The Second Lebanon War (2006) is the specific military conflict between the paramilitary organization Hezbollah and the state of Israel associated with the question of the Lebanon’s territories and the states’ control over them.
Although there are no controversies about the trigger of the conflict, it is possible to pay attention to the radical opposition of the visions of the conflict presented by the representatives of Hezbollah in their newspaper Al-Intiqad, by the Israeli media as it is in the articles from the Haaretz, and by the independent observers from the authoritative newspaper the Gulf News.
It is important to note that the conflict between Hezbollah and the Israeli military forces has its roots in the conflict of Israel with the Arab world, and this fact influences the presentation and discussion of the Lebanon War in the media.
In her article on the aspects of the Lebanon War, Erika Solomon presents the commentaries on several articles from Hezbollah’s Al-Intiqad. The author states that the presentation of the war in Al-Intiqad is based on accentuating the victorious actions of Hezbollah.
Thus, according to the Lebanese authors, the Lebanon War became the “liberation day and a victory” for the whole country (Solomon, 2009). Moreover, the authors of Al-Intiqad focus on the negative role of Israel in developing the conflict in spite of the fact the trigger of the war is closely associated with the actions of Hezbollah (Solomon, 2009).
If the authors of Al-Intiqad are inclined to mask the aggressive character of Hezbollah’s actions against Israel under the proclamations of the liberty, the position of the Israeli journalists is rather opposite. However, it is important to pay attention to the significant detail that it is typical for the Israeli media to criticize the actions of the former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in relation to the Lebanon War (U.S. court drops Lebanon War victims’ lawsuit, 2011).
Thus, Harel emphasizes the inappropriateness of Olmert’s actions when he “sent the Israel Defense Forces to launch an attack near the Litani River, even though he already had a cease-fire agreement in his possession” (Harel, 2012). It should be stated here that the similar commentaries were presented in the Gulf News on 03 May 2009.
The authors state that “many Israelis view Olmert’s decision to go to war as a knee-jerk reaction by a leader with little security experience, unlike his predecessor, former general Ariel Sharon” (Israeli PM says Lebanon war was pre-planned, 2009). This information was presented with references to the authors of the Haaretz.
The materials provided in the Gulf News during the war conflict and after it are characterized by the definite level of neutrality. From this point, the article ‘Details of the Conflict’ is remarkable. The authors concentrate on listing the aspects of the conflict stating the trigger, causes, details, and consequences of the Lebanon War (Details of the conflict, 2007).
The neutral position of the authors of the Gulf News with accusing the Hezbollah’s forces as well as the actions of the Israeli Defense Forces during the Lebanon War can be explained with references to the absence of the direct involving of the UAE in the conflict.
It is possible to state that the presentation of the aspects of the Second Lebanon War in 2006 by different journalists in Israel, Lebanon, and the UAE depends on the impact of the conflict on the country. Thus, the Israelis concentrate on the figure of the Prime Minister in developing the conflict and on the aggression of Hezbollah when the representatives of Hezbollah justify their actions basing on the concept of liberation of the territories.
References
Details of the conflict. (2007). Web.
Harel, A. (2012). Remember the Second Lebanon War. Web.
Israeli PM says Lebanon war was pre-planned. (2009). Web.
Solomon, E. (2009). 2006 Lebanon War still a point of contention in Israel, Lebanon. Web.
U.S. court drops Lebanon War victims’ lawsuit against Al Jazeera. (2011). Web.