Papers in Israel and Lebanon React Differently in Aftermath of War

By: Suzanne Rosenberg Since the beginning of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict, E&P has provided periodic analysis of how two leading English-speaking dailies, Ha'aretz in Israel and The Daily Star in Lebanon, have covered and commented on the crisis. This is the fifth in that series.

The space on the top of the Lebanese Daily Star is no longer reserved for, "Write to President Bush" and "Stop the War" campaigns. The Free Speech banner in the middle of the front page that was there a week ago as the Lebanon War was winding down has disappeared.

But now United Nations efforts to put in place an effective ceasefire, efforts by aid organizations to deliver help to displaced locals, and articles about strategies to clean up the growing environmental damage to Lebanon's beaches resulting from the war appear daily. Editorial opinion in the Star this week ranges from possible opportunities for peace for the region to fears about the failing economic heart of Lebanon.

As opposed to this focus on infrastructure and rebuilding, the front pages of Israel's Ha'aretz this week are riddled with articles that betray the internal convulsions which have characterized the end of this war for Israel.

Calls for top officials' resignations due to their alleged incompetence, and scandalous allegations against the Chief of Staff, as well as the grim stories which returning soldiers told about their experiences in battle, brought into sharp focus the challenges which confront Israeli society at this juncture. Editorial opinion was almost exclusively focused on the poor actions of the government, calls for an independent inquiry into the military and government's actions, and preparations for the inevitable next go-round with Hezbollah.

HA'ARETZ

In Israel, as the week dragged on, numerous articles in Ha'aretz and the Hebrew language press highlighted both the financial scandal of Chief of Staff Dan Halutz and the apparent mismanagement -- on all levels -- of the military campaign in Lebanon. The press, in whatever language, focused on little else.

The scandal surrounding Halutz, who evidently spent the eve of the offensive arranging to sell shares of his stock portfolio, and questions regarding a weakened culture of war in the country -- as seen through the betrayal of the military by the government -- appeared everywhere in the press, every day. It appears that Israeli troops can't seem to return across the northern border fast enough. Interviews with many returning from the theater of Lebanon reveal disgust and disappointment about what was achieved, the goals of the mission, the military intelligence, and the strategy employed in the Lebanese campaign.

Reminiscent of our own Iraqi military problems, questions are being raised about why the soldiers weren't trained and supplied better. It was reported that, had it not been for budgetary considerations, tank reinforcements might have saved the majority of Israeli fatalities. Most lost their lives in un-reinforced tanks. Questions about poor training for the mission is one thing, but reports in interviews with the soldiers and their mothers surfaced in the Israeli press this week that the soldiers, whose morale and spirit was high and whose military behavior was reported to be exemplary were nevertheless sent into battle lacking sufficient food and water.

Israeli civilians and soldiers alike point out that Shiekh Hassan Nasrallah not only is still standing but possibly stronger, despite Olmert's insistence that the Israeli military destroyed at least 30-40% of Hezbollah's technical infrastructure.

Editorial writers continued to ask what the results of the war have been. Where are the Israeli hostages, and how did the campaign make a difference for the Israeli military and security objectives? Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert have been called on to resign daily. Ha'aretz and other press in Israel are raising serious questions about the ability and intelligence of the military, and are demanding an independent inquiry (as opposed to an internal military investigation) into specific questions regarding military preparedness.

Even for the feisty and opinionated Israeli press, the vitriol and outrage in the editorial pages is extraordinary. Defense Minister Peretz reported to the press that he was not told prior to the conflict the full extent of missile placement in the north. Reservists reported that officers stopped them from attending anti-war protests, and even the liberals in Israel slammed suggestions by the Defense Minister that Israelis might open avenues of discussion with Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The clear impression is that Israelis should prepare to fight the "mini Iran" on their northern border once again and that right wing traditional conservative elements within the country which favor generals in the Defense portfolio are once again gaining momentum. More than one editorial commented favorably on Bibi Netanyahu and his behavior during the war increasing his standing within the country once again. There was much editorial speculation that the campaign would have been more successful had the Israel Defense Forces gone in with a more sizeable ground force initially, instead of the air strikes that didn't succeed against the guerilla fighters -- but did succeed in creating significant blowback against the Israelis in world opinion.

The overall impression of Israel this week, as seen through its press, is one of a government, leadership, and strategy in total disarray. Confusion, lack of communication, demoralization, and a general shock are descending on the Israeli landscape -- certainly a shift from the former sense of bravado.

The one and only positive consensus appears to be international recognition of the position that Israel is in with Hezbollah -- and a renewed international presence and international recognition -- will be good for Israel, or at least bide some time for the country to regroup and prepare for the next war on their northern border.


THE DAILY STAR

A week after the military crisis in Lebanon eased, the focus in the Daily Star is on United Nations attempts to put together a 15,000-person peacekeeping force for southern Lebanon and within the country the status of "return, recover and rebuild."

Despite warnings by Lebanese authorities about unexploded ordinance, such as cluster bombs, and bans on returning to south of the Litani River by the Israelis, thousands of Lebanese created makeshift bridges, waded through shallow water and traversed over torn-up roads in a hurry to move back to see what damage had been done to their homes and neighborhoods, eager to put some order back into their everyday lives. The Lebanese Parliament gave its OK to the ceasefire terms and immediately began sending the Lebanese military to the South to take over positions held by the Israelis. Amid headlines that southerners are cheering on the arrival of the troops, nowhere is it noted that a majority of the military are Muslims and Shia (and most likely Hezbollah loyalists), sure to confound any future efforts to disarm Hezbollah.

In the meantime, Hezbollah fighters are on the streets again. They are still in civilian clothes, but this time with clipboards instead of mobile rocket launchers, some offering press tours. They appear in ravaged neighborhoods as sort of "guerilla" insurance agents promising to rebuild and pay the first year's rent for local residents.

Hezbollah has a long-term vision and formal apparatus for this kind of local sacrifice known as Jihad al-bina, loosely translated as "Building for the Struggle." Jihad al-bina is the arm of Hezbollah responsible for rebuilding and improving community infrastructure. Where the monies for this rebuilding effort come from isn't being asked -- out loud -- by the Lebanese media or government.

The most striking event in Lebanon, however, is the sober realization that the official Lebanese government is facing a serious uphill battle to make Hezbollah a partner within the government instead of a dominant force with veto power over any official action. The son of slain leader Rafik Hariri, who has assumed the role as spokesman for anti-Syrian influence in Lebanon, has tried to keep his efforts alive by writing an editorial this week warning about increasing Iranian- and Syrian-backed Hezbollah influence. Rami Khouri writes about the other larger furies likely to come down on the Middle East and Lebanon as a result of the conflict.

Primarily, however, this past week's Daily Star reports on the large challenges facing the post-war Lebanese. They are the "historic deployment of the Lebanese army along the southern border," "Hezbollah's monumental task to rebuild southern suburbs," and "the titanic challenges to clean up the Beirut beaches." Efforts to reopen the airport succeeded by the end of the week, and an assessment of Lebanon's economic damage is now estimated to easily top 3.5 billion dollars, the paper reported. Again, the fact that reconstruction dollars may be coming from Iran, Syria, and others sympathetic to Hezbollah is sure to keep the terror group's battle for the hearts and minds of the Lebanese alive for quite some time.

***

As the posturing wanes and tests to the ceasefire continue, pride and shame brush up against each other for headlines in both Lebanon and Israel. The clear message from each country is the relief for the moment that the wholesale fighting has ceased and that the civilians of both countries can go home. Neither country appears too eager to transgress the ceasefire, and -- despite difficulties in implementing the multinational force -- both Lebanon and Israel seem to be pleased that politics will once again be local and the front pages can once again return to reporting on the American quagmire in Iraq.

The dialogue within each country is shifting, and while a "new Middle East" may indeed be in the making, it does not appear to be one that Mr. Siniora, Mr. Olmert, or Mr. Bush had anticipated.