What
You're Missing in our subscriber-only CounterPunch newsletter
Special Issue: the Collapse of America
Paul Craig
Roberts gives CounterPunchers the definitive data on what is
happening to jobs in America. Not just blue collar jobs. Middle-class,
white collar jobs. Roberts'
stunning probe is the first true picture of what the U.S. economy
is fast becoming and of the savage class wars that lie ahead.
Plus Mike
Ferner on what it really means to investigate war crimes in Iraq. CounterPunch Online is read by millions of viewers
each month! But
remember, we are funded solely by the subscribers to the
print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this website by buying a subscription
to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you won't find
anywhere else, or by making a donation for the online edition. Remember contributions
are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now!
"If Israel did not win the war and
it gets all this, what would have happened if it had won the
war?"
The
Draft UN Resolution on Lebanon
By KARIM MAKDISI
Beirut.
It is impossible to speak of a Hizbullah
victory' when nearly a thousand Lebanese civilians have been
killed, thousands more injured, a million people internally displaced;
and Lebanon's infrastructure, environment and economy laid to
waste as the world watches.
The general consensus however
is that Hizbullah's and Lebanon's steadfastness after four weeks
of merciless Israeli attacks means that Israel has failed to
achieve its objectives through military means: crushing/disarming
Hizbullah, reinstating its deterrent, and protecting the security
of northern Israel. Indeed, Hizbullah's resistance has gained
unprecedented support throughout the Arab world, and Nasrallah
has emerged as a Nasser-like figure who has restored pride to
Arabs everywhere in contrast to the uniformly servile and unpopular
Arab regimes.
The draft UN resolution proposed
by the US and France on Saturday thus seems strangely out of
place, as though Israel had won this war decisively and is in
a position to dictate the terms. The draft does not reflect either
the reality of a balance of terror that clearly exists between
Hizbullah and Israel today, or the political unity that this
war has created in Lebanon and across the Arab world. As such,
it has come as a shock to many people in the region. In the words
of the influential Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri (who is
mediating between Hizbullah and the Lebanese government), "if
Israel did not win the war and it gets all this, what would have
happened if it had won the war?"
Here are some preliminary observations
on this draft resolution:
1. It clearly adopts the Israeli
narrative that this war was begun by Hizbullah"referred
to dismissively as an "armed group" "on 12 July
when it "abducted" (as opposed to "captured")
two Israeli soldiers, and makes clear that to prevent the "resumption
of hostilities" Hizbullah must be banned in all areas between
the Blue Line and Litani River. Elsewhere, the text refers to
the Sheba'a farms as "disputed or uncertain" as opposed
to "occupied."
2. It calls for a "cessation
of hostilities" until an international force is deployed,
as opposed to the "immediate cease fire" that the Lebanese
government has repeatedly demanded. This gives Israel the face-saving
mechanism it needs to justify the heavy costs of this war to
its own public, given its pledge not to stop the war until an
international force is in place in southern Lebanon.
3. It further calls on Hizbullah
to cease all "attacks" while Israel must only cease
"offensive military operations." Given that Israel
has all along stated that this war is in self-defense, this phrasing
clearly gives Israel the green light to continue to hit Hizbullah
targets whenever it interprets the need for self defense.' And
since 'Hizbullah targets' apparently includes the full spectrum
of civilian installations throughout the country as well as all
civilians in Lebanon, Israel could interpret this to mean a green
light for the continuation of its onslaught.
4. It refers to the "unconditional
release" of Israeli soldiers, but only to "encouraging
the efforts aimed at resolving the issue of the Lebanese prisoners
detained in Israel." It says nothing about the exchange
of prisoners, a key Lebanese demand.
5. It does not heed Lebanon's
demand for an immediate lifting of the Israeli siege of Lebanon.
Rather it makes clear that airports and ports will be reopened
only for "verifiably and purely civilian purposes."
In other words, everyone and everything going in and out of the
country will be monitored, thus turning Lebanon into a new Gaza.
6. There is no mention of an
international investigation into Israel's savage attacks on civilians
and civilian infrastructure as Lebanon's Prime Minster has repeatedly
demanded. There is moreover no reference to war crimes, international
humanitarian laws or the Geneva Conventions.
7. The heart of this draft
resolution calls for a permanent ceasefire based on the disarming
of "all armed groups in Lebanon" under UN resolution
1559, and the deployment in Lebanon (as opposed to Israel, or
both countries) of an "international force" under Chapter
VII of the UN Charter to help implement a "long term solution."
The Lebanese government has insisted that the disarming of Hizbullah
must be part of Lebanon's national dialogue in the context of
the Taif Accords, and that the Lebanese army should be the main
player in securing southern Lebanon, with an expanded UNIFIL
there to assist it as needed.
In short, this draft resolution
is a major blow to Lebanon, its sovereignty, and its new found
political unity and consensus as represented by the government's
much-publicized seven point plan, first unveiled in the Rome
Conference of 25 July and later adopted unanimously by the Council
of Ministers (that includes Hizbullah) and supported by the Arab
League and Organization of Islamic Conferences. The draft totally
ignores major Lebanese demands, most notably Israel's withdrawal
from any territory it has seized during this war, the placing
of Sheba'a farms area under UN control until border delineation
is completed, the exchange of prisoners, and the rejection of
a Charter VII authorized "international force." Worse,
it waves all culpability of Israel in terms of its deliberate
targeting of civilians and consigns the long-established international
laws of war to the trashbin.
As expected, the Lebanese government
has already rejected the draft outright because it is clearly
not a serious attempt to resolve the crisis. Ominously, the draft's
bias seems clearly designed to ensure Lebanon rejects it, thus
giving Israel yet more time to continue its carnage in Lebanon.
It also seems designed to divide Lebanon once again politically"and
potentially along sectarian lines--to isolate Hizbullah. This
is extremely dangerous, and may lead to more violent civil conflict
or even full-scale war. Much depends on the leadership skills
of Prime Minister Siniora who needs to emerge as a genuine national
leader if such civil conflict is to be avoided in the coming
months.
Overall, then, we can see that
this draft UN resolution represents a second wave of US-European-Israeli
attacks on Lebanon. While the military assault against Hizbullah
has apparently failed, we now enter a diplomatic war that will
be even bloodier.
It is clear that, once again,
the differences between America and Europe are not over substance
but style. In blunt terms, America does not particularly care
how much damage is done to Lebanon as long as its objectives
are reached, while Europe"and France in particular"want
only for Hizbullah to be crushed without the unseemly images
produced in villages and cities throughout Lebanon, from Qana
in the South to Qaa in the North. Europe, in other words, is
entirely complicit with America and Israel in this war. As for
the Arab regimes, their support for the Israeli objectives has
now been neutralized by Hizbullah's popularity across the Arab
world. The international political will to reach a just, lasting
and realistic solution to this conflict"and the larger Palestinian
question"clearly does not exist. The violence and destruction
of Lebanon will thus continue, and Islamists will reap the long-term
political rewards.
The international community
as embodied by the United Nations Security Council is, for all
intents and purposes, itself waging war on a small, vulnerable
Member State; and as such it no longer carries legitimate authority
in the Arab world. In this sense Israel, America and Europe can
congratulate themselves not only on the total destruction of
a country, but on the de-legitimization of the international
legal order as we know it.
Karim Makdisi is Assistant Professor of International
Relations in the Dept of Political Studies and Public Administration
at the American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. Email:
km18@aub.edu.lb
Now
Available
from CounterPunch Books!
The Case
Against Israel
By Michael Neumann
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.
