The war in Lebanon is a grand crime committed by Israel to punish Hezbollah and its chief, Hasan Nasrallah. As much as Nasrallah's initial operation against Israel was justified by a million arguments, it has proven to be too destructive for Lebanon. Finger-pointing is useless at this stage. We need to find a way for Lebanon to move on and rise from the ashes -- again.

This morning, I was asked a very difficult question over breakfast, to which I was unable to give a correct or balanced answer. The complex question was: "how are you?" Dumfounded, I did not have an answer.

There is nothing in the world more difficult than to watch a country that I love, and which has been very good to me, crumble before my eyes. It's like seeing a beloved woman or family member suffer from an incurable disease, while being unable to end, or ease their suffering. I lived the best years of my life in Lebanon. I have befriended, and been educated by the Lebanese at the American University of Beirut (AUB), returning to Syria with a lot of sympathy, respect and admiration for Lebanon. It taught me tolerance, creativity, defiance, love -- and politics.

The events of the last two days brought the clock in my mind ticking back to June 1999, when Israel bombed Beirut, knocked down electricity for the next months of that exceptionally hot summer and spent an entire night breaking the sound barrier in Lebanon. It was a horrible night indeed, but the next morning the Lebanese woke up as if nothing had happened. The maid rang our doorbell at 7:00 am. The cafes near my house were all open, traffic was jammed as usual and ordinary people filled the streets, heading off to university, schools, and work, as if nothing had happened the previous night. That day taught me that the Lebanese love to live, no matter how difficult the circumstances. They have an abundant love for life that is hardly found among others in the Arab world, which explains why they have built such a lovable and inspiring country.

The reason for my dilemma is that I have genuine love and high respect for Hezbollah and its leader Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah. He is a selfless nationalist who is uncorrupted and has done wonders to Arab moral and pride by liberating South Lebanon from the Israelis in 2000. The steadfastness he showed when his son Hadi was killed in combat against Israel nearly ten years ago is worth grand admiration, proving that he is a man living for his cause, and, above all, not a hypocrite.

What has happened in Lebanon over the past two days, however, is too destructive. It was highly needed, because of national pride and Israeli aggression, but in as much as it was needed, it should have been avoided to spare Lebanon so much destruction. When news broke out on July 12 that Nasrallah had carried out a heroic operation and killed 8 Israelis, wounded 24, and captured 2 soldiers, I could not but smile with pride and pleasure. Nasrallah, after all, had done what he had promised to do since 2004. Back then, while exchanging prisoners with Israel, he said that unless the remaining Lebanese prisoners were released from Israeli jails, he would capture more Israelis. With impressive precision, Hebollah carried out its promises -- revealing grand lack of preparation within the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) stationed on the border with Lebanon. Pleasure and pride, however, ended when it became clear that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert would declare war on Lebanon.

What was Nasrallah thinking? Did he underestimate Olmert and his relatively new and inexperienced Defense Minister Amir Peretz, thinking that while occupied with the Palestinians in Gaza, they would not possibly open another war front with Lebanon? That is what happened in October 2000, when Nasrallah captured Israelis in Lebanon, during the outbreak of the second Palestinian intifada, and exchanged them for Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners in 2004. Back then, Prime Minister Ehud Barak, occupied with the Palestinians at home, refused to respond aggressively to Nasrallah, fearing that this would endanger Israeli lives. As a result of his passiveness toward Hezbollah, however, Barak was voted out of office in March 2001, and replaced by an Israeli soldier who was unwilling to appear soft on any attack against Israel.

That was Ariel Sharon. Ehud Olmert wants to fill in his shoes of his bedridden boss and predecessor. He wants the world to view him as another Ariel Sharon, an Israeli nationalist who would go to great length to punish all aggression against Israel. Nasrallah, probably, thought that Olmert would be another Ehud Barak. He was mistaken.

Another reason for this war in Lebanon might be the influence of the Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal. The Damascus-based Palestinian commander is uninterested in peace with Israel. He would love to see Hamas out of office in Palestine because this would give it a free hand at doing what it does best: fighting the Israelis in guerilla warfare. Freed from the restrictions of office and the burdens of running a state, Hamas would inflict more pain on Israel.

Certainly, it was more dangerous to Israel when in the underground than from where it stood after winning the Palestinian elections in January 2006. From where it stands today, its hands are tied and its margin for conduct has shrunk down to dramatically low levels. Its leaders inside the Occupied Territories want international recognition as statesmen running a country, not resistance leaders who want to liberate a nation. Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh is showing relative moderation, because he is more interested in running schools, paying wages to state employees and providing security for the Palestinians.

Meshaal, who observes events from the outside, sees Palestinian politics from a different angle. He believes that the more Hamas stays in government, the more it will be marginalized as a resistance movement. He believes in brinksmanship with Israel, and eventual radicalization. If Israel is moderate and peace-loving (which it is not) towards Hamas, then this forces Hamas to respond with similar moderation and peace-loving rhetoric. Meshaal does not want that. He wants the true face of Israel in order to show the true face of Hamas.

This is where he meets with Sheikh Hasan Nasrallah. The Lebanese leader is also clearly not interested in peace. Mainly, this is out of conviction shared by many Arab nationalists that their war with Israel is about the existence of the Jewish State, and not about specific targets like the Golan Heights and the Shebaa Farms. They always refer to a phrase that says: "We fought in 1948 for Palestine and to obstruct the creation of Israel. We did not fight for the Golan Heights or South Lebanon." So, one reason why Meshaal and Nasrallah do not want peace is that they firmly believe that Israel is a thorn in their backside -- a country that is aggressive towards the Arabs and Palestinians by nature and cannot live in peace with them.

One must not forget here that from a patriotic and nationalist point of view (regardless of outcome) what Hezbollah did on July 12 was justified, since they only attacked Israel after Israeli troops had trespassed on Lebanese territory. They did not capture the two Israeli soldiers from within Israel. If peace is signed between Lebanon and Israel, the Shebaa Farms are returned and Lebanese prisoners are released from Israeli jails, there would no longer be any need for the arms of Hezbollah.

When all of what is happening in Lebanon is over, Nasrallah can clearly stand up and tell the world: "it is impossible to disarm Hezbollah so long as we are at war with Israel." He had been saying this since 2000, while many Lebanese were arguing that the state of war with Israel officially ended when Israel withdrew from South Lebanon. What happened in Lebanon since July 12 shows everybody without the shadow of a doubt that the Israeli threat is still serious to Lebanon. If the Lebanese Army cannot defend itself (it clearly has proven itself completely incapable over the past 48 hours) then the job would have to done by Hezbollah.