What Did Kucinich Do In Lebanon?

On December 6th, Dennis' wife Elizabeth posted on the Kucinich web site an article about their August visit to southern Beruit and southern Lebanon in the aftermath of the war between Hizbollah and Israel. Accompanying the article was this picture (click for full size):



Stare at that picture for a moment.

It's well documented that Hizbollah controls all access in and out of southern Beruit and much of the south of Lebanon. They ARE the government there. Nobody gets in without first arranging access with Hizbollah officials. The press is escorted around, and there are many accounts of potential staged scenes that subsequently get reported on. Journalists must submit their passports to Hizbollah to get access. Descriptions of the off-camera and off-the-record machinations that journalists have had to go through to get into this part of Lebanon are downright creepy.

That's for a journalist or an independent blogger. Now imagine what happens when a sitting American Congressman comes by for a visit. Think Hizbollah might have been a bit more interested?

---

For some backround on getting journalistic access to this part of Lebanon, see the experience of the Anderson Cooper show. Or the experiences of independent blogger/journalist Christopher Allbritton where he descibes how Hizbollah copies journalists' passports and threatens them. Or the experiences of another independent blogger/journalist Michael Totten in Hizbollah-land Or a summary of Hizbollah's media actions at C.A.M.E.R.A..

Israel bombed the Hizbollah-controlled parts of Beruit and Lebanon. Unless Kucinich happened to visit a non-Hizbollah area that was also bombed (either mistakenly or for reasons only known to the Israeli military), I think it's very concerning to wonder who Kucinich dealt with and how he was used by the Hizbollah propoganda machine. In her article Elizabeth mentions that their visit was covered on television in Lebanon, so it was obviously a big event.

---

It would be interesting to know:

1. How did Kucinich's office arrange the trip to Lebanon?
   
2. Who were his contacts in the Lebanese government?
   
3. Who were his contacts for arranging access to southern Beruit? Who accompanied him on his forrays into south Beruit and the southern part of the country?
   
4. Who provided his security?
   
5. Who took the picture(s) and was there any oversight by Hizbollah or allied government officials?
   
6. To what extent was Mr. Kucinich's visit a propoganda opportunity for Hizbollah?
   
7. What did Mr. Kucinich do to mitigate the risk that Hizbollah would abuse his visit for propoganda purposes?
   
8. What was Mr. Kucinich's purpose of this trip? What does he feel like he accomplished?
   
9. While in Lebanon Kucinich met seperately with various faction leaders of the Lebanese government, including the leaders allied with Hizbollah. What messages did he send and what messages did he receive from each of these leaders?
   

These are important questions. Hizbollah is declared a terrorist organization by the US Government (fairly or not, and whether Kucinich agrees with that designation or not). We have a right to know who he had to deal with on this trip and what he did. Maybe I've missed it, but I didn't see any real coverage of this trip. Certainly no one appears to have asked Mr. Kucinich the above questions yet.

---

Some notes on Elizabeth's article...

• She recounts the tale of their bellman, who apparently lived in the bombed out area of south Beruit. No mention is made of whether this man is a Hizbollah supporter, however he apparently lived in or very nearby Hizbollah areas.
  
• In fact, Elizabeth keeps mentioning the "bombing of the southern suburbs of Beirut." That's geographically correct, but it doesn't acknowledge the nature of the conflict or why it was being bombed. A more accurate discription would have been "Hizbollah controlled areas of Beruit."
  
• She summarizes the bellman's story without noting where this unfortunate man stands in the various Lebanese conflicts. To hear Elizabeth tell it, this man was an unbiased victim who had no stake or opinion on the Lebanese Civil War or Hizbollah's power grab. Well, it matters. It matters because Hizbollah is a state within a state. And it was no accident that certain areas were bombed (leaving aside whether it was justifiable).
  
• Elizabeth writes "Bombs made in the US, many paid for by US foreign military aid were being used to take Lebanon’s economy back 20 years..." but makes no mention of Iranian and Syrian arms and money funding Hizbollah terror. In fact, she descibes it entirely passively as "Then came this wave of terror..." and it's not even clear what side of the recent conflict she is referring to. Perhaps it doesn't matter to her.
  
• On whole, the bellman's story is terribly sad. And she conveys the sense of helplessness most Lebanese no doubt feel. It's tragic. She's got that nailed. But the only conclusions she can reach is that American arms are perhaps a root cause and America can't stand "idly by."
  
• Not once in the article does she mention Hizbollah.
  
• Not once in the article does she mention Iran.
  
• Not once in the article does she mention Syria.
  

Like Elizabeth, I have great sympathy for Lebanon. But the Kucinich's just don't seem to get it. That's fine for most people, and it might even be fine for some Congressmen. But not for a Congressman who willfully injects himself into the Lebanese conflict by flying there and arranging a whole itinerary to tour areas and meet with leaders of various factions. We need to see and hear Mr. Kucinich intelligently speak of the dynamics there, and the conversations has to acknowledge what Hizbollah brings to the table. Otherwise it is just willful ignorance and the worst of the criticisms of Kucinich are true.