Saudi Arabia is meeting with Arab allies concerning Iranian influence in Lebanon through their Hezbollah entity:
Saudi Arabia and other Arab foreign ministers will hold an emergency meeting in Cairo on Sunday to discuss confronting Iran and its Lebanese Shi'ite ally Hezbollah, who the Arab allies say are interfering in their internal affairs.
I wonder if the topic is basically about whether the Arab states opposed to Iran can manage to quietly back--or at least refrain from loudly complaining about--an Israeli raid in force deep into Lebanon (that Saudi Arabia would support diplomatically) to tear up Hezbollah's infrastructure and kill as many Hezbollah personnel--both fighters and bureaucrats--in as many weeks as Israel can sustain before withdrawing back to their border.
Israel has ordered their shield against Hezbollah and Hamas to be expanded.
Ideally, Lebanon's army (how about those new Land Border Regiments) and the UN force already in Lebanon but too weak to take on Hezbollah now fill the vacuum.
Remember, it made sense for Israel to stand down as long as Hezbollah was bleeding out in Syria (over 2,000 KIA so far). But once Hezbollah's role in Syria ends, it makes sense for Israel to hit Hezbollah before the terror group can deploy back to Lebanon and prepare to initiate another war with Israel, based around a large rocket arsenal in southern Lebanon and experienced ground forces to protect the rockets.
UPDATE: Iran is unhappy with the meeting:
Arab League foreign ministers meeting in Cairo on Sunday lashed out at Iran and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, accusing them of destabilizing the region and vowing to take the matter to the U.N. Security Council.
Well, they surely know that the Russians will veto anything that targets their friend-for-now Iran.
Is a futile trip to the UN Security Council just a formality prior to bringing the hammer down on Hezbollah?
