The Israel-Lebanon Conflict

The lagged response of the international community towards the Israel-Lebanon conflict comes as no surprise. The US, usually the first to jump at the opportunity of involvement in a Middle Eastern conflict, has stayed relatively dormant this time.

The hesitance of the US to force an immediate ceasefire is clearly part of a greater strategic plan to strengthen the state of Israel’s position in the Middle East.

The Jewish state is surrounded by Muslim countries which are hostile towards its existence. Israel’s major worries are the on-going military threat posed by Palestinian armed groups along the West Bank and more recently, the fortification of the militant Hizbullah group in southern Lebanon.

The beginning of the latest in a long history of violent conflict between Israel and its neighbours began when Hizbullah captured two Israeli soldiers in the hope of forcing a prisoner exchange –Israel holds 15 prisoners of war from its occupation of Lebanon from 1982-1985.

Instead, Israel retaliated by bombarding Beirut’s international airport and blocking Lebanese ports with Israeli navy ships. A series of military action between both countries ensued.

While French president Jacques Chirac called the Israeli air attacks “completely disproportionate” and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan condemned Israel’s move, the US merely called for restraint but upheld Israel’s right to act in self-defence.

An emergency UN Security Council resolution calling for an end to the violence failed to materialise due to opposition from the US and Britain. President Bush merely promised the Lebanese prime minister that the US would press Israel to spare innocent lives.

Without prior knowledge of the matter, it is easy to point fingers at Hizbullah for instigating the violence. George Monbiot wrote in The Guardian that military action in Lebanon was premeditated and the Israeli government had been waiting for an excuse to wipe out Hizbullah forces.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle however, Israel’s attacks had in fact been planned more than a year ago. An unidentified senior Israeli army officer was reportedly “giving PowerPoint presentations to US and other diplomats, journalists and think tanks, setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail.”

Condoleezza Rice has justified America’s inaction so far by labelling the conflict as inevitable “birth pangs of a new Middle East”. These so-called “birth pangs” have killed 120 Israelis, including 38 civilians. In Lebanon, officials say 711 people have been killed while a million have been displaced from their homes.

After more than a month of fighting, a ceasefire was finally forged on August 14. The UN expects to deploy peacekeeping troops in southern Lebanon by next month. Europe is making up the bulk of the force by pledging 9,000 men.

Malaysia and Indonesia have promised 1,000 troops each but there are concerns that Israel will oppose this as both are Muslim countries having no diplomatic relations with Israel. Of the 15,000 troops pledged by the international community, not one of them is American.

Israel is likely to have gained little in its efforts to weaken Hizbullah as Iran and Syria remain supportive of the group and have provided ample economic means for its survival. The true losers of this war are evidently innocent Lebanese civilians whose homes and lives have been completely destroyed.

The UN has once again received a big blow to its credibility. The organisation’s incapability to act is further proof of its powerless-ness in the face of American unilateralism.