Tribalism and Honor in War and Peace

A couple days ago, an article in the Jerusalem Post quoted eighteen-year-old Mohammed Swyel of Lebanon. He stated, "Everybody in Lebanon needs Hezbollah. Of course, we need peace for this country, but not over our dignity. Our dignity is first."

Dignity. I call it tribalism and it's a big part of the reason that the Middle East is in the state it's in. And it is a factor of Middle Eastern cultures that much of the West has yet to understand.

So, as the fighting continues up North, I say to those who feel Israel has gone too far – in the Middle East, strength is what talks. There is no such thing as a unilateral withdrawal on the part of Israel for peace, or a prisoner swap for peace, in which Israel would exchange hundreds of Arab prisoners for 3 Israeli soldiers. To the Hezbollah, to the Palestinian masses, this is seen as weakness and Israel, in doing so, sets itself up for future attacks.

Take Israel's hastily implemented withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May of 2000. Israel left and the Hezbollah quickly moved in. Now tell me, what sovereign country would idly sit by as neighboring forces rain rockets on their civilians, or kidnap their soldiers on patrol within their own country's borders?

Many of you may be wondering just how this situation came about. Rather than tracing it to Biblical days, let's look at a condensed version of more recent history: back in 1978, Israel had entered southern Lebanon to stop PLO-allied cross-border attacks along its northern border. It wasn't long before the UN Security Council passed Resolutions 425 and 426, calling for the withdrawal of both Israeli and Palestinian forces, and the establishment of UNIFIL - the United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon.

Israel withdrew several months later, and the pro-Israel SLA (Southern Lebanese Army) set up base in southern Lebanon. But the Palestinian and Hezbollah forces, remained, violating the UN cease-fire resolutions and continuing their cross-border attacks into northern Israel. In 1982, Israel again entered Lebanon reaching Beirut, with the goal of evicting the PLO which had established a foothold in the country. Israeli forces withdrew from most of Lebanon in 1986, retaining a "security zone" in southern Lebanon until the Israeli Defense Forces 2000 withdrawal.

Rather than leading to peace along the border, this withdrawal allowed the Syrian-backed Hezbollah to move back into the south of Lebanon, leading to the raining of rockets on Kiryat Shmona and other northern Israeli cities.

Now, back to tribalism, honor and dignity. While the majority of Arab leaders may have accepted the larger idea of a Middle East peace, I would argue that they represent the Westernized few. (For example, they obviously do not include Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, or Hasan Nasrallah, leader of the Hezbollah, who I would argue represent the best of tribalism, fanaticism, or whatever else you'd like to term it.)

So while 'Westernized' Arab leaders are left trying to bridge the gap between the 'civilized' notions of negotiation toward peace, standards other Western countries expect them to uphold; they are also left having to show respect for the 'tribal' notion of blood for honor; a belief I would argue, primarily of the poor, uneducated and un-Westernized.

I'd also argue that it is an instilled fear (a.k.a. brainwashing) of the 'indecent freedoms' these un-Westernized Muslims may associate with Western culture that would lead to a strengthening of the fanaticism. This fear becomes a bond that holds them together and which fuels their hatred – of Israel, of the West, of America.

Bottom line is, when it comes to the Middle East, there are two standards of behavior – the Western 'civilized' standard; and the Islamic 'tribalized' standard. Survival requires that you engage in diplomacy with the West; and show strength to the Arabs.