Whiskey and Rye

Syria's political puppetry

Middle Eastern diplomacy is ordinarily an odd game. Yet never in the half century of Arab-Israeli conflict has a country taken such an asinine, hypocritical stance as Lebanon has in its recent refusal to support Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory—a withdrawal that the Lebanese have demanded for 18 years. Then again, it's not really Lebanon's or Israel's fault. Confused? Here's the story.

DAVID S. WERTIME/YH

In the 1970s, Palestinian militants started a civil war in Lebanon from which Lebanon has yet to fully recover. During the chaos of the war, Palestinian terrorists launched attacks from Lebanon across Israel's northern border. In one of these attacks, terrorists took over an Israeli kindergarten class and murdered several children before Israeli soldiers killed the terrorists. Towns in northern Israel also lived under the constant threat of Palestinian rocket attacks launched from Lebanon.

This situation became unbearable for Israel. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon—not to gain territory, but to wipe out the Palestinian terrorists. Although Israel succeeded in destroying the Palestinian terrorists, the occupation of Lebanon quickly became Israel's Vietnam: an unpopular war at home that seemed to serve little purpose for Israelis not living on the northern border. In 1985, Israel withdrew from much of Lebanon, remaining in a "security zone" about 10 miles wide along Israel's northern border in order to protect northern Israel from attacks.

Since 1985, Israeli soldiers have fought Hizbollah, an Iranian-backed Islamic terrorist group in southern Lebanon. Hizbollah says that its only goal is to drive the Israeli army out of Lebanon, but its rocket attacks on northern Israel suggest otherwise.

After over a decade of heavy casualties and bad international press, Israelis have grown weary of occupying the security zone. Earlier this year, Prime Minister Ehud Barak decided to withdraw to Israel's United Nations (UN)-recognized northern border, as stipulated in UN Security Council Resolution 425. This week, the Israeli government announced that the Israeli Army would withdraw from Lebanon by Fri, July 7.

You'd think Lebanon would be happy about this. In fact, when Israel first floated the possibility of a unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon last year, the Lebanese government reacted favorably. However, within a week, its position changed, and Beirut announced it would not accept an Israeli withdrawal. Why the turnabout? After all, Lebanon should want foreign soldiers out of its territory.

But Israel is not the only country with troops in Lebanon. Syria, Lebanon's neighbor to the east, occupies the rest of the country and controls the Lebanese government. Unlike Lebanon, Syria does have a territorial dispute with Israel. Both countries claim ownership of the Golan Heights on Israel's northeastern border, which Israel has controlled since 1967. Syria wants them back in exchange for a peace treaty. Barak is willing to give the Heights to Syria, but the Syrians have balked at signing a peace accord and recently withdrew from talks.

Syria wants Israel to continue occupying the security zone in Lebanon. Since Syria controls Hizbollah, it can use the militants to apply pressure on Israel. Having Israeli soldiers in Lebanon allows Syria to instigate combat against Israel without having to do so on its own border. When Israel withdraws, Syria will have to attack Israelis in Israel instead of in Lebanon, which looks bad in the eyes of the international community. Furthermore, an end to the Israeli presence in Lebanon leaves the Syrians as the only remaining occupying force. Syria uses the Israeli occupation as an excuse to remain in Lebanon, and no more security zone means that Syria suddenly looks like the aggressive foreign power that it is.

So the end result of this ridiculous affair is that the Syrian and Lebanese governments are telling Israel not to withdraw. Unfortunately for the Syrians, Israel has the UN on its side—an unusual situation given the UN's typically pro-Arab leanings. It seems obvious to United Naitons Secretary-General Kofi Annan: Israel intends to comply with Security Council Resolution 425 and remove its troops from Lebanese territory. This should be of no concern to Syria, only to Israel and Lebanon.

I hope that by July 7 the Lebanese government is allowed to express its true opinion and support Israel's decision to unilaterally withdraw. Lebanon wins because it gets its country back. Israel wins regardless. If terrorism on the northern border ends, Israel succeeded. If terrorism continues, Israel can retaliate from its own territory without carrying the stigma of an occupier. As for Syria, if it's serious about peace, it should negotiate directly with Israel without attempting to use Lebanon as an unwilling pawn.

Back to Opinion...