Where
Are The Achievements
Of This War?
By Uri Avnery
21 August, 2006
Gush Shalom
Tel Aviv.
With A few words, a Lebanese
army officer destroyed, the day before yesterday, the illusion that
Israel had achieved anything in this war. At a televised Lebanese army
parade that was also broadcast on Israeli TV , the officer read a prepared
text to his assembled troops, who were about to be deployed along the
Lebanese-Israeli border.
This is what he said in Arabic:
"Today, in the name of the comprehensive will of the people, you
are preparing to be deployed on the soil of the wounded South, side
by side with the forces of your Resistance and your people, which have
amazed the world with their steadfastness and blown to pieces the reputation
of the army about which it has been said that it is invincible."
In simple language: "the
comprehensive will of the people" - the will of all parts of the
Lebanese public, including the Shiite community. "Side by side
with the Resistance": side by side with Hizbullah. "Which
have amazed the world with their steadfastness": the heroism of
the Hizbullah fighters. "Blown to pieces the reputation of the
army about which it has been said that it is invincible": the Israeli
army.
Thus spoke a commander of
the Lebanese army, the deployment of which along the border is being
celebrated by the Olmert-Peretz government as a huge victory, because
this army is supposed to confront Hizbullah and disarm it. Israeli commentators
have created the illusion that this army would be at the disposal of
the friends of the US and Israel in Beirut, such as Fuad Siniora, Saad
Hariri and Walid Jumblatt.
It is no accident that this
item was drowned in the deluge of TV blabber, like a stone thrown into
a well. After broadcasting the item itself, no meaningful debate about
it took place. It was erased from the public mind.
But not only the balloon
of the redeeming Lebanese army has been punctured. The same has happened
to the multi-colored second balloon that was to serve as an Israeli
achievement: the deployment of the international force that would protect
Israel from Hizbullah and prevent its re-armament. As the days pass,
it becomes increasingly clear that this force will be, at best, a mishmash
of small national units, without a clear mandate and "robust"
capabilities. The commando raid carried out by our army today, in blatant
violation of the cease-fire, will certainly not attract more international
volunteers for the job.
So what remains of all the
"achievements" of this war? A good question.
* * *
AFTER EVERY failed war, the
cry for an official investigation goes up in Israel. Now there is a
"trauma", much bitterness, a feeling of defeat and of a missed
opportunity. Hence the demand for a strong Commission of Inquiry that
will cut off the heads of those responsible.
That's what happened after
the first Lebanon war, which reached its climax in the Sabra and Shatila
massacre. The government refused any serious inquiry. The masses that
gathered in what is now called "Rabin Square" (the mythical
400 thousand) demanded a judicial inquiry. The public mood reached boiling
point and in the end the Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, gave in.
The Kahan Commission that
investigated the event condemned a number of politicians and army officers
for "indirect" responsibility for the massacre, even though
its own factual conclusions would have justified a much stronger condemnation.
But Ariel Sharon was, at least, removed from the Defense Ministry.
Before that, after the trauma
of the Yom Kippur war, the government also refused to appoint a Commission
of Inquiry, but public pressure forced its hand. The fate of the Agranat
Committee, which included a former Chief-of-Staff and two other senior
officers, was rather odd: it conducted a serious investigation, put
all the blame on the military, removed from office the Chief-of-Staff,
"Dado" Elazar - and acquitted the political leadership of
any blame. This caused a spontaneous public uproar. In its wake, Golda
Meir and Moshe Dayan - predecessors of Olmert and Peretz as Prime Minister
and Minister of Defense - were forced to resign.
This time, too, the political
and military leadership is trying to block any serious investigation.
Amir Peretz even appointed a whitewash-committee, packed with his cronies.
But public pressure is building up, and chances seem good that in the
end there will be no way out but to appoint a judicial inquiry committee.
Generally, the one who appoints
a commission of inquiry and sets its terms of reference predetermines
its conclusions. Under Israeli law, it is the government which decides
to appoint such a commission and determines its terms of reference.
(As a Member of the Knesset, I voted against these paragraphs.) But
the composition of the commission is determined by the President of
the Supreme Court. If a commission is set up, I assume the present President
of the Court, Aharon Barak, a highly respected chief justice, will appoint
himself for the job.
IF INDEED such a commission
is set up, what will it investigate?
The politicians and generals will try to restrict the inquiry to the
technical aspects of the conduct of the war:
* Why was the army not prepared
for a war against guerillas?
* Why were the land forces
not sent into the field in the two first weeks?
* Did the military command
believe that the war could be won by the Air Force alone?
* What was the quality of
the intelligence?
* Why was nothing done to
protect the rear, when the rocket threat was known?
* Why were the poor in the
North left to their fate, after the well-to-do had left the area?
* Why were the reserve units
not ready for the war?
* Why were the emergency
arsenals empty?
* Why did the supply system
not function?
* Why did the Chief-of-Staff
practically depose the Chief of the Northern Command in the middle of
the war?
* Why was it decided at the
last moment to start a campaign that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers?
The government will probably attempt to widen the investigation and
to put part of the blame on its predecessors:
* Why did the Ehud Barak
and Ariel Sharon governments just look on when Hizbullah was growing?
* Why was nothing done as
Hizbullah built up its huge stockpile of rockets?
All these are serious questions,
and it is certainly necessary to clear them up. But it is more important
to investigate the roots of the war:
* What made the trio Olmert-Peretz-Halutz
decide to start a war only a few hours after the capture of the two
soldiers?
* Was it agreed with the
Americans in advance to go to war the moment a credible pretext presented
itself?
* Did the Americans push
Israel into the war, and, later on, demand that it go on and on as far
as possible?
* Was it Condoleezza Rice
who decided in fact when to start and when to stop?
* Did the US want to get
us entangled with Syria?
* Did the US use us for its
campaign against Iran?
This, too, is not enough.
There are more profound and important questions.
THIS WAR has no name. Even
after 33 days of fighting and six days of cease-fire, no natural name
has been found. The media use a chronological name: Lebanon War II.
This way, the war in Lebanon
is separated from the war in the Gaza Strip, which has been conducted
simultaneously, and which is going on unabated after the cease-fire
in the North. Do these two wars have a common denominator? Are they,
perhaps, one and the same war?
The answer is: certainly,
yes. And the proper name is: the War for the Settlements.
The war against the Palestinian
people is being waged in order to keep the "settlement blocs"
and annex large parts of the West Bank. The war in the North was waged,
in fact, to keep the settlements on the Golan Heights.
Hizbullah grew up with the
support of Syria, which controlled Lebanon at the time. Hafez al-Assad
saw the return of the Golan to Syria as the aim of his life - after
all, it was he who lost them in the June 1967 war, and who did not succeed
in getting them back in the October 1973 war. He did not want to risk
another war on the Israel-Syria border, which is so close to Damascus.
Therefore, he patronized Hizbullah, so as to convince Israel that it
would have no quiet as long as it refused to give the Golan back. Assad
jr. is continuing with his fathers legacy.
Without the cooperation of Syria, Iran has no direct way of supplying
Hizbullah with arms.
The solution is on hand:
we have to remove the settlers from there, whatever the cost in wines
and mineral water, and give the Golan back to its rightful owners. Ehud
Barak almost did so, but, as is his wont, lost his nerve at the last
moment.
It has to be said aloud:
every one of the 154 Israeli dead of Lebanon War II (until the cease-fire)
died for the settlers on the Golan Heights.
* * *
THE 155TH Israeli victim
of this war is the "Covergence Plan" - the plan for a unilateral
withdrawal from parts of the West Bank.
Ehud Olmert was elected four months ago (hard to believe! only four
months!) on the platform of Convergence, much as Amir Peretz was elected
on the platform of reducing the army and carrying out far-reaching social
reforms.
In the course of the war,
Olmert still announced that he would implement the "Convergence".
But the day before yesterday he conceded that we could forget about
it.
The Convergence was to remove
60 thousand settlers from where they are, but to leave the almost 400
thousand settlers in the West Bank (including the Jerusalem area). Now
this plan has also been buried.
What remains? No peace, no negotiations, no solution at all for the
historic conflict. Just a complete deadlock for years, at least until
we get rid of the duo Olmert & Peretz.
All over Israel, they are
already talking about the "Next Round", the war that will
at long last eliminate Hizbullah and punish it for besmirching our honor.
That has become, so it seems, a self-evident matter. Even Haaretz treats
it as such in its editorials.
In the South, they don't
speak about the "Next Round" because the present round is
endless.
To have any value whatsoever,
the investigation must expose the real roots of the war and present
the public with the historic choice that has become clear in this war,
too: Either the settlements and an endless war, or the return of the
occupied territories and peace.
Otherwise, the investigation
will only provide more backing for the outlook of the Right, to wit:
we only have to expose the mistakes that have been made and correct
them, then we can start the next war and win.