Don't Know Much About History?

I apologize for disappearing, and then promptly writing about 13th and 14th century history in Asia Minor. But trust me, there is a point about Lebanese politics hidden beneath all this.

Once upon a time, the Byzantine Empire -- centered around Istanbul and stretching across modern-day Turkey -- was crumbling. It would survive in some form or another until the mid-15th century, but the reason for its decline was clear centuries earlier. Turkish warriors established statelets on the Eastern border of Byzantine territory, from which they plundered Byzantine territory and seized land. The raiders called themselves ghazis -- warriors for their Islamic faith against the Byzantine infidels. Their loyalties were fluid, flowing to whichever state was most successful in carrying out attacks on Byzantine land.

The ghazi states competed in a primitive, rough meritocracy. Legitimacy was gained from tearing off pieces of the crumbling Byzantine Empire. Victory brought more ghazis, and swelled a state's territory. And the ghazi state controlled by Osman was one of the most successful, most daring, in advancing the ghazi state.

In the time of Osman, the statelet was one of the smaller ghazi territories in Asia Minor. Those to the east, further away from Byzantine territory, had more developed bureaucracies and methods for political control. But Osman possessed a long border with the Byzantine Empire. This gave him, and his successors, the opportunity to raid and plunder at will, growing quickly in size and prestige. Fighters from the other statelets flocked to the new Osman state. This little foothold in Asia Minor would form the seed of the new Ottoman Empire.

Ghazi culture is alive and well today. Groups from Fatah al-Islam and Hamas to Hizbullah win loyalty and supporters for their prowess in fighting Israel. Of course, they lack the redeeming qualities of 13th century ghazis who eventually created the Ottoman Empire, which surpassed the Byzantine Empire by any imaginable standard. But the need for a frontier with the enemy state, and the fact that their legitimacy rests on combat with it, remains the same. And, of course, does much to explain skepticism about hopes for "negotiations" with these groups, or the possibility of them accepting any buffer between them and their prey.