|
The Future of the Israeli/Lebanese/Syrian Conflict
By Sahar Kassaimah
23/04/2001
The deadly Israeli air strike on Syrian radar sites in the mountains of Lebanon on Monday, April 16th, was a barefaced challenge from Israel to the Arab world. With the region already on edge, the strike marked Sharon's second escalation within a week and constituted a destabilizing aggression by Israel that extended its conflict with Lebanese fighters to the Syrians.
The raid demolished a Syrian radar station east of Beirut, killing three Syrian soldiers and injuring four others, and raising many questions about the future of the conflict and the risk of further military activities in the region.
In this article, we will discuss Sharon's reason for this aggression; the reactions of the Arab countries, the United States and the Israeli people toward the air strike; and the future response of the Syrian government, which has endured as one of Israel's implacable foes.
Sharon's Stated Reason For The Strike
Israeli officials said that the air strike in Lebanon, the first on a Syrian target since 1996 when Israeli gun ships hit Syrian army positions near Beirut Airport during a bombing campaign against Lebanon, was meant as a warning to Syria rather than as an invitation to further conflict in the region.
Israel's defense minister, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, described the Lebanon air strike as defensive, having followed the killing of three Israeli soldiers and the kidnapping of three others by Hezbollah since Israel withdrew its forces from Lebanon last May.
"We sent a message to the Syrians that we see them as the only ones responsible," said Eliezer. "But at the same time ... I am trying to prevent an escalation."
Also, Israeli government spokesman Dori Gold said, " ... Syria has been giving more than just a green light to the recent attacks against Israel… Syria is becoming the conduit of weaponry, and support[s] Hezbollah in this continual struggle against Israel."
"The signal is clear - turn off the green light, make it a red light," he added.
According to government officials, however, two members of Sharon's 12-member Security Cabinet, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres and Transportation Minister Ephraim Sneh, voted against the air raid one day before the attack.
It appears that Sharon and his government are seeking to convey a clear message to the Arab world that they must dissuade any individual or group that attempts to counter Israeli violence against the Palestinians, and that they should stop the Palestinian uprising.
By this aggression against Syria and Lebanon, Sharon has shown that he knows no other way of dealing with Arabs besides the way he demonstrated years ago in the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps.
He is sending a clear message - not just to Syria and Lebanon but also to the entire world - that he does not care about or believe in the peace process, or about the interests and well-being of Palestinians or Arabs. Rather, he cares only about achieving Israel's dreams - at the expense of the dreams of Arab people or even over their dead bodies.
Despite being elected on the slogan "Only Sharon can bring peace," Sharon is escalating Israeli aggression towards Palestinians, and urging Israelis to prepare themselves psychologically for a long struggle. Some analysts have said that the word "peace" has dropped out of his vocabulary and off his government's agenda.
At the same time, advocates for Israeli security are complaining that he is not doing enough to restore security as promised. They have started to voice harsh judgments of Sharon's overall approach to the Palestinians, saying that he could end the Palestinian attacks by unleashing Israel's military might but that he is overly concerned about international censure.
World Reaction Toward The Raids
From Moscow, Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa warned that Israel "will pay a heavy price for that - at the convenient and appropriate time."
"Israel was killing the peace process and expanding the tension and instability in the whole Middle East… The Lebanese are defending Lebanese land, which is under occupation. What happens in Shebaa constitutes a legitimate part of the Lebanese resistance," said Sharaa, defending Hezbollah raids on Israel.
"The Shebaa Farms, situated along the borders of Israel, Lebanon and Syria, are occupied Lebanese territory, and even Israel recognizes that it is not Israeli territory," added Sharaa.
Hezbollah has said that it will continue to attack Israeli troops in the disputed area along the border, vowing to "cut off the hand of the enemy that reached into our territory and our brothers."
After 1974, Syria's border with Israel remained quiet with all attacks against Israel carried out via Hezbollah in Lebanon. Syria placed 30,000 troops in Lebanon; Israel demanded their withdrawal after pulling its own troops out of the country. Syria has radar stations in the Dar al Baidar area, and maintains bases and checkpoints along the Beirut-Damascus highway on high alert. In a statement, it has said that it reserves the "right to defend itself."
Lebanese President Emile Lahoud expressed fears that the Israelis' stance could lead to overall confrontations. Egyptian Foreign Minister Amr Moussa voiced his country's condemnation of the Israeli aggression during a visit to Abu Dhabi, accusing Israel of creating "turmoil amongst the Arab peoples of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria."
Meanwhile, the Jordanian newspaper Al Rai said that the "aggression against Lebanon has showed that Sharon is determined, more than ever before, to blow the peace process, and that he is convinced that it is the language of force that will allow him to Judaize occupied lands."
Iran's first vice president, Hassan Habibi, appealed to Islamic and Arab states to support Lebanon in its resistance against Israel. China also expressed its concern over rising tensions in the Middle East, urging Israel to end its raids on Syrian positions in Lebanon.
The United States' Reaction
Not surprisingly, the Bush Administration accused the Iranian-backed, Syrian-abetted Hezbollah in Lebanon who had killed an Israeli soldier over the weekend of deliberately provoking Israel, but stopped short of endorsing Israel's air strikes.
The Israeli soldier was killed when Hezbollah hit an Israeli tank with a Sagger missile in the area where the Lebanese, Syrian, and Israeli borders meet.
The U.S. ambassador in Lebanon, David Satterfield, also blamed Hezbollah for the escalation of violence in the region.
Syria charged the U.S., the chief sponsor of the peace process, of being biased towards Israel, saying it deplores the U.S.'s "total alignment" with Israel which "directly or indirectly encourages aggressions."
"We are sorry to see the U.S. position totally aligned with Israel, which directly or indirectly amounts to encouraging Israel on its path of extremism and refusal of international peace efforts," said Syrian Information Minister Adnan Omran. "The American position is interpreted by Israel and Sharon as a green light for continued aggression and occupation."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said that he was "deeply disturbed" by the attack and "especially dismayed" by Israel's response Monday. He also urged all parties to act with "utmost restraint."
While Hezbollah contends that Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon is unfinished because it did not pull out of the Shebaa Farms area, the U.N. has affirmed the Israeli withdrawal as complete, saying that the area is a part of Syrian territory captured by Israel in the 1967 Middle East war and that its status needs to be resolved by Israeli-Syrian talks.
The Israeli Reaction
Among Israelis, there are different views on dealing with Syria and Lebanon. Some believe that Israel should give up the Golan Heights in order to make peace with Syria, while others believe that it is too high of a price.
Most Israeli newspapers responded to Sharon's strikes on Hezbollah targets by saying that it was inadequate. However, the liberal newspaper
Ha'aretz published its first editorial in criticism of Sharon.
"He and his tough policies rob the nation of any hope for peace, and promise it a future -God forbid, also a destiny - like that of Sparta," said the editorial which was titled "Life By The Sword."
"A hundred Ariel Sharons and a thousand Fuad Ben-Eliezers cannot put a stop to the mortar fire in the Gaza Strip and the trickle of shooting from Beit Jala on Gilo," said Eitan Haber in a newspaper column, in reference to Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer.
Haber served as Chief of Staff to the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, assassinated in 1995.
"From the Palestinian point of view, they no longer have anything to lose," he added.
"One hundred years ago and more, people came into their living room in the land of Israel apartment and took a seat. Thirty-four years ago during the Six Day War, we moved onto the balcony as well, but every time we go to the bathroom, or want to drink coffee in the kitchen, we have to cross the living room and bedroom both. The Palestinians are fed up. Now, they're shooting at the balcony."
How Will The Syrian Government Respond?
Some analysts say that, in the eyes of its country's hard-liners, Syria will be pressured to retaliate, rather than having been weakened. They say that Syria remains the most powerful military force amongst Israel's neighbors, and that its domestic political situation increases the likelihood that the latest Israeli action will provoke further escalation.
No one knows how President Bashar Assad, not yet tested since assuming office, will act in this serious situation. However, many analysts believe that it is very likely that Syria will directly confront Israel, and that the response will probably come via Hezbollah.
Other analysts say that Syria is unlikely to confront Israel directly. "I don't think that either Syria or Israel perceives any interest in a military escalation that can bring wider fighting," said Edward P. Djerejian, a former American ambassador to both countries.
"But the risks of miscalculation and escalation are always there, and that is the danger. And if you add to that the ongoing violence on the Palestinian front, the situation is obviously deteriorating."
According to the New York Times, in an interview with Ha'aretz, Sharon said, "I think that every effort has to be made to arrive at a resolution of the conflict without endangering Israel… But to come and say that peace is knocking at our door, that is not right. I don't believe that it is possible to resolve a conflict that has lasted 120 years in one jump. And I don't think we have to put forward such a pretentious goal of signing peace immediately - what's called ending the conflict - because the end of the conflict will come only when the Arab world recognizes the innate right of the Jewish people to establish an independent Jewish state in the Middle East. And that recognition has not yet come," added Sharon.
The question now is: Will this old-fashioned Zionist and career military prime minister ever get that recognition from the Arab world, or will he and future Israeli generations spend their lives awaiting the realization of a dream that can never come true?
|
