Opinion is split as to whether Israel or Hizbullah should take the blame for the destruction of Lebanon, writes Rasha Saad While newspapers reflect on the viciousness of the Israeli assault on Lebanon, pundits were divided over whom to blame. Writers in the Saudi, London-based Asharq Al-Awsat directly and indirectly blamed Hizbullah for starting the conflict, very much similar to the official Saudi stance which called Hizbullah's kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers a miscalculated adventure. Mshari Al-Zaydi charged that Hizbullah had drawn in Israel's war machine, which was lying in wait, to Lebanon's villages and cities and that in the process, it did Iran a huge favour "as it manoeuvres with the United States and Europe and attempts to use all its cards in the region, including Hizbullah, which is supposed to act in the interest of Lebanon... supposedly." Al-Zaydi bluntly defended the Saudi stance, arguing that "Saudi Arabia and other rational Arab countries hold Hizbullah responsible for escalating the situation and lacking coordination with the Lebanese government." Hussein Shobokshi, also in Asharq Al-Awsat, said that today Hizbullah raises its yellow flags "that differ completely to the Lebanese flag" and declares that whoever is not with them will not be with the victorious. "To play with the destiny of a state is to cause the state painful losses as long as efforts are individualistic; as such, we shift from Jihad to suicide." Shobokshi argues that, away from sectarian partisanship of one movement or another, it is clear that "those who applaud and cheer the current events in Lebanon are those who glorify death and destruction." Diana Mukkaled also in Asharq Al-Awsat wrote that there are many internal divisions and crises emerging within Lebanon. She explained that with consensus on the ruthlessness of the Israeli military operation, "there is real anger on the issue surrounding Hizbullah's responsibility in dragging Lebanon into such a dangerous and deadly adventure." Aware of the seriousness and danger of such divisions at this crucial time, renowned Saudi columnist Dawoud Shirian wrote in the Saudi-funded London-based Al-Hayat newspaper that whether Hizbullah is right or wrong, whether it was hasty or reckless, whether it started a proxy war or a war of its own, is not the issue now. According to Shirian what is important now is to stop the war, protect the Lebanese from genocide, and minimise the terrible physical and political damage. In his article, "The war of blame in Lebanon" Shirian stressed, "we [Arabs] should unite, as the Israelis have done. When the war is over, we can argue with one another and ask who allowed parties, organisations and groups to assume the role of states and governments. We should ask who is responsible for the absence of the role of the Arab regimes in resolving key issues." Other writers in Al-Hayat blamed Israel and the US for the escalation. Columnist Jihad Al-Khazen wrote that Israel responded to the Hizbullah operation by terrorising civilians and "with Nazi-style collective punishment". Al-Khazen added that Israel continues to destroy purely civilian targets in Lebanon that have nothing to do with Hizbullah and its fighters. "If there really is an axis of evil, it is made up of Israel, Israel and Israel, not Iraq, Iran and North Korea." According to Al-Khazen, if it had not been for Israel and its long-standing barbaric occupation of Arab lands, Hamas and Hizbullah would never have existed. "They were created as a result of Israeli aggression, for which the US shares responsibility by its blind support of Israel. US support harms Israel's relations with its Arab neighbours because it encourages fanaticism in Israel," argues Al-Khazen. Patrick Seale also wrote in Al-Hayat, "Israel's strategy in Lebanon seems to be to empty the south of its population, driving the Shias out of their traditional homeland, where they have lived for centuries, in much the same way as it continues its pitiless onslaught on Gaza." According to Seale, Israel has always relied on brute force to ensure its security. He wrote that since its creation in 1948, Israel has sought to dominate the region by military means. "This doctrine rests on the belief that the Arabs will never be strong enough, or capable enough, to challenge it. This is a fundamentally racist attitude." Seale also accused Israel of state terrorism. "Terrorism is usually defined as the indiscriminate killing of civilians in pursuit of political goals. Is this not what Israel is doing in both Lebanon and Gaza? It is killing large numbers of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians in pursuit of its political aim of annihilating Hizbullah and Hamas. By any objective standard, Israel is guilty of state terrorism." Abdul-Wahab Badrakhan also in Al-Hayat charged that George Bush and Ehud Olmert should be held for being war criminals for ordering the killing of Lebanese civilians and refusing to agree to a ceasefire. "What sort of creatures are they by the standards of the 21st century? If they are human beings, then they must be two criminals who make war a means to exercise barbarism," Badrakhan wrote.
