I've written a few times about the Iraqi Air Force's security dilemma: It will be very difficult for the Iraq and the US to build an organization that can protect Iraq's borders without simultaneously threatening Iraq's neighbors (including Israel). As Pat Lang points out, Lebanon faces a similar problem:
Amin Gemayel was not particularly forthcoming, and seemed badly out of touch. When pressed for details on a number of points he was completely at a loss. He seemed to resort to stock politician phrases even in personal conversation. My impression was of a man losing vitality. I tried to push him on the question of what a real 'national defense strategy' would be, seeking some common ground between him and Hezbollah. He replied that he envisaged a 'Swiss model' of every citizen owning a gun. Incredulous, I asked him if that would really deter Israeli or Syrian aggression. He responded evasively, citing the importance of various UN resolutions. When I cornered him privately after the session, he said that in the 1970s they had tried to acquire Crotale air defense systems but were thwarted by Israeli pressure, indicating that similar factors were at play today.
The Lebanese problem is a bit more intractable even than the Iraqi, as Lebanon cannot even control its own territory without threatening Israel and Syria. A Lebanese Army with the equipment and training necessary to defeat Hezbollah would, given the instability of Lebanese politics, become a significant threat to Israeli security. As such, the army is restricted to doctrines and weapons that leave it with only a very limited capability to defend and control its territory. All the while, the United States and Israel criticize the Lebanese government for being unable to deal with Hezbollah...
Via Alex at Yorkshire Ranter.
--Robert Farley
