The Bir el-Abed area in southern Beirut damaged by Israeli air strikes. (Peter Speetjens, IRIN)

What is Hizbullah?

"Hizbullah" means "party of God" in Arabic, and is the name of the religious-political movement founded in Lebanon in the aftermath of Israel's 1982 invasion of that country. It is based primarily within the Shi'a Muslim community, which resides in Beirut, the Beka'a Valley, and South Lebanon. Hizbullah's overall ideological goal is to establish an Islamic republic in Lebanon by peaceful and democratic means. Forcing the withdrawal of Israel's occupying army was one of its earliest and most central goals. Its armed wing, the Islamic Resistance, mounted a determined and ultimately successful guerrilla campaign against Israeli troops, leading Israel to withdraw from Lebanon in May 2000. Since that time, Hizbullah has been increasingly vocal in its support of the Palestinian struggle, and, in particular of its religious elements.

Hizbullah is headed by a collective leadership (the "Shura" Council), but Sayid Hassan Nasrallah, Secretary General of the Shura Council, is charismatic and widely revered, and is the most public face of the organization. The group's executive council directs a number of units that provide social welfare, education, health, and other vital services to Lebanon's poorest citizens. Hizbullah's expenditures on education, for example, have, in recent years, exceeded those of the Lebanese Education Ministry by a wide margin. Hizbullah also runs a television station (al-Manar, the "Lighthouse" or "Beacon"), four radio stations, and five newspapers or journals.

Hizbullah has participated in Lebanese electoral politics since 1992, and has steadily gained influence. In the 2005 elections, it gained 23 seats in Lebanon's 128-member parliament, and has two ministers in the current Lebanese government.

Hizbullah has been designated a "terrorist organization" by the United States, Israel, Canada, Australia, Great Britain, and the Netherlands. The European Union, however, has declined this designation, as have the rest of the nations of the world.

Hizbullah's armed wing is believed to have around 3,500 fighters, mostly armed with rifles and other light arms. It has an arsenal of an estimated 12,000 missiles, most of them with limited range and unsophisticated guidance systems. Some of its missiles may have a range of up to 120 miles, although none has ever been fired.

What motivated Hizbullah's recent capture of Israeli soldiers?

Hizbullah itself has stated that the raid which resulted in the capture of two Israelis and the deaths of eight more was motivated by a desire to gain the release of a number of Lebanese who have been detained - some for decades - by Israel.

In October 2000, Hizbullah skirmished with Israeli troops in the Shebaa Farms - an area still occupied by Israel, but which Hizbullah and Syria claim is part of Lebanon - after which three Israeli solders were missing, and either killed in action or captured. In January 2004, Hizbullah and Israel completed a prisoner swap, brokered by Germany. The remains of Israeli soldiers, including three from the Sheba'a Farms battle, and one Israeli civilian were exchanged for a number of Lebanese and Palestinian detainees, as well as the remains of Lebanese fighters held by Israel.

The Israeli cabinet nonetheless voted to hold back several Lebanese detainees, including Samir Quntar, who has been held in Israeli prison since 1979.

In November 2005, Hizbullah troops engaged Israeli troops along the border in an attempt to seize several as bargaining chips to gain the freedom of the remaining Lebanese detained in Israel. This effort was foiled by the Israeli army.

Coming so shortly after the capture of an Israeli soldier in Gaza, it has been widely assumed that the recent Hizbullah raid was coordinated with the Palestinian operation, and designed to demonstrate support for the Palestinian struggle. Yet Hizbullah has stated that the operation had been planned for months, and was launched at the first logistical opportunity.

What are the Sheba'a farms, and how to they figure into Hizbullah's dispute with Israel?

The Sheba'a farms are a strip of land approximately nine miles long and one and a half miles wide, situated near the borders of Lebanon, Syria, and Israel, and southwest of the Lebanese village of Sheba'a. The area was occupied by Israel in 1967.

When Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, its troops remained in Sheba'a farms. Israel then asked the U.N. to certify that it had fully withdrawn from Lebanon, in compliance with Security Council Resolution 425, passed in 1978 during Israel's first major invasion of Lebanon. Lebanon and Syria both insisted that Sheba'a farms were part of Lebanon, and that Israel's withdrawal was therefore incomplete. Syria, however, has declined to formally cede the territory to Lebanon.

U.N. officials reviewed maps of the area, and determined that the Sheba'a farms fell on the Syrian side of the border (which had been drawn in the 1930's by the French, who administered a mandate over Syria at the time).

Lebanon and Syria have continued to contest the U.N.'s judgment on this issue, as has Hizbullah. Until recently, Hizbullah troops have mostly engaged Israeli troops only in the Sheba'a farms area, to underscore the group's claim that it is fighting to liberate Lebanese territory.

Whether or not Sheba'a farms is a part of Lebanon, as the Lebanese and Syrian governments and Hizbullah maintain, Israel is required to withdraw from the territory under U.N. Resolution 242, passed after the 1967 war. In a sense, then, the issue is not whether Israel should withdraw from Sheba'a farms, but which Security Council resolution requires it to do so - either 242 or 425.

What are the roles of Syria and Iran in supporting Hizbullah, including in the current crisis?

Syria and Iran have each been strong supporters of Hizbullah - Syria, primarily for strategic reasons, and Iran for both strategic and ideological reasons. Syria supports Hizbullah as a means to bar a potential separate peace agreement between Lebanon and Israel, that would isolate and weaken Syria. Iran supports Hizbullah as a means to extend its ideological and strategic influence into the Arab world. Iran provides Hizbullah with an estimated $100-200 million annually, and is the likely source of much of Hizbullah's weaponry. Syria is a lesser partner, although it is suspected of being the conduit for Iran's aid to Hizbullah.

Iran has doubtless provided Hizbullah with broad ideological inspiration and direction, but there is little beyond speculation to support the view that Iran directs Hizbullah's actions - any more than, for example, the U.S. - which provides Israel with close to $3 billion annually in military and economic aid - directs the actions of that country.

What has Israel's response been and what is the goal of their response?

Israel has responded to the capture of its soldiers with a campaign of aerial and naval bombardment against the Beirut international airport, power stations, roads, bridges, ports, lighthouses, gas stations, and a variety of other civilian targets in Lebanon. It is increasingly resorting to ground troops in the assault. Israel has also continued its siege of the Gaza Strip. As of this writing, 423 Lebanese, including 376 civilians, have been killed, and scores more wounded, and over 140 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip. Thirty-two Israeli soldiers and nineteen civilians have also been killed, some by missiles fired into Israel.

These are not measures likely to lead to the release of the Israeli soldiers - either the one seized near Gaza nor the two taken captive near Lebanon. Instead, Israel seems to have exploited their capture to pursue wider strategic objectives.

First, Israel is sending a message that its regional military superiority cannot be challenged. The Palestinian assault near the Gaza Strip in late June, and the Hizbullah raid near the border with Lebanon were both daring and operationally sophisticated. Israel realizes that any crack in its vaunted military aura inspires further resistance. That is why Israel has retaliated to attacks on purely military targets with at least as much ferocity as it does to attacks on Israeli civilians.

Second, Israel hopes to turn local populations in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip against Hizbullah and Hamas, respectively. A rain of death and destruction on Lebanese and Palestinian civilians is a form of collective punishment, intended to impose costs of resistance on all. Israel hopes the Lebanese government, on the one hand, and Palestinian Fateh "moderates", on the other hand, will be forced to police these two determined foes of Israel. Deliberate targeting of civilians for political, non-military purposes is a war crime under international law.

Third, Israel seeks to undermine the emerging entente between Fateh and Hamas, and bring down the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority. Hamas, despite its reprehensible charter, has been edging forward in negotiations with Fateh over the "Prisoners' Document" - an eighteen point plan for national unity that would likely pave the way for negotiations with Israel toward a two-state solution. It has also observed a 17 month truce against Israel, except after extreme provocations, such as bombings this June in which Israel annihilated tens of Palestinian civilians. Even Israel's attacks on Hizbullah in Lebanon are ultimately aimed at demoralizing and weakening Hamas, as Israeli leaders have candidly admitted.

What is the role and response of the US, Arab states, and the international community?

The United States has endorsed Israel's assaults against the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. The United States vetoed a draft UN Security Council resolution condemning all violence between Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza, and calling for the release of the Israeli soldier captured in late June. President Bush has pointedly declined to call for a ceasefire in Lebanon, stating that "Israel has a right to defend herself", and that the "root cause" of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon "is terrorism and terrorist attacks on a democratic country." President Bush has blamed Syria and Iran for instigating the current round of violence.

France, Russia, and the European Union have criticized Israel's use of "disproportionate force" in its response to the Hizbullah raid.

The reaction of the Arab states has been mixed. Egypt had warned Israel after its attack on Gaza that it should not take their peace treaty, signed in 1979, "for granted." When the fighting spread to Lebanon, several states - notably Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, were critical of Hizbullah's cross-border raid, while still condemning Israeli violence. Syria, accused by the United States of sponsoring Hizbullah, is keeping a very low profile, with no apparent desire to be drawn into the current conflict.

Interestingly, the new government of Iraq, which the U.S. had hoped would become a pro-Israeli ally in the region, unanimously passed a resolution condemning Israel's "criminal aggression."

How does this affect Israel's ongoing invasion of Gaza?

Despite much talk about Israel now "fighting wars on two fronts", in fact, in Gaza, it is attacking an entirely defenseless civilian population, who have no military whatsoever. Hizbullah's rocket barrages on Northern Israel instill fear among many Israelis and have caused a few civilian deaths and some property damage, but in no way have slowed the Israeli military onslaught against Lebanon. With international attention diverted now to Lebanon, Israel has continued its campaign against Gaza with increasing intensity, and accordingly greater loss of lives and property.

Will the situation further escalate or come to a quick resolution?

Israel has stated that its attacks on Lebanon may continue for several weeks. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has claimed that a ceasefire must be "sustainable," and that a return to the "status quo ante is unacceptable." U.S. officials have steadfastly resisted efforts by European and other nations to bring about an immediate cessation of violence.

Israel has made threatening statements toward both Syria and Iran, raising the prospect of widespread regional warfare. Imam Moktada as-Sadr, leader of the Shi'a-based al-Mahdi Army in Iraq, proclaimed that his followers would not stand idly by while Israel attacked its neighbors, raising the possibility of escalating attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

Whether or not the fighting spreads in the short term, Israel's long history of overwhelming violence against Palestinians and other Arab populations has never succeeded in achieving Israel's goals. Its opponents, on the contrary, have always regenerated, often in more powerful and sophisticated form. Just four years ago Israel invaded the West Bank, destroying infrastructure and smashing the institutions of the Fateh-led Palestinian Authority - paving the way for the ascendance of Hamas. Throughout the Arab world today, Sayid Hassan Nasrallah is being hailed as the new Saladin (the Muslim general who forced the eviction of the Crusaders from Jerusalem in the twelfth century).

The U.S. has rarely stood so openly in support of Israeli violence against its neighbors. Osama Bin Laden, in his November 2004 videotape, proclaimed that he first imagined towers toppling in the United States while watching television broadcasts of Israel's 1982 bombardment of downtown Beirut. U.S. backing of Israel's onslaught may very well bear an immense future cost to the American people.