A Premeditated Attack

Whatever we think of Israel’s assault on Lebanon, all of us seem to agreeabout one fact: that it was a response, however disproportionate, to anunprovoked attack by Hizbullah. I repeated this "fact" in my last column,when I wrote that "Hizbullah fired the first shots". This being so, theIsraeli government’s supporters ask peaceniks like me, what would you havedone? It’s an important question. But its premise, I have now discovered, isflawed.

Since Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000, there havebeen hundreds of violations of the "blue line" between the two countries.The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) reports that Israeliaircraft crossed the line "on an almost daily basis" between 2001 and 2003,and "persistently" until 2006 (1). These incursions "caused great concernto the civilian population, particularly low-altitude flights that break thesound barrier over populated areas". On some occasions Hizbullah tried toshoot them down with anti-aircraft guns.

In October 2000, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) shot at unarmed Palestiniandemonstrators on the border, killing three and wounding 20. In response,Hizbullah crossed the line and kidnapped three Israeli soldiers. On severaloccasions, Hizbullah fired missiles and mortar rounds at IDFpositions, and the IDF responded with heavy artilleryand sometimes aerial bombardment. Incidents like this killed three Israelis andthree Lebanese in 2003; one Israeli soldier and two Hizbullah fighters in 2005and two Lebanese people and three Israeli soldiers in February 2006. Rocketswere fired from Lebanon into Israel several times in 2004, 2005 and 2006, onsome occasions by Hizbullah. But, the UN records, "none of the incidentsresulted in a military escalation"(2).

On May 26th this year, two officials of Islamic Jihad – Nidal and MahmoudMajzoub – were killed by a car bomb in the Lebanese city of Sidon. This waswidely assumed in Lebanon and Israel to be the work of Mossad, the Israeliintelligence agency(3). In June a man named Mahmoud Rafeh confessed to thekillings and admitted that he had been working for Mossad since 1994(4).Militants in southern Lebanon responded, on the day of the bombing, by launchingeight rockets into Israel. One soldier was lightly wounded. There was a majorbust-up on the border, during which one member of Hizbullah was killed andseveral wounded, and one Israeli soldier wounded. But while the border region"remained tense and volatile", UNIFIL says it was"generally quiet" until July 12th(5).

There has been a heated debate on the internet about whether the two Israelisoldiers kidnapped by Hizbullah that day were captured in Israel or inLebanon(6), but it now seems pretty clear that they were seized in Israel. Thisis what the UN says, and even Hizbullah seems to have forgotten that they weresupposed to have be found sneaking around the outskirts of the Lebanese villageof Aitaa al-Chaab. Now it states simply that "the Islamic Resistance capturedtwo Israeli soldiers at the border with occupied Palestine"(7). Three otherIsraeli soldiers were killed by the militants. There is also some dispute aboutwhen, on July 12th, Hizbullah first fired its rockets; but UNIFILmakes it clear that the firing took place at the same time as the raid – 9 am.Its purpose seems to have been to create a diversion. No one was hit.

But there is no serious debate about why the two soldiers were captured:Hizbullah was seeking to exchange them for the 15 prisoners of war taken by theIsraelis during the occupation of Lebanon(8) and (in breach of article 118 ofthe third Geneva convention(9)) never released. It seems clear that if Israelhad handed over the prisoners, it would – without the spillage of any moreblood – have retrieved its men and reduced the likelihood of furtherkidnappings. But the Israeli government refused to negotiate. Instead – well,we all know what happened instead. Almost 1,000 Lebanese and 33 Israelicivilians have been killed so far, and a million Lebanese displaced from theirhomes.

On July 12th, in other words, Hizbullah fired the first shots. But that actof aggression was simply one instance in a long sequence of small incursions andattacks over the past six years, by both sides. So why was the Israeli responseso different from all that preceded it? The answer is that it was not a reactionto the events of that day. The assault had been planned for months.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that "More than a year ago, asenior Israeli army officer began giving PowerPoint presentations, on anoff-the-record basis, to US and other diplomats, journalists and think tanks,setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail."(10) Theattack, he said, would last for three weeks. It would begin with bombing andculminate in a ground invasion. Gerald Steinberg, professor of political scienceat Bar-Ilan University, told the paper that "of all of Israel’s wars since1948, this was the one for which Israel was most prepared … By 2004, themilitary campaign scheduled to last about three weeks that we’re seeing nowhad already been blocked out and, in the last year or two, it’s been simulatedand rehearsed across the board."(11)

A "senior Israeli official" told the Washington Post that the raidby Hizbullah provided Israel with a "unique moment" for wiping outHizbullah(12). The New Statesman’s editor John Kampfner says he wastold by more than one official source that the United States government knew inadvance of Israel’s intention to take military action in Lebanon(13). The Bushadministration told the British government(14).

Israel’s assault, then, was premeditated: it was simply waiting for anappropriate excuse. It was also unnecessary. It is true that Hizbullah had beenbuilding up munitions close to the border, as its current rocket attacks show.But so had Israel. Just as Israel could assert that it was seeking to deterincursions by Hizbullah, Hizbullah could claim – also with justification –that it was trying to deter incursions by Israel. The Lebanese army is certainlyincapable of doing so. Yes, Hizbullah should have been pulled back from theIsraeli border by the Lebanese government and disarmed. Yes, the raid and therocket attack on July 12th were unjustified, stupid and provocative, like justabout everything that has taken place around the border for the past six years.But the suggestion that Hizbullah could launch an invasion of Israel orconstitutes an existential threat to the state is preposterous. Since theoccupation ended, all its acts of war have been minor ones, and nearly all ofthem reactive.

So it is not hard to answer the question of what we would have done. First,stop recruiting enemies, by withdrawing from the occupied territories inPalestine and Syria. Second, stop provoking the armed groups in Lebanon withviolations of the blue line – in particular the persistent flights across theborder. Third, release the prisoners of war who remain unlawfully incarceratedin Israel. Fourth, continue to defend the border, while maintaining thediplomatic pressure on Lebanon to disarm Hizbullah (as anyone can see, thiswould be much more feasible if the occupations were to end). Here then is mychallenge to the supporters of the Israeli government: do you dare to contendthat this programme would have caused more death and destruction than thecurrent adventure has done?

www.monbiot.com

References:

1. UNIFIL, August 2006. Lebanon – UNIFIL- Background.

2. ibid.

3. See FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting),28th July 2006. Down the Memory Hole: Israelicontribution to conflict is forgotten by leading papers.

4. Nicholas Blanford, 15th June 2006. Lebanon exposes deadly Israeli spyring. The Times.

5. UNIFIL, 21st July 2006. Report of theSecretary-General on the United Nations InterimForce in Lebanon (For the period from 21 January 2006 to 18 July 2006). UNSecurity Council.

6. See for example Joshua Frank, 25th July 2006. Kidnappedin Israel; Captured in Lebanon?

7. Hizbullah, quoted by Big News Network.com, 4th August 2006. Hezbollahnot to blame for war, reports show.

8. UNHCHR

9. They are listed by the KhiamCenter

10. Matthew Kalman, 21st July 2006. Israel set war plan more than a year ago:Strategy was put in motion as Hezbollah began gaining military strength inLebanon. San Francisco Chronicle.

11. Quoted by Matthew Kalman, ibid.

12. Robin Wright, 16th July 2006. Strikes Are Called Part of Broad Strategy:U.S., Israel Aim to Weaken Hezbollah, Region’s Militants. Washington Post. Myattention was drawn to this article by Tanya Reinhart, 28th July 2006.Israel’s NewMiddle East

13. John Kampfner, pers comm.

14. John Kampfner, 7th August 2006. Blood on his hands. New Statesman.