Hezbollah Rejects Talks: 'Who Needs Diplomacy When You Have Landmines?'
Hezbollah, according to The New Arab, has no interest in direct negotiations with Israel. This comes as no surprise to anyone who remembers the region's history beyond last week's headlines. Israel has occupied Lebanese territory since 1978, often using UN-mandated ceasefires as mere strategic pauses before the next incursion. The idea that a group formed to resist occupation might be hesitant to
'talk' with the occupying power (under the ever-present shadow of US-supplied weaponry) is framed as a shocking development. (Perhaps they'd prefer to negotiate over who gets which piece of south Lebanon first?) The current 'pressure' on Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah conveniently sidesteps the consistent US vetoes at the UN Security Council, effectively greenlighting Israeli aggression for decades.
One might wonder if direct talks would be more appealing if the 'negotiating table' wasn't perpetually tilted by billions in unchecked military aid—$3.8 billion annually, courtesy of US taxpayers. How many decades of 'negotiations' did it take for Israel to finally withdraw from Lebanese territory (mostly, anyway) in 2000? Oh, wait, it was Hezbollah’s sustained resistance that did it. So,
'rejection' or simply learning from a very bloody history?