|
1972
|
|
venerdì, luglio 21, 2006
Notizie dal fronte/7. Due interessanti contributi alla discussione sulla guerra Israele-Hezbollah oggi sul Washington Post. Il primo è un'analisi di Michael Abramowitz che si sofferma sulla visione della Casa Bianca:
In the administration's view, the new conflict is not just a crisis to be managed. It is also an opportunity to seriously degrade a big threat in the region, just as Bush believes he is doing in Iraq. Israel's crippling of Hezbollah, officials also hope, would complete the work of building a functioning democracy in Lebanon and send a strong message to the Syrian and Iranian backers of Hezbollah. Bush and his team were also deeply skeptical of the Middle East policy of the previous administration, and of what they see as an excessive devotion to a peace process in which one of the protagonists, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, was not seriously invested. Explaining the reluctance to push quickly for a cease-fire, one senior administration official who was not authorized to speak on the record indicated a belief that premature diplomacy might leave Hezbollah in a position of strength. "We don't want the kind of truce that will lead to another conflict," said this official, who added that, when the time comes, "you will see plenty of diplomacy." Fred S. Zeidman, a Texas venture capitalist who is active in Jewish affairs and has been close to the president for years, said the current crisis shows the depth of the president's support for Israel. "He will not bow to international pressure to pressure Israel," Zeidman said. "I have never seen a man more committed to Israel." E' questa coerenza strategica che fa di Bush uno dei più grandi di sempre, nonostante gli errori tattici. Il secondo è un articolo di Jim Hoagland sulle responsabilità del governo libanese e - indirettamente - delle democrazie occidentali, rilassatesi dopo la Rivoluzione dei Cedri: The latest outburst of violence is more a result of the fragmentation of political forces in the Middle East than a region-wide regrouping of Arabs and Iranians into a dangerous new monolith of radical Islam. By losing control over Hezbollah, as it lost control of Palestinian guerrillas in the 1970s, the central government of Lebanon has once again made manifest the high cost of irresolution. E' un conflitto a più livelli dove ognuno combatte per sé e per qualcun altro. Il miglior alleato del Libano è Israele. Ma se leggete i giornali non lo capite. |
A Fabio.
A Luisa.   
  Asia e dintorni Normblog |
