The Real Aim

Uri Avnery 15.7.06

THE REAL aim is to change the regime in Lebanon and to install a puppet government.

That was the aim of Ariel Sharon's invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It failed. But Sharon and his pupils in the military and political leadership have never really given up on it. As in 1982, the present operation, too, was planned and is being carried out in full coordination with the US. As then, there is no doubt that it is coordinated with a part of the Lebanese elite. That's the main thing. Everything else is noise and propaganda.

ON THE eve of the 1982 invasion, Secretary of State Alexander Haig told Ariel Sharon that, before starting it, it was necessary to have a "clear
provocation", which would be accepted by the world. The provocation indeed took place - exactly at the appropriate time - when Abu-Nidal's terror gang tried to assassinate the Israeli ambassador in London. This had no connection with Lebanon, and even less with the PLO (the enemy of Abu-Nidal), but it served its purpose.

This time, the necessary provocation has been provided by the capture of the two Israeli soldiers by Hizbullah. Everyone knows that they xannot be freed except through an exchange of prisoners. But the huge military campaign that has been ready to go for months was sold to the Israeli and international public as a rescue operation. (Strangely enough, the very same thing happened two weeks earlier in the Gaza Strip. Hamas and its partners captured a soldier, which provided the excuse for a massive operation that had been prepared for a long time and whose aim is to destroy the Palestinian government.)

THE DECLARED aim of the Lebanon operation is to push Hizbullah away from the border, so as to make it impossible for them to capture more soldiers and to launch rockets at Israeli towns. The invasion of the Gaza strip is also officially aimed at getting Ashkelon and Sderot out of the range of the Qassams. That resembles the 1982 "Operation Peace for Gallilee". Then, the public and the Knesset were told that the aim of the war was to "push the Katyushas 40 km away from the border". That was a deliberate lie. For 11 months before the war, not a single
Katyusha rocket (nor a single shot) had been fired over the border. From the beginning, the aim of the operation was to reach Beirut and install a Quisling dictator. As I have recounted more than once, Sharon himself told me so nine months before the war, and I duly published it at the time, with his consent (but unattributed).

Of course, the present operation also has several secondary aims, which do not include the freeing of the prisoners. Everybody understands that that cannot be achieved by military means. But it is probably possible to destroy some of the thousands of missiles that Hizbullah has accumulated over the years. For this end, the army chiefs are ready to endanger the inhabitants of the Israeli towns that are exposed to the rockets. They believe that that is worthwhile, like an exchange of chess figures.

Another secondary aim is to rehabilitate the "deterrent power" of the army. That is a codeword for the restoration of the army's injured pride that has suffered a severe blow from the daring military actions of Hamas in the south and Hizbullah in the north.

OFFICIALLY, THE Israeli government demands that the Government of Lebanon disarm Hizbullah and remove it from the border region.
That is clearly impossible under the present Lebanese regime, a delicate fabric of ethno-religious communities. The slightest shock can bring the whole structure crashing down and throw the state into total anarchy - especially after the Americans succeeded in driving out the Syrian army, the only element that has for years provided some stability.

The idea of installing a Quisling in Lebanon is nothing new. In 1955, David Ben-Gurion proposed taking a "Christian officer" and installing him as dictator. Moshe Sharet showed that this idea was based on complete ignorance of Lebanese affairs and torpedoed it. But 27 years later, Ariel Sharon tried to put it into effect nevertheless. Bashir Gemayel was indeed installed as president, only to be murdered soon afterwards. His brother, Amin, succeeded him and signed a peace agreement with Israel, but was driven out of office. (The same brother is now publicly supporting the Israeli operation.)

The calculation now is that if the Israeli Air Force rains heavy enough blows on the Lebanese population - paralysing the sea- and airports, destroying the infrastructure, bombarding residential neighborhoods, cutting the Beirut-Damascus highroad etc. - the public will get furious with Hizbullah and pressure the Lebanese government into fulfilling Israel's demands. Since the present government cannot even dream of doing so, a dictatorship will be set up with Israel's support.

That is the military logic. I have my doubts. It can be assumed that most Lebanese will react as any other people on earth would: with fury and hatred towards the invader. That happened in 1982, when the Shiites in the south of Lebanon, until then as docile as a doormat, stood up against the Israeli occupiers and created the Hizbullah, which has become the strongest force in the country. If the Lebanese elite now becomes tainted as collaborators with Israel, it will be swept off the map. (By the way, have the Qassams and Katyushas caused the Israeli population to exert pressure on our government to give up? Quite the contrary.)

The American policy is full of contradictions. President Bush wants "regime change" in the Middle East, but the present Lebanese regime has only recently been set up by under American pressure. In the meantime, Bush has succeeded only in breaking up Iraq and causing a civil war (as foretold here). He may get the same in Lebanon, if he does not stop the Israeli army in time. Moreover, a devastating blow against Hizbullah may arouse fury not only in Iran, but also among the Shiites in Iraq, on whose support all of Bush's plans for a pro-American regime are built.

So what's the answer? Not by accident, Hizbullah has carried out its soldier-snatching raid at a time when the Palestinians are crying out for
succor. The Palestinian cause is popular all over the Arab word. By showing that they are a friend in need, when all other Arabs are failing dismally, Hizbullah hopes to increase its popularity. If an Israeli-Palestinian agreement had been achieved by now, Hizbullah would be no more than a local Lebanese phenomenon, irrelevant to our situation.

LESS THAN three months after its formation, the Olmert-Peretz government has succeeded in plunging Israel into a two-front war, whose aims are unrealistic and whose results cannot be foreseen.

If Olmert hopes to be seen as Mister Macho-Macho, a Sharon # 2, he will be disappointed. The same goes for the desperate attempts of Peretz to be taken seriously as an imposing Mister Security. Everybody understands that this campaign - both in Gaza and in Lebanon - has been planned by the army and dictated by the army. The man who makes the decisions in Israel now is Dan Halutz. It is no accident that the job in Lebanon has been turned over to the Air Force.

The public is not enthusiastic about the war. It is resigned to it, in stoic fatalism, because it is being told that there is no alternative. And indeed, who can be against it? Who does not want to liberate the "kidnapped soldiers"? Who does not want to remove the Katyushas and rehabilitate deterrence? No politician dares to criticize the operation (except the Arab MKs, who are ignored by the Jewish public). In the media, the generals reign supreme, and not only those in uniform. There is almost no former general who is not being invited by the media to comment, explain and justify, all speaking in one voice. (As an illustration: Israel's most popular TV channel invited me to an interview about the war, after hearing that I had taken part in an anti-war demonstration. I was quite surprised. But not for long - an hour before the broadcast, an apologetic talk-show host called and said that there had been a terrible mistake - they really meant to invite Professor Shlomo Avineri, a former Director General of the Foreign Office who can be counted on to justify any act of the government, whatever it may be, in lofty academic language.)

"Inter arma silent Musae" - when the weapons speak, the muses fall silent. Or, rather: when the guns roar, the brain ceases to function.

AND JUST a small thought: when the State of Israel was founded in the middle of a cruel war, a poster was plastered on the walls: "All the country - a front! All the people - an army!" 58 Years have passed, and the same slogan is still as valid as it was then. What does that say about generations of statesmen and generals?

from listserve of the Israeli Peace group: New Profile:New Profile - A Movement For The Civil-ization Of Israeli Society
 http://www.newprofile.org/default.asp?language=en



UFPJ Talking Points 43

Phyllis Bennis:
The Gaza/Lebanon Crises: Escalating Occupation & Danger of New Border Fighting:
 http://www.ips-dc.org/comment/bennis/tp43GazaLebanon.htm
Institute for Policy Studies
July 12, 2006

several excerpts from this important summary:

(first two points:)

# The Israeli attacks constitute collective punishment of the entire Gazan population, and have created a humanitarian crisis of unprecedented
proportions in Gaza.

# All these attacks violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which sets out the obligations of occupying powers and specifically prohibits collective punishments, "targeted" assassinations, and destruction of the infrastructure of an occupied territory.

As Gideon Levy wrote in the Israeli paper Ha'aretz, "the Palestinians started it" remains the assumption for Israelis, and for most Americans.
"'They started' will be the routine response to anyone who tries to argue, for example, that a few hours before the first Qassam fell on the school in Ashkelon, causing no damage, Israel sowed destruction at the Islamic University in Gaza. Israel is causing electricity blackouts, laying sieges, bombing and shelling, assassinating and imprisoning, killing and wounding civilians, including children and babies, in horrifying numbers, but 'they started'."...

The consequences of the Lebanon attacks remain uncertain. But it is in Gaza that the humanitarian crisis is skyrocketing - and there is serious danger that escalating tensions on the Israeli-Lebanese border will divert the world's attention from that crisis. As was evident in sanctions-devastated Iraq in 2003, a new war in the area does not improve the lives of those already suffering extreme humanitarian disaster, but rather exacerbates those problems. These attacks represent a massive collective punishment against the 1.3 million people of Gaza, and thus under international law constitute a war crime, violating Israel's obligations as Occupying Power under the Geneva Conventions. The 12 July air assault on a Gaza house, ostensibly a "targeted assassination" of a Hamas leader, did not kill the official target but did kill two other adults and seven children. The deliberate targeting and destruction of the main electrical generating plant, especially at the height of summer and at a moment in which the absolute siege of Gaza means there are virtually no fuel stocks available for local generators, guarantees humanitarian disaster. The deliberate destruction of the already-eroded water system means that already borderline-saline water is scarcer than ever. Tens of thousands of Gaza City residents live in high-rise apartments of ten floors or higher; without electricity, not only the elevators but even water pumps cannot function.

The humanitarian situation is catastrophic...


MADRE Calls for Protection of Civilians as Violence Escalates in Lebanon, Israel, and Gaza
July 12, 2006

MADRE, an international women's human rights organization, expresses grave concern for the safety of Palestinian, Israeli, and Lebanese civilians as a "two-front war" looms in the Middle East.

On Wednesday morning, fighters from the Lebanese-based Hezbollah organization captured two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid into northern Israel and fired rockets and mortar bombs at Israeli towns. At least four Israeli civilians were wounded. Residents in the north have been ordered into bomb shelters. If, in fact, the soldiers were captured inside Israeli territory, Hezbollah's raid constitutes an act of aggression in clear violation of international law. Moreover, the targeting of Israeli civilians under any circumstances is a grave violation of international humanitarian law.

In response to the Hezbollah raid, Israel has attacked southern Lebanon with tanks, gunboats, and war planes. At least two civilians were killed on Wednesday. Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz has declared that, "Israel sees itself as being free to employ any means it deems fit, and the army has been instructed accordingly." However, MADRE emphasizes that Israel is bound by international law. Any lawful military retaliation must prioritize the safety of civilians and remain proportionate to the threat posed to Israel by Hezbollah.

Today's resurgence of hostilities across Israel's northern border may be a turning point in the Middle East, threatening a regional war that would endanger millions of civilians in Israel, Iran, Lebanon, and Syria. Israel is treating Hezbollah's attack as an "act of war" by Lebanon, where Hezbollah's political wing holds seats in Parliament. Meanwhile, Syria and Iran, both backers of Hezbollah, have effectively condoned the group's raid into Israel. On Wednesday, a spokesperson for the US National Security Council said the US holds Syria and Iran "responsible for this attack and for the ensuing violence." The Bush Administration has already targeted both countries as likely candidates for "regime change."

Despite fears of an expanding conflict, the epicenter of crisis in the Middle East remains the Gaza Strip, where Israeli policy has created a looming humanitarian disaster. The fate of Gaza's 1.4 million people must not be eclipsed, even as the widening conflict demands the world's attention. On Wednesday alone, 23 people were killed by the Israeli military in Gaza, among them seven children and their mother. Even more widespread than the threat of direct Israeli military strikes are dire shortages of water, food, medicine, and electricity caused by Israel's ongoing siege of the Gaza Strip.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said that Israel's objective is to "apply pressure" to the civilian population of Gaza in response to Hamas' capture of an Israeli soldier in June and its recent rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. Olmert's tactic is a form of collective punishment that violates the Hague Convention as well as the Fourth Geneva Convention and constitutes a war crime.1,2

MADRE emphasizes that no party to the conflict—whether the State of Israel or the armed wings of Hezbollah and Hamas—has the right to attack civilians. MADRE calls for the protection of all civilians in Palestine, Israel, and Lebanon.
End Notes

1. "No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible," Article 50, Hague Convention.
2. "No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed," Article 33, Fourth Geneva Convention.

 http://www.madre.org/articles/me/middleeast71206.html

MADRE articles about the Middle East, current war situation in Gaza and
Lebanon:  http://www.madre.org/articles/me.html?tr=y&auid=1810953