Monday, May 24, 2010

John Brennan’s Hezbollah proposal is a "thoroughly idiotic scheme"...

حين رأيت جمال الجنوب، عرفت لماذا هم مستعدون للموت من اجله» (حسن بحسون)
Michael Young, who has no problem in seeing moderation in Samir Geagea' (a convicted mass murderer) and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia .... denigrates John Brennan, the British .... for his "Hezbollah moderates" remark, and for their open channels with Hezbollah ...... at Young's favorite pulpit, MEOWLebanon/ here

"...... There is indeed a mulish formalism to the thinking of some Americans that makes you wonder if they are serious. For Brennan the world possibly really is divided into “extremists” and “moderates,” and if an organization or country appears uncompromising, then that must simply be because the moderates haven’t yet been discovered.
But what a self-centered way of looking at politics, since it assesses the actions of others entirely from the perspective of the interpreter. Brennan assumes that Hezbollah’s thinking, rhetoric, conceptual universe and so on, is perfectly comprehensible within American categories, his categories, which is just another way of saying that the party is not as serious about its own ideas as we assume.
A few years ago, the British government came out with an equally amusing sleight of hand, when it opened a dialogue with what it referred to as Hezbollah’s political wing, which it differentiated from the party’s military wing. This was rank hypocrisy, of course. The British knew enough about Hezbollah to realize that it is a highly centralized organization, in fact a Leninist organization in many ways, so that all the loose references to “wings” were just excuses to talk to party officials without being accused by the United States of chatting up what Washington officially labels a “terrorist organization.”
But Brennan’s proposal doesn’t even have the saving grace of cynicism. When asked how he proposed to reach the moderates, the presidential advisor offered no answer. That’s because his scheme is thoroughly idiotic. One thing about Hezbollah, its militants generally believe what they say, and when they say that Washington is their enemy, they mean that too. The party’s structure and worldview leave no room for “moderates” or “extremists.” What they allow are debates over tactics, but within well-defined strategic parameters, usually set by Iran, of which opposition to America and Israel is essential.
That lesson the St. Joseph University students understood instinctively. You might wonder, justifiably, how young people sent to an institution of higher learning where humanistic values are taught could so readily fall for Hezbollah’s catechism of violence and self-sacrifice. But at least they were not on an illusory quest for “moderates.” Their trip was about guns and war and death, and even if it was cool, they knew it was about guns and war and death.


1 comment:

Joshua Landis said...

Read Mark Perry's answer Brennan's use of the term "moderates" in relation to Hizbullah:

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2010/05/24/5-minutes-mark-perry

He doesn't believe that Brennan is simply being naive; rather, he says the term is code for doing what has to be done, just as the US military began to deal with Iraqi Sunnis and stopped calling them al-Qaida and began calling them "Sons of Iraq."