This is one of my all-time favorite magazine covers. A hot babe hoisted up in the middle of Lebanon’s Cedar Revolution, flashing only peace signs (and unfortunately little else). The girl at the top of this blog’s banner does the same. Democracy stirs in the Middle East, along with something else. Now that’s inspiration.

The revolution expelled Syria for the most part from Lebanon, allowing it to hold free and fair elections in which an anti-Syria coalition was formed. However, given the regime’s longterm entrenchment, it’s elements are still very much active and large parts of the country are still dominated by Hezbollah. Part of the revolution’s goals was to disarm the militia, demarcate the borders, and make the Lebanese government the sole source of sovereignty, yet this has just not happened. Why not?

Part of it is the democratic process. Lebanon’s consociational system grants a veto to any group that can muster a 1/3 vote against any government move. This was intended to prevent any one group from being dominated by the others, and it has been used over the past year by Hezbollah — along with threats of violence — to keep the anti-Syria coalition hamstrung in dealing with its weapons. Given the technical legalities, along with Hezbollah’s pure might and dominance of the south, southern Beirut, the Bekaa, and other parts of the country, there is simply not enough political will within the different sects’ leaders to press the issue too much. Doing so could, in fact, spark another civil war.

Because of this, nothing has really happened since last year. The Lebanese government is still not completely sovereign. However, Hezbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers and Israel’s response could provide a unique opportunity at stirring up popular opinion against Hezbollah, thereby forcing the political will to disarm it.

The fact is, the only people in Lebanon who supported what Hezbollah did are either Syrians, Palestinians, or Hezbollah supporters. The rest of the Lebanese sighed in despair. Many may not like Israel all that much, but they are no longer willing to be wrapped up in a war with it. Political Editor Sarkis Naoum, writing in the influential Lebanese daily An-Nahar, wrote, “”The ‘state of Lebanon’ held responsible by Israel for yesterday’s Hezbollah operation does not exist and may never exist in the foreseeable future… How can such a state exist when the war-and-peace decision is not in its hands and its influence on the Lebanese who have it, that’s if indeed they have it, is little or in fact nonexistent?” They want peace. Hezbollah, on the other hand, wants nothing to do with the concept, making the decision for war itself, and dragging everyone else down along with it.

Government officials are getting much more forward with their condemnations of Hezbollah’s actions as well as their calls for it to be disarmed. The cabinet passed a resolution yesterday saying that the government has the right and duty to extend its control over all of its territory. According to the article, some very senior Lebanese politicians have said that this resolution could precede the actual sending of the Lebanese army to the south.

The Israeli response could actually be a boon to this sentiment, forcing the disarmament of Hezbollah. Here’s how:

The IDF in the past couple days has blockaded Lebanon by ground, sea, and air, preventing weapons and terrorists from entering or leaving the country. It has attacked Hezbollah offices, outposts, and even headquarters building in the south as well as Beirut. Strategic infrastructure has been destroyed, unfortunately resulting in a loss of some civilian life as well.

But what is important to note is that, while Israel’s response is overwhelmingly powerful and felt by all Lebanese, it is targeted at Hezbollah. Leaflets have been dropped urging civilians to leave these areas and many have fled. The Israeli military has said that it may conduct operations for months, the main purpose being to completely eliminate Hezbollah’s operations apparatus, sending the group scrambling for cohesiveness.

At this point, when the group no longer has direction and leadership, the Lebanese Army can move in and re-take the south from its hands. It is important that the Lebanese Army do this. An Israeli occupation would lend legitimacy to Hezbollah as a resistance to the foreign occupying power, so Israel must be careful not to alienate Lebanese opinion so far away from it that the public must of necessity support Hezbollah in order to make Israel leave. Many in the 1980s supported the expulsion of the PLO, but not the occupation that lasted until 2000. Avoiding that latter mistake and allowing the Lebanese government to take control of the territory, knowing that it does not want a war, is the best thing that it can do.

As a consociational democracy, Lebanon is under the extreme influence of foreign powers due to its strategic position, small size, history, and demographic makeup. Syria and Iran have influenced it for the worst, and France and the United States have been able to help expel Syria’s troops from the country. Yet Israel has played a role as well, and by sending incursions into the country, this role can be a positive one.

Destroying Hezbollah is in its short-term strategic interest, so working with the Lebanese Army to help establish the country’s sovereignty is a must. In the long-term, however, neither Israel nor Lebanon will be safe from the destructive influence of Syria and Iran until those countries have in place democratic regimes that are accountable to their people. It’s as simple as that. Hopefully this strategic blow will be the first step toward that end, an end that is desired by the Lebanese people themselves, a completion of the Cedar Revolution.