Speaker 1: Kiyota. I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page,
Speaker 1: a daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald. Tensions
Speaker 1: in the Middle East are ramping up at an alarming rate.
Speaker 1: Israel's defense forces said it's begun a targeted ground operation
Speaker 1: into southern Lebanon against terrorist targets. It comes after days
Speaker 1: of air strikes within Beirut's city limits, which started after
Speaker 1: Israel assassinated HESBLA leader Hassan Nasrallah. The escalation in the
Speaker 1: war has killed civilians, destroyed homes, and displaced a million
Speaker 1: people in Lebanon. Today on the Front Page, Waikato University
Speaker 1: International law professor Ol Gillespie joins us to discuss, first off,
Speaker 1: our can you give us an over of what's happening here?
Speaker 2: The war, or the most recent conflict in Gaza has
Speaker 2: been a difficult conflict for the last nearly a year now,
Speaker 2: and it has been to a degree contained and not
Speaker 2: spread over borders. But what you're seeing now is that
Speaker 2: the war is starting to expand, and even though there
Speaker 2: are different causes, they are related and so what was
Speaker 2: once effectively within territory that Israel controlled is now moving
Speaker 2: into other countries, and so it's moving into Lebanon in particular.
Speaker 2: The risk is that it won't just state to Lebanon,
Speaker 2: but it could also move towards Yemen and its potential
Speaker 2: maybe in Syria because there's some sympathy in Syria for
Speaker 2: some of these causes. But there's one country behind them all,
Speaker 2: which is Iran. And so the biggest fear right now
Speaker 2: is that Israel and Iran get into a fight. And
Speaker 2: it's not just Israel and the puppets because his Bula,
Speaker 2: the forces in Yemen, and the forces in Syria are
Speaker 2: all controlled by Iran. But right now there's a very
Speaker 2: than paper walls stopping that major regional conflict breaking out.
Speaker 1: So who are the main players here and how can
Speaker 1: you help us kind of get our head around who
Speaker 1: we're looking at.
Speaker 2: So with his Blar, if you're looking at them in
Speaker 2: terms of capacity, they've got probably double the amount of
Speaker 2: soldiers that Hermas has. They definitely have better military kit
Speaker 2: and so as opposed to using rockets, they've also got
Speaker 2: things like missiles which are much more precision guided. Their
Speaker 2: biggest advantage is that they have got a conduit which
Speaker 2: goes directly to Iran, which can give them weapons supply
Speaker 2: as they need it, and that's a very different situation
Speaker 2: to a gaza where they're fighting with much more limited
Speaker 2: resources because they're isolated.
Speaker 1: Where is has Bila based.
Speaker 2: They're based in Lebanon. They are not the Lebanese state.
Speaker 2: They are effectively a non governmental militia, but they are
Speaker 2: funded directly from Iran. Some countries designate his BLA as
Speaker 2: a terrorist entity, which means that you're not allowed to
Speaker 2: acknowledge them or work with them, and those who support
Speaker 2: them are at risk of criminal charges. New Zealand is
Speaker 2: not one of those countries.
Speaker 1: So why has BLA gotten involved this late in the game.
Speaker 2: Well, in many ways, the game with his BLA goes
Speaker 2: back to the early nineteen eighties, and you can either
Speaker 2: see this current conflict as separate or you can see
Speaker 2: it as part of a sequence that goes back decades.
Speaker 2: And so there have been other times when Israel has
Speaker 2: actually made a ground incursion into Lebanon. That happened in
Speaker 2: the nineteen eighties, and it happened the early part of
Speaker 2: the twenty first century. What they'll be trying to achieve
Speaker 2: is to push his BLA back beyond a certain border
Speaker 2: so that there's a neutral zone between the two sides,
Speaker 2: and if that is achieved, a type of truth may
Speaker 2: come down and then Israel might withdraw.
Speaker 3: Two am in Lebanon, where Israel has begun its ground
Speaker 3: offensive into the south. Throughout Monday, Israeli as rights continue
Speaker 3: to target southern Lebanon. Several Israeli as rights I've had
Speaker 3: these southern sub of be ruled. A series of loud
Speaker 3: explosions were heard across the city just after midnight. As
Speaker 3: Bola says it's fighting back with shelling and rocket attacks.
Speaker 1: They have started attacking Beirute and Lebanon in the last
Speaker 1: few days, and it comes just days after Israel assassinated
Speaker 1: Hiszbelah leader Hassan Nasraala. The group's vowing to continue fighting
Speaker 1: Israel in support of Palestinians, it says them, saying that
Speaker 1: they're fighting on behalf of Palestinians. Is that the group's
Speaker 1: way of getting involved in this conflict and furthering their
Speaker 1: wants and needs.
Speaker 2: The Palestinian issue is a humanitarian catastrophe, and some people
Speaker 2: see it in ethical terms, some people see it in
Speaker 2: political terms. Some groups use it as a justification for violence,
Speaker 2: and Hisbela is currently one of the groups which is
Speaker 2: justifying some of their violence against the Israeli state because
Speaker 2: the calamity which is happening in Palestine or the occupied territories.
Speaker 2: Having said that, if you actually were able to solve
Speaker 2: the Palestinian issue with the creation of a Palestinian state
Speaker 2: and the two state option, it's unlikely that peace would
Speaker 2: break out in the Middle East. You would just solved
Speaker 2: one part of the problem. They're connected, but they are
Speaker 2: different at the same time, and so even if you
Speaker 2: do find a peaceful solution to Palestine, the relationship between
Speaker 2: Iran and Israel is very difficult and that could continue
Speaker 2: in a difficult way even if peace was found. But
Speaker 2: having said that, finding peace with Palestine is it should
Speaker 2: be our foremost goal.
Speaker 1: In terms of the conflict that Israel's facing with Hazbillah,
Speaker 1: It's come at a time when Benjamin Yatnya, who was
Speaker 1: really reaching for that public support. Do you think that
Speaker 1: this and the assassination of senior leaders of the group
Speaker 1: on behalf of Israel has been a positive for him?
Speaker 2: War is a good distraction for any politician who has
Speaker 2: domestic troubles at home, and this isn't just the case
Speaker 2: of Israel, and often you will find that a conflict
Speaker 2: means that the population becomes concerned with other issues, and
Speaker 2: when you're fighting large external enemies, it means that debate
Speaker 2: about some of your own policies gets pushed to one side.
Speaker 2: So on a personal political level, yes, I think expanding
Speaker 2: the war is good for Netanyahu.
Speaker 1: How significant is a ground invasion in Lebanon.
Speaker 2: We've seen ground invasions before. The reason they do it
Speaker 2: is to push back the insurgents, which in this case
Speaker 2: says Bilarre to a certain distance. The risk is that
Speaker 2: a ground invasion presents much more risk to Israeli troops
Speaker 2: than aerial bombardment, and that's because they're on the ground
Speaker 2: that in an urban environment, and they're fighting an enemy
Speaker 2: which is well armed and quite well prepared. It's a
Speaker 2: different caliber of conflict to what you would see in Gaza,
Speaker 2: because the enemy is larger in terms of manpower, their
Speaker 2: munitions are more modern, and their supply lines are strong.
Speaker 2: And so the risk for Israel is that they go
Speaker 2: into Lebanon or they're going too southern Lebanon, and it
Speaker 2: becomes a much harder battlefield objective to find success on
Speaker 2: because the enemy is more entrenched, more prepared, and much
Speaker 2: better armed.
Speaker 1: In terms of Israel at the moment that fighting wars
Speaker 1: on several fronts, Can you give us some examples on
Speaker 1: what's happening there.
Speaker 2: So apart from the ongoing conflict in Gaza, they've also
Speaker 2: been involved in strikes on Syria, strikes on Yemen. The
Speaker 2: only country they have not struck directly is Iran, but
Speaker 2: they've clearly provided no shortage of provocation for Iran to
Speaker 2: hit them with assassinations on Iranian territory. In short, Israel
Speaker 2: is feeling very strong and they're almost provoking Iran into
Speaker 2: a greater conflict. But right now, imagine Iran is feeling
Speaker 2: quite nervous about that prospect because the superiority of Israeli
Speaker 2: military is becoming apparent. And you can see that just
Speaker 2: in the way that they've used technology in recent days
Speaker 2: to effectively eliminate the entire upper echelon of his Balan.
Speaker 2: It's ethically questionable like what they've done, and legally questionable
Speaker 2: some of the things like using walkie talkies which explode.
Speaker 2: And so I think if you were in Iran right now,
Speaker 2: your rhetoric would be high, but you would be very
Speaker 2: reluctant to go toe to toe with Israel in this conflict.
Speaker 1: What would it take for Iran to get personally involved
Speaker 1: in this What do you think would be the straw
Speaker 1: that would break their back?
Speaker 2: There's been plenty of straws so far. There's been provocative actions,
Speaker 2: and you may remember a couple of months ago when
Speaker 2: Iran sent three hundred missiles towards Israel following an assassination,
Speaker 2: and so there's no shortage of provocations in terms of assassinations.
Speaker 2: The thing that would tip it would be a direct
Speaker 2: attack on Iranian territory, but I think Israel's got no
Speaker 2: intention to do that unless Iran started to shoot missiles
Speaker 2: directly at them again. But Iran's got no need to
Speaker 2: do that, because they can just push their munitions towards
Speaker 2: Lebanon and let his Billad do it for them, or
Speaker 2: push them towards Yemen and let the Huthi do it
Speaker 2: for them, or push them towards Syria. Iran doesn't need
Speaker 2: to fight directly. It can just fund this war from
Speaker 2: Afar and hopefully for the Iranians, keep them safe from
Speaker 2: Israeli bombs.
Speaker 1: I suppose this escalation is putting the US in a
Speaker 1: very difficult position.
Speaker 2: If Iran gets involved in the conflict directly, it's quite
Speaker 2: possible that the United States will get involved as well,
Speaker 2: and that would have implications not just for America and
Speaker 2: they're run up with their presidential campaign, but also for
Speaker 2: countries like New Zealand, because we are part of a
Speaker 2: group of ten countries which have pledged to help keep
Speaker 2: the international waterway of the Red Sea open, and so
Speaker 2: if it kicked off in your worst case scenario, it's
Speaker 2: possible that New Zealand could be asked to do more
Speaker 2: to help protect the Red Sea.
Speaker 4: I am guessing that the United States wants to avoid
Speaker 4: any kind of direct alliance with Israel on this, but
Speaker 4: will provide them with the necessary weapons, including the bomb
Speaker 4: that took out Hassan Nasralla just a couple of days ago.
Speaker 4: So I think that the United States wants to avoid
Speaker 4: escalation in which they will have to take part a
Speaker 4: direct part in as Iran has over the past few months.
Speaker 4: But it remains to be seen if they will be
Speaker 4: dragged into a more full fledged war.
Speaker 1: This upsurge in conflict. What would it mean for the
Speaker 1: rest of the world and what countries or what other
Speaker 1: countries should be most worried right now other than Iran, say.
Speaker 2: In economic terms, it will push the price of goods up,
Speaker 2: especially oil that come out from that part of the world,
Speaker 2: because it becomes much more expensive to deal with them.
Speaker 2: You're likely to find that most of the region will
Speaker 2: not go to conflict, even though that the relationship between
Speaker 2: Iran and countries like Saudi and Qatar are not good.
Speaker 2: They would want to get or Egypt. They wouldn't want
Speaker 2: to get directly involved in the conflict. But the good
Speaker 2: news is that this would not become the Third World War.
Speaker 2: And that's because neither China nor Russia are actual allies
Speaker 2: of Iran. They're friendly with Iran, but there's no military
Speaker 2: obligation that they would go and help them. And so
Speaker 2: it may expand a little bit. It may pull in
Speaker 2: the United States, but I don't think it would pull
Speaker 2: in much bigger players, of which a direct conflict between
Speaker 2: the superpowers would be the result.
Speaker 1: We've mentioned that Israeli continuing to fight on all separate fronts. Logistically, though,
Speaker 1: how long can it put up that fight? How is
Speaker 1: its resources and its military world.
Speaker 2: Class easily top of the world, And it's not just
Speaker 2: in terms of the amount of soldiers that it can field,
Speaker 2: which is in the hundreds of thousands when they call
Speaker 2: up their reservists, but also in the quality of their
Speaker 2: weaponry they have is top class. And of course it
Speaker 2: needs to be remembered that Israel is also probably a
Speaker 2: nuclear power, and that if terrible things happen, they always
Speaker 2: have in their backyard the possibility using whap to mass destruction.
Speaker 2: I don't think that will happen here. I think if
Speaker 2: you did see a conflict that spread towards Iran, you
Speaker 2: would find that Israel would be determined to make sure
Speaker 2: that Iran does not accelerate its movement towards the bomb.
Speaker 2: And so Iran and the international community are playing cat
Speaker 2: and mouse right now over whether they will or won't
Speaker 2: develop the bomb. But I think if war broke out
Speaker 2: with Israel, Israel would make sure that Iran was retarded
Speaker 2: in that space catastrophically.
Speaker 1: So we've mentioned in New Zealand's position if the US
Speaker 1: got involved, But what is our position in this at
Speaker 1: the moment.
Speaker 2: First off, if there are any Kiwis in Lebanon, they
Speaker 2: should leave the area as fast as they can, even
Speaker 2: in surrounding countries. They should be listening very closely to
Speaker 2: the media, and they should be listening to foreign affairs
Speaker 2: updates about where it is and isn't safe. I think
Speaker 2: if it escalates more, it would be in the relationship
Speaker 2: between Iran and Israel, and that could happen that Israel
Speaker 2: is acting faster and with more confidence than it has
Speaker 2: done for the last year.
Speaker 1: And listeners been following this conflict would have heard the
Speaker 1: term who these what's their role?
Speaker 2: They're based in Yemen, they are another proxy of Iran
Speaker 2: Sheha based faith. They've got access to some pretty high
Speaker 2: capacity kit and the area I work in his peace
Speaker 2: and like what would peace eventually look like? And it's
Speaker 2: difficult in an area where you've had seven decades of
Speaker 2: war but increasingly betrend is that you're seeing countries being
Speaker 2: destroyed and almost ungovernable and impossible to rebuild. And so
Speaker 2: a country like Lebanon was barely sustainable economically, and before
Speaker 2: the conflict, Syria is in a similar situation. Yemen is
Speaker 2: in a similar situation with Gaza. The objective right now
Speaker 2: may not be actually to defeat the enemy. It might
Speaker 2: be to defeat any chance of them rebuilding a civilized structure.
Speaker 2: And so a lot of the Middle East is being
Speaker 2: turned into rubble, which will make long term peace difficult,
Speaker 2: but also harder for oppositions to rebuild.
Speaker 1: What do you see happening next.
Speaker 2: Well, at the moment, Israel will listen to no one
Speaker 2: yetna who will do what he deems is most necessary
Speaker 2: for the survival and furtherance of interests of his country.
Speaker 2: He doesn't listen to the Security Council, he does not
Speaker 2: listen to the International Court of Justice. He barely listens
Speaker 2: to the United States. And so I think the only
Speaker 2: way you can get Israel out of Lebanon is the
Speaker 2: Security Council has to become involved. You have to have
Speaker 2: a type of peace agreement, and that would involve the
Speaker 2: insurgents or his being pushed back a certain distance, a
Speaker 2: neutral zone being put place between countries, and then Israel
Speaker 2: moved out of Lebanon. That's the pattern we saw in
Speaker 2: the nineteen eighties, in the first part of the twenty
Speaker 2: first century. So we have been here before and there
Speaker 2: is a pattern to be followed. And in the meantime,
Speaker 2: what we have to try to make sure is that
Speaker 2: we follow the rules of war and humanitarian law to
Speaker 2: the highest possible ability so that there's no indiscriminate or
Speaker 2: disproportionate or in humane conflict and civilians are kept out
Speaker 2: of a line of fire.
Speaker 1: Thanks for joining us ou. That's it for this episode
Speaker 1: of the Front Page. You can read more about today's
Speaker 1: stories and extensive news coverage at enzet Herald dot co
Speaker 1: dot nz. The Front Page is produced by Ethan Siles
Speaker 1: with sound engineer Patty Fox. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to
Speaker 1: the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: and tune in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.