Terrible Hockstein Deal for Schizophrenic "Lebanon-Hezbollah" and War Criminal Netanyahu

Without sinking into the details where he devil apparently lies, some thoughts on the impending US-brokered deal between Israel and Hezbollah:

I have repeated criticized Amos Hockstein's trying to sell junk to the Lebanese. All he wants is a half-ass deal with which senile Biden could leave the White House claiming a pathetic puny success. As always, these deals in the past (1978, 1982, 1989, 1996, 2006...) have kicked the can down the road and temporarily put an end to the chronic carcinogenic wars between Jewish theocratic Israel and Muslim theocratic Iran. If this deal goes through, Lebanon will limp again for another 10-20 years under Iranian occupation with occasional violence until it climaxes into an oubreak like the present one.

- Israel will not be eliminating Hezbollah as it claimed its objective was.

- Israeli-biased and weapons-feeder, the US, is the arbiter. Who are they fooling?

- Since 1969 when the criminal Arab League forced Lebanon to cede sovereignty over its southern territory south of the Litani River to Yasser Arafat's PLO, the Lebanese Army has been denied entry into the area. Now, this deal supposedly will allow the Lebanese Army to deploy there and "replace" Hezbollah's criminals there.

- Hezbollah will remain armed but will withdraw north of the Litani River, some 30 miles from the border. Nothing prevents it from firing rockets into Israel, which would again displace tens of thousands of northern Israeli settlers whose return to their settlements was Netanyahu's second objective.  

- If Hezbollah (or one of the cryptic affiliates it hides behind to claim deniability) fires into Israel from behind the Litani, a headache-laced bureaucratic process is triggered: Israel would wait (how long is anyone's guess) to see if the Lebanese Army will properly "handle" the matter. If not, Israel will send a nag to the Americans who would convene a 5-member committee (UN, US, Lebanon, Israel, France) to decide if the Hezbollah fire warrants an Israeli reprisal. Permission would then be given or denied to the Israelis to retaliate. Sounds like one of these endless and boring rugby games with more time outs than actual play time that Americans call football, with helmets, microphones, cleats, pads, gloves, jockstraps and fifty other gadgets that strips the game of any spontaneity.

- This would pit the American mediators into direct confrontation with either the Lebanese Army and/or Hezbollah if retaliation by Israel is authorized, or with Israel if the authorization is denied.

- This would also pit Hezbollah against the Lebanese Army if the latter attempts to intercept, interdict and somehow stand in the way of Hezbollah.

- The deal does not address the lawlessness on the Lebanese-Syrian border through which Iran dispatches missiles, rockets, mercenaries and the like to Hezbollah.

- The root cause of the problem is not addressed: The Lebanese state and army must be given an overpowering posture vis-a-vis Hezbollah, Syria and Iran with:

   - either an international force on the ground (under Chapter 7 of the UN; as was done with other small vulnerable countries like East Timor, Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo...) 

    - or serious diplomatic, economic and military assistance in order for the country to forcefully secure its borders with BOTH Israel and Syria. For six decades, the Americans have prohibited the Lebanese Armed Forces from becoming too strong out of a dishonest pretext of protecting Israel. Throughout that long period, the Americans consistently gave Stalinist Syria carte blanche to occupy Lebanon and undermine the country's previously reputable "democracy in diversity".

Lebanon's exemplary model of coexistence between various religions and communities was successful between 1920 and 1970. It stands as a thorn in the side of the surrounding ultra-nationalist and ultra-religious dictatorships like Syria, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia etc. all based on the exclusivity of one religion or ethnicity.