Is it possible to understand a convoluted and complex situation such as the fighting in Lebanon between Hezbollah and the Sunni and Druze who have been described as pro-Western and pro-government (of Fouad Siniora) without exploring the relationship between the fighting in Lebanon and the strategic interests of Iran and Syria? Apparently, the New York Times thinks so; their article starts with a brief description of the renewed fighting:
Fierce Fighting Breaks Out East of Beirut
Fierce clashes broke out on Sunday in the mountains east of Beirut between supporters of the Western-backed government and followers of Hezbollah, the militant group backed by Iran.
The fighting, in the Shouf and Aley districts in the mountains overlooking the capital, Beirut, followed overnight clashes in the northern city of Tripoli that left at least two people dead and five wounded, according to security officials.
And here is their synopsis of the causation:
Hezbollah’s military dominance, and its continuing blockade of the main road to Beirut’s airport, have raised pressure on the governing coalition to accept a resolution of Lebanon’s 17-month political crisis on terms favorable to Hezbollah and its allies in the opposition.
...
Hezbollah had agreed Saturday evening to withdraw its militants from the streets after the government said it would reconsider a decision it made last week to challenge the group’s private telephone network.
The government and the Hezbollah-led opposition have been locked in a stalemate that has prevented the election of a president, leaving the country without one since November.
Hezbollah vowed to continue what it called a civil disobedience campaign, continuing to block the airport road, until the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora officially rescinded the decision on the telephone network and a solution to the political crisis was reached through dialogue.
This is, of course, how Hezbollah propaganda describes the fighting, as civil disobedience against an unjust regime. If this explanation of a crisis that directly and indirectly affects the stability of the Middle East and the strategic interests of all of the important players in the neighborhood is accepted, it generates a response from the West that can only lead to the worst of all outcomes for supporters of civil society.
For a more complete and more nuanced understanding of the fighting, one can read al Manar (the radical Shia/Iranian pov), al Jazeera (the dominant Sunni pov), and other publications as well as those reporters who are especially plugged into the area, such as Michael Totten:
Recent Comments