With one million displaced, Lebanon turns to digital wallets for aid
wired.com36 points by joozio 8 hours ago
36 points by joozio 8 hours ago
Headline really deploying passive voice here. Israel's invasion and wide bombings of Lebanon is what has displaced a million people.
Lebanon had a few million displaced before bombing even started. Many refugees from Syria, it is basically softer version of Gaza.
Syria actually worse than Gaza (5+ million displaced, 200k+ civilians killed) but over a much larger area and timespan.
[flagged]
"Israel's defence minister has said a buffer zone will be set up inside southern Lebanon and that Israel will keep security control over a swathe of the territory even after the end of the current war against the armed group Hezbollah."
Src》https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yx8knpr5no
"JERUSALEM, March 31 (Reuters) - Israel will destroy all homes in Lebanese villages near the border and 600,000 people who fled the south will not be allowed home until northern Israel is secure, the defence minister said on Tuesday, vowing to inflict Gaza-like destruction in the area. Israel Katz reiterated Israeli plans to establish a buffer zone in southern Lebanon, saying that it would maintain control over a swathe of territory up to the Litani River once the war with the Iran-backed Hezbollah group ended."
Src》https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-destroy-all...
I wish it wasn't like this but there's no point in not facing reality
sounds like an effective way to create a buffer zone, i dont see anything wrong here
The sovereignity of foreign states and there territorial integrity according to international law.
"Under present international law, annexation no longer constitutes a legally admissible mode of acquisition of territory as it violates the prohibition of the threat or use of force (Use of Force, Prohibition of). Therefore annexations must not be recognized as legal."
Src》https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/97801992316...
Put simply: You must not just build a buffer zone on someone elses territory. (You of course can build one on you own as you wish)
Does Iranian militants mean every local Shiite that Israel is now expelling?
Israel is instructing civilians to leave the areas where there is fighting as is their responsibility under international law. When Hezbollah is disarmed by Lebanon and the war is over they can return.
Do people keep falling for these arguments after all the times it hasn't been the case?
It's been the case in all the previous wars fought in Lebanon.
The question is why do people keep falling for the arguments against Israel when clearly Israel was attacked from Lebanon, is not attacking any neighbor that does not attack it, and is responding just like any other normal country would when it is attacked.
I think you might be the one falling for propaganda, my friend. Hamas is evil. Hezbollah is evil. Their behavior is indefensible.
Responding by leveling the homes of millions of civilians, holding people in an open air prison. Limiting food, water, and medicine, killing journalists, building an apartheid state, systematically using rape as a means of controlling prisoners, deploying white phosphorus on civilian populations.... these are not just or reasonable responses.
Israel's actions are truly horrifying in scale. The violence aimed at civilians, the systemic abuse of people just trying to survive on subsistence.
I'm not falling for any arguments. I'm simply observing what Israel is doing and saying, "this is truly awful. The scale of misery they are deploying against their enemies is unconscionable."
> Israel … is not attacking any neighbor that does not attack it
Incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_attack_on_Doha
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_airstrike_on_the_Irani...
Israel went after Hamas in Doha and not after Qatar as a country. Does this really prove your point?
EDIT: exploring the legality of this with AI:
The "Unwilling or Unable" Doctrine: A major debate in international law is whether a state can use force in self-defense against a non-state actor located in another sovereign state. Some nations (like the US and Israel) argue for the "unwilling or unable" standard. This doctrine suggests that if a host state (e.g., Qatar) is unwilling or unable to stop a non-state actor (e.g., Hamas) from using its territory to direct or launch attacks, the victim state (Israel) has the right to use force within the host state's borders to defend itself.
Violations of Sovereignty: Conversely, many states and legal experts reject the "unwilling or unable" doctrine. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter strictly prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity of another state. From this viewpoint, executing a strike in Qatar without Qatari consent or a UN Security Council mandate would be viewed as an illegal act of aggression and a violation of Qatar's sovereignty.
I think my overall point still stands though that in the absences of aggression towards Israel Israel would not be attacking. The exact threshold though is obviously something we debate- e.g. whether simply hosting the leadership of Hamas is enough of a reason to take military action. But it's a reason (i.e. Israel had some self-defense justification).
How did that work out for the Palestinians?
Has Hamas disarmed yet?
Your policy is unlimited violence against civilians? You realize how ghoulish that is, right?
I live in Washington DC area, I am cool not to leave?
The Pentagon e.g. would be a legitimate target for Iran and if in their operations against the US they know that your neighborhood is a military target then they can and should warn you and allow you to leave. I doubt that the US military stores rockets in your basement but if they are then that would be a concern. That said if you were in range of Iran's rockets I don't think they'd worry much about e.g. firing cluster munitions on Washington DC like they do on Tel Aviv or Israeli cities.
Keep on blaming the victims, as if you would have any say the day armed and organized militias would come into your neighborhood to do the same.
The person you are replying to is probably someone who won't understand that the genocide Israel is perpetrating, the settler colonialism, the systemic abuses and torture and rape of prisoners, the invasion are all justified somehow.
Some people cannot take a step back and consider other perspectives, unfortunately.
Edit: see? Their response, "I like it"? This person is deeply troubled and misanthropic.
Israel isn't colonizing Lebanon or abusing and torturing Lebanese. But Lebanon certainly abuses prisoners: https://www.hrw.org/report/2013/06/26/its-part-job/ill-treat...
So by your logic it is fair game to attack Lebanon due to its treatment of prisoners?
Lebanon also commits war crimes by firing rockets indiscriminately into Israeli population centers.
Why is your rage so selective?
I didn't say this was all happening in Lebanon. The West Bank, Gaza, prisons across Israel. And now, an invasion and razing civilian lives in Lebanon.
> Israel isn’t … abusing and torturing Lebanese.
Israeli-backed army ran a torture center in south Lebanon for years.
https://www.hrw.org/news/1999/10/27/israel-responsible-abuse...
Given the level of bloodthirst in Israeli society currently, and the accounts of torture of Palestinians in Israeli custody, I’m afraid that something similar is just around the corner for Lebanese as well.
This was from 1999 and it was run by the SLA who were Lebanese. But yes, it was not great and guess what, Israel withdrew from South Lebanon in 2000!
But Lebanon and other Arab countries still routines arbitrarily imprison and torture their citizens.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/06/26/lebanon-enforce-anti-tor...
[flagged]
What motivated hezbolah to form and engage in violence?
to destroy israel
What exactly was happening before Hezbollah was formed?
the civil war caused by palestinian and muslim terrorists against christian lebanese
It was the incessant attempts by Israel to invade Lebanon and the inaction of the Lebanese government but I guess your answer responds to your underlying allegiances.
Israel invaded Lebanon for the same reason every time - to prevent attacks on civilians from Lebanese territory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_insurgency_in_Sout...
Because of the constant invasion and denial of recognition of the West Bank and Gaza as Palestinian and after decades of pogroms and ethnic cleansing of Palestinian villages.
[flagged]
the mob flagged a comment stating that thousands of rockets at israeli civilians by hezbollah is what caused the displacement.
No. It is Lebanon attacking Israel that resulted in Israel's self defense actions that resulted in the displacement. The displacement is due to Israel's warning to civilians to leave the area of fighting for their protection as it is required to do by international law. Lebanon is firing rockets into Israeli civilian population daily, this is a war crime.
"Israel strikes Lebanon after Iran ally Hezbollah fires missiles over border"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/02/israel-idf-str...
Is Israel firing into Christian neighborhoods? I think I saw something saying they were not. That seems consistent with Israel’s strikes being intended to target Hezbollah specifically (because Hezbollah launched rockets into Israel at the outset of the military operation in Iran).
> Is Israel firing into Christian neighborhoods?
Yes.
“Lebanese Maronite Catholic priest Fr. Pierre al-Rahi, … was killed in this village in southern Lebanon during an Israeli artillery tank fire on a house March 9, 2026 … al-Rahi had earlier refused, along with other priests, to obey an order by the Israeli military to evacuate the Christian village of Qlayaa”
https://www.ncronline.org/news/lebanese-maronite-catholic-pr...
That's an exception that proves the rule. For the most part Israel is not firing at either Sunni or Christian villages. There is also more to this specific incident so people should research it.
Israel fired on, and killed, UN peace keepers. Multiple times.
I think they are hardly disciplined here.
Seriously, this again. In the middle of Hezbollah controlled territory there were firefights with UN peacekeepers ... and of course the people who did this "were IDF soldiers". Of course ... that's the explanation.
Does anyone still believe this? I mean, even if it's technically true, it is very well known Hezbollah sneaks as close as they can to UN bases, and then fires rockets at Israeli civilians from there, intentionally. And yes, I'm sure that this creates more than a bit of tension.
But even if that did result in a firefight ... it's not Israel that's responsible. Nobody seriously believes that.
And they are also using humans as shield? Is it only the enemies of Israel that use human shields or do criminals/terrorists in Israel (if there is such a thing) or any other country do that too?
I'm not sure how we got to the human shield conversation but Hezbollah is firing from within civilian areas if that's the question: https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-891166
As to what's common between Hezbollah and Hamas and Iran in the way they treat their civilians I will leave that as an exercise to the reader.
Interesting, based on your comment Hezbollah did that from Lebanese territories for no reason.
"Lebanese armed group Hezbollah fired rockets into Israel in response to the United States-Israeli war on Iran. Israeli forces have also launched a ground invasion of southern Lebanon."
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/5/at-least-14-people-k...
> Israel's self defense actions
> this is a war crime
Wow-wow just stop that bs. Without israel that region would be much safer.
Last I checked Lebanon was a separate country. So Lebanon decided to join the war against the US and Israel and now the consequences of that are Israel's fault?
Wow-wow just stop that bs. Without Israel people in the region would be murdering each other just like they did in Syria, in the Iran-Iraq war, in Yemen, in Lebanon's civil war etc. Maybe if those countries stopped attacking Israel they wouldn't be in war Mr. warmonger.
EDIT: It's worth mentioning that an attack on another country is not a legal reason according to international law to attack a third country. The critics of Israel and the US are claiming those started an "illegal war" on Iran so by that same rationale Lebanon started an illegal war on Israel.
> Maybe if those countries stopped attacking Israel they wouldn't be in war Mr. warmonger.
Maybe if Israel stopped violently expropriating Arab lands, and assaulting and raping Arabs without consequences. It’s really not that complicated.
This is nonsense and you know it.
> Israel stopped violently expropriating Arab lands
This is objectively happening in the West Bank and Gaza.
> assaulting and raping Arabs without consequences.
This is also objectively happening. A group of IDF soldiers were filmed raping a man to death. Their punishment? Literally nothing. They are cheered by some.
You cannot possibly believe that these sorts of behaviors are helping calm things.
> The displacement is due to Israel's warning to civilians to leave the area of fighting for their protection
Most modern instances of ethnic cleansing are justified as military necessities.
E.g.: Armenian genocide
“Article 1—During war time, army and corp commanders and their deputies and commanders of fortified posts are obliged to destroy any assault or resistance and violently restore order with military forces in the case of opposition, armed attacks or resistance directed against the government orders, the defense of homeland and the preservation of public order.
Article 2—Army, independent corp and division commanders are allowed to transfer and relocate the village and town population in matters related to the military affair or if they feel there is an activity of espionage and treason.”
You can't have it both ways though. If Israel fires back at Hezbollah and civilians are killed then it is committing war crimes and if it asks the civilians to leave then it is committing war crimes. In previous wars in Lebanon civilians were asked to leave and then eventually returned and so there are numerous similar examples where Israel's instructions and the situation was similar and there was no ethnic cleansing.
Has anyone in this thread said what Hezbollah is doing isn't a war crime? I'd like to think we're all in agreement that firing unguided rockets into civilian areas is unacceptable.
One can believe both parties are committing atrocities, even if the scale is clearly different between them.
Seems there are two parallel developments here:
a) Rise of alternate forms of organizing trust. People distrust government or other organizations, and turn to alternative forms of organization and trust.
b) Rise of digital wallet/transfer systems that are fundamentally about charging for throughput/withdrawals. The article mentions that banks are restricting withdraws - presumably because banks need deposits to stay liquid. Whish on the other hand doesn't care - it makes money as a % of each transaction.
Hasn't Hawala been a thing in Lebanon for hundreds of years? It doesn't seem like a novel development at all, besides the digital tools. Informal money transfer systems are not new thing challenging the banks at all. The banks are the new thing here.
Since most people won't know: the reason this crisis is developing is because of how hezbollah behaved last time.
These people are Syrian immigrants (largely), pretend to be Shi'a muslims (but aren't), and have moved to Southern Libanon, decades ago, throwing out (and worse) the original (Christian) population, because they were paid to do so. Then in the last war they ran away from the south, to avoid fighting, and they were largely welcomed into Beirut, especially southern Beirut, many taken in by Christians and Sunni (partially because they had money and Lebanon was in a deep crisis). Then a lot of them never left, threw the people who had taken them in out of their own homes. They simply stole the apartments of people who took them in, then chased inhabitants out of entire blocks.
This time, neighbors sometimes literally attack anybody tries to help these people, and chase the refugees away, for fear of a repeat.
The result is, of course, a deep typical middle eastern crisis. Deep misery. Money is deeply involved, corruption is everywhere. Nobody, especially not the people who are now in deep trouble, are innocent. And there is no real solution, nor is anybody interested in providing a solution.
Iran's islamist regime is directly responsible for this crisis, through giving these people money and weapons, but of course they are not available to resolve anything (and that's NOT because the US is attacking them, yes that's a problem, but it's not like they would help anyone if they were doing fine)
Damn I wonder why they are displaced. No one to blame for sure.