The creation of a separate Hezbollah communications network, allowing them to plot the overthrow of Lebanese democracy with their Syrian and Iranian masters, was only one more step in a continuous process. If the Lebanese government was going to challenge this step, it should have been ready with the military means and resolve needed to enforce its authority. Hezbollah gambled that the government was not ready to back its position, and Hezbollah was apparently right. The role of the Lebanese army in Beirut is unclear. Whatever they are doing, they are not doing their job. How can the Lebanese army announce that it is "neutral" when an armed militia challenges the authority of the government?

The vital interests of the West are threatened, but Western diplomats give off only hot air. US President Bush, defender of democracy and the true faith, could not be bothered, as he is preparing for his daughter's wedding. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, so solicitous of the welfare of the democratic government of Fouad Seniora when the Israelis tried to oust the Hezbollah in 2006, issued a meaningless statement:

"We will stand by the Lebanese government and peaceful citizens of Lebanon through this crisis and provide the support they need to weather this storm,"

It is not a storm, Ms Rice. A storm blows over and gives way to sunny weather. It is the coming of an ice age, with all the inevitability of a slow but certain catastrophic event, that has plainly been in the works since the creation of the Hezbollah. What is remarkable is that everyone stood about, powerless, while a handful of unscrupulous religious fanatics exploited Lebanese ills to convert Lebanon into a franchise of the Iranian Islamist revolution. If the US is going to provide the Lebanese with the support they need, yesterday was the time to do it. It is silly to speak about avoiding civil war now. The Hezbollah has set up roadblocks on all the roads to Beirut. They control the road to the international airport. That is an act of insurrection.

The Europeans too, and the Arabs, are consulting and talking and meeting, but where were they in December of 2006, when the Hezbollah began obstructing the workings of the Lebanese government? Where have they all been since then? And where was the Lebanese government and the Lebanese army? Everyone watched while the Hezbollah, the paws of the Iranian cat, played with the mouse of the Seniora government. By now the mouse is totally dizzy and fatigued, and the bystanders seem to be likewise befuddled. Israeli President Shimon Peres is a great man, and part of his greatness is that he can make very great mistakes. In a most remarkable statement, he "explained" that the crisis in Lebanon is an "internal split" of the Lebanese. That's right, the potential establishment of an Islamic Republic, a forward base of Iran, on Israel's northern border is just an "internal" affair of the Lebanese: "It has nothing to do with Israel. It's an internal split," quoth Peres. With wise men like that, who needs fools? But Peres was only saying what everyone else was thinking and doing, and the truth is, that there is not very much Israel can do, at least not openly. It is up to France, the USA, the Arab League and perhaps Turkey. But none of them seem to be concerned beyond the point of saying they are concerned.

Did the crisis begin in December of 2006, or did it begin in July of that year, when Hezbollah kidnapped Israeli soldiers and brought a war on Lebanon, and the Lebanese government did virtually nothing to stop them? Or did the crisis begin in 2000, when the Hezbollah kidnapped the first set of Israeli soldiers? Or did the crisis really begin when the Hezbollah was allowed to take over large parts of Lebanon and set up its state within a state? Where was the Lebanese government all this time, and where were the Western powers, who should have been ensuring that the government, and not the Hezbollah, provided the social services and political representation that the Shi'a population of Lebanon needed?

Last autumn, when I wrote about the forgotten agony of Lebanon, the problem was already acute, and the international silence about Lebanon was deafening. I concluded, 'As for the Hezbollah, they are providing a sterling example of how Jihadists can "adapt" to "democracy."' Was I wrong? But the vast majority of Lebanese media and international experts continued to babble that the Hezbollah had the national interests of Lebanon at heart. Even now, when the Hezbollah overran the Lebanese capital and seized control of the roads and Hezbollah general Secretary Nasrallah blames the government for interfering in his private army, pundit Rami Khouri told Al Jazeera that a "mediator" is required:

Commenting on Nasrallah's speech, Rami Khoury, editor-at-large for Lebanese newspaper The Daily Star, said Nasrallah had been careful to present Hezbollah as acting out of self-defence.

"He's made it clear that the government has declared war on Hezbollah and Hezbollah is defending itself," he told Al Jazeera.

"What you need now is some credible, expert mediator - probably from the Arab world - to step in."

The psychopath who begins shooting the hostages when the SWAT team advances may also make it clear that he only acted in self-defense. Should a neutral mediator be appointed to adjudicate the claims of the psychopath versus those of the police? The Arab world mediator, the expert, did step in, may we remind Rami Khouri. The Arab League tried to negotiate a settlement, but the Hezbollah and their bosses in Tehran and Damascus refused it. The UN, also a neutral mediator, called for disarmament of Hezbollah and implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559, but since the UN was not willing to enforce its decision, the Hezbollah turned a deaf ear. Lebanon has run out of neutral mediators. There is no neutral mediator whose judgment would be accepted by Syria and Iran. There is no expert on international law who will rule that it is OK to maintain an armed militia within a state, that it is legal to allow the murderers of Rafiq Hariri to get away with murder. and that it is right for Bashar Assad to pick the next president of Lebanon. Those are the only judgments that Hezbollah and its masters would accept. The Hezbollah are in defiance of the Lebanese government and of international law. The case could not be clearer. Bandits only obey the law when they are forced to do so. By now, even Rami Khouri should understand that. What is needed is a neutral mediator with enough battalions to enforce their decisions, and the will to do it. The UN and the Arab League are unwilling to back their decisions with force.

But can we really blame them? The Lebanese army exists, but it is unwilling or unable to act. Doing nothing in the face of insurrection is not avoiding civil war, it is simply surrendering in the civil war that is already a fact. The Lebanese government has not issued a clear call for armed support, nor has it directed the army to dismantle the Hezbollah, nor has it asked the help of UNIFIL to do so. Pundits like Khouri call for more "mediation." If the Lebanese are not willing to help themselves, then who will help them? If they will not defend themselves, then who will defend them? Nobody wants to get mired in the mud of Lebanon again.

Of course, when a Lebanese journalist or a Lebanese politician says anything, it is sometimes hard to know if they are saying what they think, or what they need to stay alive. Given the number of journalists and politicians that have already been assassinated because they dared to speak out against Hezbollah, Syria and Iran, it is fair to conclude that there is a sort of Darwinian selection at work in Lebanon, for tact and discretion. Brave politicians like Walid Jumblatt, and brave journalists like Michael Young are in increasingly short supply in Lebanon. Perhaps if there were more of them, international support would be more substantial, and perhaps if international support was worth something, more Lebanese would be willing to speak out.

The French and the Italians have finally acted decisively, and they have acted true to form, as we learn from these headlines:

France plans for possible Lebanon evacuation

Italy readies evacuation plan from Lebanon

The French and the Italians are, of course, prudently preparing the retreat, what else could one expect? When the going gets tough, the tough get going.

Everyone, without exception, seems to be frozen in the headlamps of historical inevitability. Like characters in a Greek tragedy, they may see the looming catastrophe, but they render themselves powerless to stop it. By the time the Arab league meets and discusses, the UN discusses and decides to "remain seized of the matter," the French conclude their discussions and deliberations, and the Italians conclude their evacuation plans, it will be over - Hezbollah and its Syrian and Iranian masters will have established one more fact on the ground. The unacceptable will be accepted, just as the 1.5 year paralysis of the Lebanese government was accepted.

Ami Isseroff