolio. In short, while Hezbollah is part of the government, Prime Minister Siniora was not party to Hezbollah’s actions against Israel!

... contd.