Its fighters launched dozens of Katyusha rockets and mortars at Israel and seized two more soldiers and killed eight others in cross-border raids.

It was seen as a dramatic gesture of solidarity with the Palestinians, but Israel’s response was far more dramatic and devastating to Lebanon.

Hezbollah said it wanted to exchange the two soldiers for thousands of Palestinians held in Israeli detention.

What it got was a 34-day onslaught from the Israeli military, costing more than 1,000 lives, mostly Lebanese civilians.

About 160 Israelis were killed, mostly soldiers, in fighting and rocket fire from Hezbollah. Hundreds of thousands of civilians were displaced on either side.

Events in Lebanon during the summer of 2006 ended up completely overshadowing what had been going on in Gaza.

Intense speculation

We are now nearly two weeks into Israel’s campaign to hit the Hamas militant movement in Gaza, an attempt to reduce rocket fire by Palestinian militants.

The news of rockets being fired from Lebanon will have raised alarm of a possible serious escalation in this bloody New Year period.

Intense speculation has focused on whether or not Hezbollah was responsible for Thursday’s rocket fire or whether it was Palestinian militant groups in exile in refugee camps in Lebanon.

Most analysts have concluded it is unlikely to be Hezbollah – despite recent fiery rhetoric from the group’s leader Hassan Nasrallah about the possibility of renewed conflict with Israel.

For a start, there has been no Hezbollah claim of responsibility, which is not the group’s usual style.

It has a reputation, even among Israelis, for being the most credible conveyor of information about its activities – when it chooses to convey such information.

Political timing

There is also the question of the scale of the attack – so far it is much smaller than in July 2006, and it is widely thought that Hezbollah would be capable of a much heavier blow if it had wanted.

The rockets seem to be short-range, and probably were fired from south of the Litani river, which is under control of the Unifil peacekeeping force and the Lebanese regular army.

It has been like this since the 2006 ceasefire which determined an end to all armed activity by militants between the Litani and the Israeli border.

It is widely assumed that Hezbollah still operates under cover in this area, but it is doubtful at this time that they would attempt such a blatant challenge to UN authority.

This is because the group is now part of the Lebanese government – with a power of veto on legislation – so it would be unlikely to want to jeopardise that position.

Another question regarding such attacks is whether Hezbollah somehow assisted, as they are launched from an area where – by reputation – not a leaf can move without its people knowing about it.

If so, the latest attack may be a way for Hezbollah to show solidarity with Gaza without provoking a massive Israeli retaliation.

After all, last year Israeli officials threatened that any attack from Hezbollah would trigger that would a retaliation against all of Lebanon that would make 2006 seem mild.

Difficult terrain

So who would attack Israel like this? Lebanon plays host to 400,000 Palestinian refugees, a reservoir of anger and militancy fuelled by 60 years of exile from what they consider as their land.

There are large refugee camps around Tyre and Sidon in southern Lebanon and militant groups have been known to launch rockets at Israel.

The last occasion of rocket fire was in January 2008, which was linked to the visit of US President George W Bush to Israel.

Hezbollah denied responsibility for that attack and the Israeli military blamed an unnamed Palestinian organisation.

But the incident showed the Unifil/Lebanese army regime was not in total control south of the Litani – notoriously difficult terrain to secure completely, as the Israeli army found to its cost during its long occupation of the area.

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Who is behind the Lebanon rockets?

The claim is categorically denied by the head of Saddam’s tribe. The Iraqi Government similarly denies any mutilation took place after the dictator was hanged on December 30, 2006, for crimes against humanity.

Talal Misrab, 45, is the chief guard at Saddam’s tomb, housed in a large hall in al-Awja, a small village north of Baghdad, where the fallen dictator spent much of his childhood.

In an interview with The Times, he claimed: “There were six stab wounds on his body.” Mr Misrab alleged that four of the wounds were on the former president’s front and two on his back. He also said there was an injury to his face.

The guard alleged that 300 other people witnessed the injuries when the body was buried in the early hours of the morning, the day after Saddam was killed.

Another tribesman said he had been told by Sheikh Ali al-Neda, the former head of Saddam’s tribe, who has since also died, that the body had stab wounds.

Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraq’s security advisor, denied the allegation.

“I oversaw the whole process from A-Z and Saddam Hussein’s body was not, not stabbed or mutilated and he was not humiliated before execution,” he said.

Sheikh Hasan al-Neda, who is now leader of Saddam’s tribe, also dismissed the suggestion that anyone had interfered with the corpse.

“I swear by God his body was totally intact except for a bruise on his cheek,” Mr al-Neda said. “When we received the body in Baghdad, we were told that they [the Iraqi authorities] washed and wrapped it according to Islamic traditions, but we still washed him again here in Tikrit.”

He continued: “My son Ahmed was there and he told a Saudi newspaper that the body was not mutilated in any way.”

The circumstances of Saddam’s death are not in dispute, however. His execution triggered international outrage after leaked video footage revealed that he was taunted by guards who chanted Shia Muslim slogans as the noose was placed around his neck on the gallows.

Nouri al-Maliki, the Prime Minister, told The Times last month that he regretted the way in which the sentence was carried out. He added: “Those who chanted were punished. There was no major violation apart from the chanting.”

Times Online

The meeting on Sunday was the first between the two leaders since Israel’s 2006 war in Lebanon and comes five months after Qatar mediated an end to an 18-month political conflict in Lebanon which had escalated into street battles.

“There was an affirmation of national unity and civil peace and the need to take all measures to prevent tension … and to reinforce dialogue and to avoid strife regardless of political differences,” the statement issued by both sides said.

The rare meeting between Nasrallah and al-Hariri marks a thaw in relations between the two opponents before parliamentary elections scheduled for 2009.

Hezbollah’s al-Manar television aired footage of the meeting, which was also attended by aides to both leaders.

The joint statement also said that Nasrallah and al-Hariri would be in “mutual contact”.

Political differences

The differences between Hezbollah, a Shia Muslim political organisation which runs an armed wing, and member parties of the March 14 parliamentary majority flared into armed conflict in May.

Fighters from Hezbollah and its allies briefly took control of predominantly Muslim west Beirut, prompting an armed response by supporters of the March 14 bloc, including those allied to al-Hariri’s Future Movement.

The joint statement released on Monday said that the meeting was “honest and open” and said that the leaders would take “steps to calm the situation in the media and in the street”.

The talks between al-Hariri and Nasrallah are being seen in Lebanon as the most significant of a series of meetings between politicians from March 14 and the Hezbollah-led opposition.

Nasrallah and al-Hariri are also committed to implementing the Qatar-mediated deal which in May had called for “national dialogue” talks, Monday’s joint statement said.

The next session is scheduled for November 5.

Weapons issue

The parliamentary majority is calling for Hezbollah to disarm, in favour of building a stronger Lebanese national army.

However, Hezbollah insists that its weapons are essential to a Lebanese national resistance against Israel, its southern neighbour.

Israel failed to destroy Hezbollah during a 34-day war in 2006, which was sparked by a Hezbollah cross-border raid.

Demands for the disarmament of Hezbollah, which is backed by Syria and Iran, have become increasingly shrill since the 2005 assassination of Rafiq al-Hariri, a former Lebanese prime minister and Saad’s father.

Hezbollah is the most powerful faction in Lebanon and its opposition bloc holds veto power over decisions taken in Lebanon’s cabinet.

While Hezbollah is not willing to disarm, its leaders have said that the organisation is willing to discuss a defence strategy that would define the role of its fighters.

Al Jazeera English – Middle East – Nasrallah and al-Hariri enter talks