US arms Lebanon

Since the Lebanese army is already controlled by the Hezbollah, this might not be the best idea.

October 26, 2008

U.S. Resupplies Lebanon Military to Stabilize Ally
By ROBERT F. WORTH and ERIC LIPTON
BEIRUT, Lebanon — For years, the Lebanese military was ridiculed as the least effective armed group in a country that was full of them. After the army splintered during the 15-year civil war, its arsenal slowly rotted into a museum of obsolete tanks and grounded aircraft.

 

Now that is starting to change. At the gates of a military base just north of Beirut, groups of soldiers drive new American Humvees and trucks, and some tote gleaming new American rifles and grenade launchers.

 

The weapons are the leading edge of a new American commitment to resupply the military of this small but pivotal Middle Eastern country, which emerged three years ago from decades of Syrian domination.

 

The new wave of aid, the first major American military assistance to Lebanon since the 1980s, is meant to build an armed force that could help stabilize Lebanon's fractured state, fight a rising terrorist threat and provide a legitimate alternative to the Shiite militant group Hezbollah. That organization, which controls southern Lebanon, has refused to disarm, arguing that it is the only force that can defend the country against Israel.

 

So far, none of the deliveries of heavier weapons have been large enough to require a formal notification to Congress. Those deals are still in the early stages, administration officials said.

 

Some officials within the Pentagon and State Department have expressed concern about extensive military aid to a country so recently free of Syrian control and in which Hezbollah, which has close Syrian and Iranian ties, has continued to gain political power. And that has been a main concern for Israel, which has been lobbying for a lower level of support to remove the possibility that American tanks and helicopters might one day be used against it.

 

History also casts a shadow: the last major effort to assist the Lebanese Army, in the 1980s, ended with American troops being caught up in a civil war.

 

These doubts, and the contrast with the robust American military aid to Israel, have provoked some anger in Lebanon. A television comedy here this week depicted American envoys handing out socks and toy airplanes to Lebanese generals.

 

Still, officials at the State Department and the Pentagon say they are convinced that rebuilding Lebanon's military is essential to peace efforts in the region.

 

Other nations are involved, including the United Arab Emirates, Germany, Belgium, Britain and Canada. There have even been rival offers of assistance from Russia, China and Iran. But so far the United States, which has long been the Lebanese military's main source of outside support for weapons and training, says it will anchor the effort.

 

"United States policy is that Lebanon be sovereign and independent and the Lebanon government and its institutions govern all of Lebanon's territory and disarm militias," said Christopher C. Straub, deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East. "We recognize that is not going to happen overnight, but that is our policy."

 

The plan to rearm Lebanon was born in 2005, after the popular so-called Cedar Revolution forced Syria to withdraw and seemed to vindicate the Bush administration's efforts to spread democracy throughout the region. In 2006, the 34-day war between Israel and Hezbollah bolstered the notion that Lebanon needed a stronger military, to provide a national alternative to the Shiite group's militia.

 

The army was in terrible condition. After a brief injection of American aid during the early 1980s, it split along sectarian and political lines. The Sixth Brigade, composed of Shiites trained by the Americans, went over to the militias and won a mocking new slogan: "We serve and defect."

 

After the civil war, during the years of Syrian domination, the army's stocks deteriorated to the point that most soldiers fired no more than 30 rounds a year.

 

"It was like a police force, but undertrained and underequipped," said Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese general. "Even the Special Forces are very young and inexperienced now, whereas Hezbollah has lots of experience."

 

In fact, the army was deliberately kept weak by the country's Syrian overseers, who did not want a strong alternative force. That was part of what allowed Hezbollah to grow into such a formidable power during the 1980s and 1990s, using advanced weaponry provided by Iran and Syria.

 

Now, however, American officials say they have faith in the independence and professionalism of the army, which has become thoroughly integrated to include all of Lebanon's many religious and ethnic factions, and has avoided interfering in politics. American-driven audits have shown that almost nothing given to the army has ended up in Hezbollah's hands.

 

"They have demonstrated year after year after year that when we give them equipment, they take responsibility for it," said Mark T. Kimmitt, assistant secretary of state for political and military affairs.

 

An important moment for the army came in the summer of 2007, when it fought and won a three-month battle with Islamists in the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp in the northern city of Tripoli. That struggle, in which 168 soldiers and an unknown number of militants were killed, vividly underscored the need to re-equip the army. With no combat helicopters or precision weapons, the army had to resort to dropping bombs by hand from its Vietnam-era Huey helicopters, a hopelessly inaccurate method that resulted in the near-leveling of the camp.

 

Although the United States rushed them 40 loads of C-17 transport planes full of ammunition and other gear, army commanders bitterly resented the failure to provide them with more sophisticated arms.

 

"Nahr al-Bared lasted 105 days," said one high-level Lebanese officer involved in procurement issues, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "If we had had attack helicopters, it would have been over in 15 days."

 

Another stark illustration of Lebanon's new military ambitions, and its gaping needs, is visible right now on the country's northern border with Syria. In recent weeks, after a string of bombings in Tripoli that left 20 people dead — most of them Lebanese soldiers — the military sent 8,000 soldiers to the border to monitor smuggling routes across the northern mountains.

 

That effort alone was a measure of Lebanon's new independence from Syria. But the border control force was too small, and it lacked necessary equipment, Lebanese military officials say.

 

"They have no U.A.V.'s, no night-vision equipment, none of the sensors they use in other countries to tell if what you're seeing is a threat or just an animal," the Lebanese procurement officer said, using the abbreviation for unmanned aerial vehicles. "Let's say you have 50 valleys in one area, and you have soldiers posted on hilltops. They can watch during the day, but at night they can do nothing."

 

Lebanese commanders say they are anxious about the slow pace of American military support so far. Of the $410 million that has been committed since 2006, less than half has been delivered — mostly ammunition, communications equipment, Humvees, trucks, rifles, automatic grenade launchers and other light weapons, and spare parts, according to Lebanese and American military officials.

 

And it is heavier weapons that are most needed, Lebanese officials say. In particular, they want an air defense system, which would allow them to argue that they could completely replace Hezbollah as a warding force against Israel in the south.

 

"It's the ABC of any army to have the capacity to defend itself," the Lebanese procurement officer said. "During the 2006 war, Israeli aircraft were shooting from 300 meters up."

 

Mr. Straub, with the Pentagon, said the focus is still on identifying Lebanon's exact military requirements and then finding the weapons to suit them. That means that although Lebanon has requested attack helicopters, for instance, it is not yet a question of approving a specific deal.

 

"They have first got to define the requirement," Mr. Straub said. "Everybody wants to rush to the equipment. But we have got to define the requirement."

 

Yet one State Department official said that conflicts in the administration are holding up any major deal, as some at the Pentagon and State Department are more eager to rebuild the Lebanon Armed Forces while others are reluctant to move too quickly, given Israel's concerns. "There are differing points of view," the State Department official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the matter.

 

The Lebanese also want precision antitank missiles and a rebuilt fleet of tanks to replace their aging American and Soviet models. Specifically, they want surplus Vietnam-era M60 tanks that would be rebuilt with American parts and transferred to Lebanon from Jordan.

 

Even though that shopping list does not include the most advanced weaponry, it has caused serious discomfort for Israel.

 

"We don't want Lebanon to be run by Hezbollah," said one Israeli official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of continuing negotiations with the United States. The fear, the official said, is that the weapons might fall into the wrong hands.

 

For now, American officials say that they are committed to helping Lebanon get the weapons it needs to defend itself, and the acknowledge that the delays have caused anxiety in Lebanon.

 

"It is understandable, the frustration the Lebanese are expressing," Mr. Kimmitt of the State Department said.

 

Robert F. Worth reported from Beirut, and Eric Lipton from Washington.