Robert Fisk, Middle East correspondent for British newspaper The Independent, is one of the most acclaimed—and experienced—journalists in the region. Three decades in Lebanon have given Fisk a first-hand knowledge of local political and cultural dynamics that is simply unparalleled. On July 15, Fisk offered Executive his insights on the current war, speaking about Hizbullah, Israel, parallels and connections to Lebanon’s past, and his predictions for the future of the embattled country.
E Who do you hold responsible for the current conflict in Lebanon?
This is about Syria, and about Iran. This is about people needing Syria and Iran to use their influence to stop the war. The Hizbullah were well aware that they broke international law by crossing the border into Israel. They went through the wire, into Israel. They crossed the UN rules, the Blue Line. So they broke all the rules.
They must have planned a scenario. Nasrallah says this has been planned for more than five months—I’m sure he’s telling the truth. And that means they would’ve known the Israeli response, and would’ve planned their reply to that. For example, the gunboat hit last night. That wasn’t just someone who said, “Oh look! There’s a gunboat, let’s find a missile and shoot it.” That was planned before the attack across the border. It must have been. This was an Iranian long-range missile. This is very serious stuff. This is not Katyusha or Kalashnikov.
Remember that, weeks ago, they sent a drone over Haifa. I’m sure it took pictures. I would imagine they were aiming at the oil storage tanks in Haifa. And they obviously worked on the principle that Israel would reply most cruelly to that attack, which as usual Israel did, most cruelly. We’ve now got something like 90 people dead, up to date. And, as usual, the Israelis are failing in Lebanon. They sent their soldiers across the border 35 feet, they lost four men and had a tank blown up. Then they got shelled in Haifa. Then they’ve lost a gunboat. What are the gains? They’ve helped to destroy the infrastructure of Lebanon—gas stations, bridges, you name it. And they can go on destroying it and bring down the government. Then we’ll have a pro-Syrian government again and they can ask the Syrians to come back. Is that what they want?
I don’t think Olmert has any idea about military affairs, I don’t think he has any of it planned, I don’t think the Israeli military know what they’re doing. When you get down to it, killing people in trucks and blowing up homes with eight kids in them and attacking gas stations, it’s the end, isn’t it? It’s over, it’s finished. They’ve got no idea where their soldiers are and they haven’t got them back. So, if it was planned by Hizbullah to drag the Israelis into this mess, they were very successful. But they would’ve known how many innocent lives that attack across the border was going to cost. Because they were counting that Israel would attack the innocent, and Israel did, as usual. So in that sense, what Hizbullah did was reckless, ruthless, and carefully conceived. They relied upon Israel’s cruelty and they got it right.
“Who gave Nasrallah the right to take such
unilateral responsibility?”
E What sort of responsibility does Hizbullah bear for what’s happening?
Did they get a vote or a referendum from the Lebanese people to stage this attack over the border? Who gave Nasrallah the right to take such unilateral responsibility, knowing that there will be such terrible results? Nobody did. This wasn’t even Shebaa Farms. If it were Shebaa, one could understand the logic behind it. But the logic behind this is about Syria and Iran.
E So how do you think Syria and Iran can be brought into the solution?
Diplomats will go to Damascus and ask the help of President Bashar al-Assad. And one year after his army retreated in great humiliation from Lebanon, he’ll be back on the stage again.
E Do you mean that you anticipate a Syrian return to Lebanon?
No. They’re here! They’re here in the sense that they’re in our minds – look at what has happened in the South! Don’t tell me that the Syrians didn’t have any idea that such an operation would take place. I don’t mean Assad, but the ‘Syrians.’ That missile that was fired last night was a highly sophisticated, Iranian-made missile. That wasn’t brought here because somebody wanted to weight their baggage and bring their clothes in the other bag, you know? That didn’t come here because they were going to practice it. They’ve already practiced somewhere else, probably in Iran. That came here to be used on ships, and it was used, successfully. If I were the Iranian military attaché in Beirut, I would’ve been watching that with great interest. It’s test firing, isn’t it? Combat-proven, that’s what you say at arms fairs.
They’re in the market, aren’t they? The Israelis are saying “This proves the Iranian hand in all this!” Well, what’s the manufacturer of the missiles that are hitting all these houses [in Lebanon]? They’re made in California. They’re made in Seattle as well. And one of the missiles they’re using is made in Duluth, Georgia; another one is made in Florida. So, what does that prove? That proves the Americans’ hand?
E At this point, do you feel that Hizbullah is essentially directing Lebanese foreign policy?
They are! They are—the government isn’t, is it? [Lebanese Prime Minister] Fuad Seniora is reduced to ringing up Condoleezza Rice and President Bush.
E Is there a more active role the Lebanese government could take here?
Well, if [assassinated former Prime Minister] Hariri were alive, yes. Hariri would be in St. Petersburg now [at the G8 Summit], demanding to speak to Putin and Bush—and he’d get them. Fuad Seniora is a very nice guy, and I know him personally, and he’s a great economist, but in this sort of tragedy, the Senioras of this world don’t swing any weight.
E Even in a best-case scenario, where this situation resolved quickly, do you see it causing a crisis of legitimacy for the Lebanese government?
Well, it’s causing one already.
E What are the prospects for Lebanon in the short-term?
Well, you’ll have to go to Paris and ask for more money from the European Union. Which means, as usual, that the taxpayers in my country and others will end up paying for this trashing and vandalization of Lebanon. The Hizbullah —how they’ll come out of it, I’m not sure. You see, the crueler the Israelis are, the cleaner they look even though they started it. And they’ll work on that principle. And they’re correct. As usual.
When this started, most Lebanese were cursing the Hizbullah for bringing this down upon Lebanon. But I don’t think there were many Lebanese last night weeping for the crew of that ship. You see?
Syria will have proven that it decides the future of Lebanon. Not Mr. Seniora, Mr. Jumblatt, Mr. Aoun and all the other dignitaries downtown.
E On the subject of Aoun—how will current events affect the future of his relationship with Hizbullah?
Well, it was very interesting to hear the comments he made two days ago. He was remarkably soft in his comments about Hizbullah, wasn’t he? Aoun was always a very messianic person, and when he got back [from Paris] he was being hailed as this kind of savior: reading L’Orient-Le Jour when he returned home was like reading the Syria Times under Bashar al-Assad—utterly uncritical. It was like reading the Iraqi Times when Saddam was there. And since then, he’s proven what I’ve always thought, that he can be a very, very different man from the messianic general we saw before.
E What about the future of Hizbullah? Israel is saying they won’t cease hostilities against Lebanon until UN Resolution 1559 is implemented?
Israel always makes these threats. I’ve got a file I’ve pulled out on Israeli threats to Lebanon. And they’re always saying, “We’ll never release prisoners,” and then they do. They did in 2004, they did in 1985; at one point, they released 1,050 Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners in exchange for, I think, one Israeli spy and three dead soldiers. So, of course they’ll release prisoners. Ehud Olmert may not think he is, but he will.
E Even with a parallel situation taking place in Gaza?
Well, they might get the guy in Gaza, they might find him—it’s a little place, and they’re surrounded. But here, it’s a different matter. They have no idea where the soliders are, nor does anyone else. Well, someone does of course, but not me.
E You were here for the Israeli invasion in 1982. What similarities do you see between the two situations?
It’s not going to be 1982 again. The Israelis are not going to come here on foot. It was a disaster for them: this was their Iraq. They lost the whole operation. Do you remember the purpose of 1982? To secure the northern border of Israel; “We will not leave until we have wiped out the evil cancer of Palestinian terrorism.” And now it’s “evil cancer of Hizbullah terrorism.” Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism—I sat and watched the BBC’s coverage of the UN Security Council yesterday, and up pops the Israeli ambassador to the UN Security Council, and sure enough, he uses “terror” 20 times, or 21 times, in two minutes. It’s like a punctuation mark now, the word terror.
Everyone here who remembers ’82 will think of ’82 now, of course. I’ve been thinking about it: I’ve gone back looking at my book on Lebanon, Pity the Nation, and recalling what I wrote about it, and looking up all the quotations. “We will not stand idly by,” was one of them – the same quote used by Olmert the other day – it’s the same thing that Begin said.
E What kind of solution do you see for the present conflict?
Well, it all goes around [UN Resolution] 1559, doesn’t it? And the way Lebanon gets around it is to keep postponing things. They got the Syrians out, which everyone here more or less wanted; that put the Hizbullah in a much stronger position, of course. And they appreciate that.
Once the UN have gone and paid homage to Assad and everyone else, there’ll be some kind of agreement that the Israeli soldiers will be released soon, that there’ll be a promise through negotiators that the Israelis will release X number of prisoners, the Europeans will offer loans to rebuild Lebanon, as usual – why we should have to pay for this trash, I don’t know, but we do. The Israeli prime minister will appeal for the patience of Israelis, as complicated negotiations managed to release their soldiers, who wouldn’t have been released had Israel not taken a firm hand with Lebanon after the attack. (Laughs) Try me—see if it works. See if it still happens.
E What will be the future of Hizbullah after the war, in your opinion?
I don’t know. They wanted to be in politics and they got into politics: they went into the government, democratic elections. But they also still want to be a militia. Now, can you be a member of the government, playing a democratic role, while the same organization you belong to starts a war that devastates your country without even telling the government?
It always comes back to the same problem: this is not a modern state, because it’s a confessional state. And as long as the president has got to be a Maronite and the prime minister a Sunni and the speaker of Parliament a Shia, it can never be a modern state. But if it’s not a sectarian state, it won’t be Lebanon anymore. Big problem. Upon that, everything else hinges, including the Hizbullah.
So what will they be like afterwards? Well, it depends how many more people get killed. It depends on whether the Hizbullah score some other high-profile attack, like shooting down an airplane, for example—which I’m sure they’re thinking about. With their new missiles, I think they could probably do it—at least, they have a chance of it. And I’m sure they’ve thought about it, planned it, discussed it. I mean, that planning of that ship was done a long time ago. “Oh look, there’s a ship! Let’s go for it.” Forget it.
E Do you think the timing was intentional, coming as it did at the peak of tourist season in Lebanon and coinciding with the situation in Gaza?
Just after the exam season was over and the Baccalaureates are taking place. I noticed that, too.
But no – it needed a particular Israeli unit in a particular place. When this was planned originally, they didn’t know that Gaza was going to happen. I mean, the Hamas delegate here in Lebanon says there wasn’t any coordination; I think he’s probably right. What do you want to do, ring up Gaza and open a phone line? “We’re planning to get two guys tomorrow.” The people who did it in South Lebanon knew that Gaza was taking place, didn’t they? It had been going on for a week or so. But they weren’t inspired by it all, it wasn’t that the projects and the money came from Gaza. Hizbullah said months ago they were going to capture Israeli soldiers.
One of the dangerous sides to all this is that Hizbullah, despite its worth to the country, is a Shia Muslim organization. And a lot of Sunnis are getting killed in this. And you know, with the sectarian conflict in Baghdad.
The one thing this represents now is that the West—in terms of Israel, America, Britain, and everyone else—are all fighting Islamists. We’re fighting Islamists in Afghanistan, we’re fighting Islamists in Iraq, the Israelis are fighting Islamists in Hamas, and they’re fighting Islamists in Lebanon. When I first came here, the West was always fighting nationalists, secular nationalists. That all changed.
The other thing that’s changed is Arabs are no longer afraid. Now, the Hizbullah races to southern Lebanon to fight them. It’s not happened before. The idea that you can beat the Arabs into submission is over. It doesn’t work. Once you lose your fear—and this started in ’82—once you lose your fear, you never get the fear back again. You’re injected against it. You can’t come and re-inject a person. When the Israelis say, “We shall attack painfully,” – yeah, well you’ve done that before!
E Do you feel that anything could have been done in the past year by the Lebanese government to prevent the
current crisis from happening?
The key thing would be to get the Hizbullah to join the army. But they’re not going to join the army, because they won’t be the Hizbullah anymore. It’s interesting that the financial situation of Lebanon was much worse after Hariri’s death than it is today after this bombardment. Both in terms of stocks, and in terms of propping up the Lebanese pound. Hariri’s death proved the maturity of Lebanon, because a lot of us thought that all the ghosts were going to climb out of the mass grave and the civil war would restart. And it didn’t.
E So you don’t see this becoming a long,
drawn-out conflict?
There are too many people involved now. The UN’s involved, the G8 are involved, the Arab League are involved—not that that matters for anything; the world’s attention is on it, and people are becoming sickened by the casualties. Israeli military is coming out very poorly, not just because they’re killing a lot of innocent people. Who would ever have thought that Lebanon would produce anyone who could ever fire a missile and hit a gunboat? It was astonishing last night, it changed the whole balance of power. I mean, are those gunboats going to come back to shell the coast road anymore? I don’t think so.
They came across the border, got blown up in their tank and they didn’t come back anymore, did they?
E Based on your experience in
Lebanon, what kind of economic
impact do you anticipate?
As long as the pound stays at 1,500 to the dollar, Lebanon’s ok. I don’t know how long it can go on nursing a $39 billion public debt. People are always predicting the downfall of the Lebanese economy, and it’s true that at the start of the civil war, if you had a 50-pound note – 50 Lebanese pounds – you kept it somewhere safe. I think Hariri stabilized the economy here, and I think it’ll go on being ok.
Let’s speak with horrible frankness: this country has been repairing and re-repairing and re-repairing and re-repairing itself so long now, it won’t be long before they get those bridges back up again, and the lines repaired. I’ve seen this country devastated by 15 years of civil war, devastated in ’82 by the Israeli invasion with absolutely crushing force – whole towns went missing—and it’s all been rebuilt. And it will be again. And the French will help.
I don’t know what the effect will be on the Israeli economy. Apparently, the Shekel is falling against the dollar at the moment. It’s one thing for the Israeli officials to say they’re going to put Lebanon back 20 years, but Israel could go back 20 years, too. I remember when they had to replace the old Shekel with the New Shekel, and that was a shock.
The other thing which will have a big effect on the G8 is that this is pushing up the price of oil even higher. It’s now almost at $80 a barrel. Just think, it was $16 a barrel at the 1991 Gulf War! That hurts America in its pockets, and I think that if America is hurt in its pockets, it matters more than America’s support for Israel. And that is what the G8 summit will actually be talking about: the dollar, and the barrel and the oil. That’s what it should be talking about, I should say. And this is having its effect; Israel always appeals to the world’s conscience, but it never seems to heed what the world needs as well— that there are other people living on this planet who also have needs, like driving their cars. I’m sure there will be efforts contrived to blame the Arabs for all this – I suppose you can blame the Hizbullah as well—but I think that Lebanon will survive, it always does.
I always remember this wonderful mythical story of the Australian economist who was invited by the Chamber of Trade, before the civil war, to come here and explain to them how the Lebanese economy works, and he spent two or three weeks researching, and talking to everyone and reading every book and pamphlet and came back, and stood up allegedly in front of the Chamber of Commerce and said, “Ladies and gentlemen, I haven’t the slightest idea what you’re doing, but keep it up!”
“[Lebanon] will be [rebuilt] again. and the french will help”
E Are Hizbullah’s actions – kidnapping the two soliders— in any way excusable?
You can look at it in certain ways. Number one, there are still people locked up in Israeli jails. Including hundreds and hundreds of Palestinians without trial. And no one’s got them out. This is the only way that has ever got them out of prison, apart from the Oslo agreement. So, that’s one argument that the Hizbullah have put forward already.
Another one: the Israeli prime minister says its “an act of war,” and the Lebanese government has to take responsibility for it. And we all know that they can’t take responsibility for a single militiaman – it’s untrue. But if you apply the same standards, when Jewish settlers kill and murder Palestinians—holders of Israeli passports coming from Israel, landing at Tel Aviv airport from America in some cases—can the Palestinians declare war on the Israeli government? Do they blame the Israeli government for it, even though the government has actually armed the settlers? They don’t. They may blame Zionism, they may blame the way Israel is run, but they don’t declare war on Israel, do they? But Israel can declare war on the Lebanese government. Or say it’s an act of war. Odd, isn’t it?
Israel can do more or less anything they want anywhere, can’t they?
