Arming the LAF with Night Vision Equipment

The UNIFIL political officer, meeting with the JINSA Flag & General Officer delegation on the Lebanese border, mentioned a “donors’ conference” in Beirut dealing with the issue of providing arms, funding and training to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). She mentioned anti-tank missiles. When asked against whose tanks the LAF expected to fight, she said that wasn’t her problem, but she did mention LAF operations against the Palestinian militias in northern Lebanon in 2007. “Lebanon is a sovereign country, and the donors took seriously the requests made by the government.”

The UNIFIL political officer, meeting with the JINSA Flag & General Officer delegation on the Lebanese border, mentioned a “donors’ conference” in Beirut dealing with the issue of providing arms, funding and training to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). She mentioned anti-tank missiles. When asked against whose tanks the LAF expected to fight, she said that wasn’t her problem, but she did mention LAF operations against the Palestinian militias in northern Lebanon in 2007. “Lebanon is a sovereign country, and the donors took seriously the requests made by the government.”

Lebanon is a semi-sovereign country. Parts of it are occupied by Palestinians in refugee camps that are “no go zones” for the government; parts are occupied by the Hezbollah army and its Iranian IRGC partners and by Syria. And part of the government is occupied by Hezbollah – which shot its way into the Cabinet after the last election. If the world is building Lebanon an army, it would be wise to ask against whom that army plans to fight.

“Not Hezbollah” would be the first answer. The LAF is 30% Shi’ite and there are close relations between members of the LAF and members of Hezbollah – sometimes family relations. The idea that the LAF would dispossess Hezbollah of its weapons on behalf of border security with Israel is no less foolish than the idea that the Palestinian Army would dispossess Palestinians of their weapons on behalf of security for Israel.

And if the answer is “the Palestinian militias,” the question would be, “do they now have tanks?” The answer would be, “no.”

It is in this light that the CENTCOM announcement of the delivery of US arms to the LAF should be considered. “This shipment included 1,000 M16A4 rifles, 10 missile launchers, 1,583 grenade launchers, and 538 sets of day/night binoculars and night-vision devices. This equipment will be supported with training provided by the United States government. The United States is committed to providing assistance to the LAF to help them increase their capacity.” Defense Industry Daily reported that the U.S. has supplied mini-UAVs, helicopters and surplus M-60A3 main battle tanks.

The LAF website said, “The assistance received from Syria, the USA, and other friendly countries has played a basic role in bridging the gap between needs and available means.” Again we ask, “Means for what against whom?”

The UAV’s would give the LAF the ability to watch inside Israel – where would that information go? Helicopters could patrol the Israeli/Lebanese border, requiring Israeli forces to scramble to ensure that a flight was not part of a terrorist attack. And the delivery of U.S.-origin night-vision devices to the Lebanese military was a first. The State Department had previously restricted night-vision systems to NATO states and leading allies of the U.S. Hezbollah would find them very handy.

The CENTCOM memo concluded, “This assistance includes training and equipment to meet the LAF’s long-term needs which the Lebanese government has identified in its five-year plan for the LAF in order to protect Lebanese citizens, counter-terrorism, and to fulfill its duties throughout the country.”

Or participate in the next Hezbollah war against Israel – and to increase the likelihood of that war by giving Hezbollah additional operational capabilities.