| Office of Research | Issue Focus | Foreign Media Reaction |
|
Commentary from ... Europe Middle East East Asia/Pacific Western Hemisphere |
| MEPP: After Israel's Withdrawal From Lebanon, 'A New Uncertainty' |
The end of Israel's 22-year-old occupation in southern Lebanon was the main story in the foreign press this week, with many trying to determine whether the "earlier-than-anticipated" pullout will either bring the region closer to peace or open a whole new conflict, "more ferocious than the one in the past." Almost everywhere, observers judged that South Lebanon remains "a very dangerous place" and that absent an agreement with Lebanon's powerbroker, Syria, Israel must "deal with the root of the problem" and address the Palestinian track of the peace process. Most analysts believed that Israel's chances of bringing Syria to the negotiating table were still thin. Some thought that Syria may decide to let Israel wait a while, but others judged that Damascus may be too preoccupied with the stirrings of political and other "reforms" now occurring in Syria "to act decisively." These were regional themes:
ISRAEL: "Day after" assessments of the withdrawal gave Israeli Prime Minister Barak high marks for "delivering" on "an election promise" and deemed it "too early to conjecture" whether the pullout "will prove to be the right thing to have done with respect to quiet on the northern border." The international community was requested to support "the new deterrence policy emerging from Israel" in the protection of its north.
ARAB WORLD: The Arab press was jubilant about the Lebanese resistance's "victory." Papers touted "intifada" and "jihad" as the best way for Arabs to reclaim their land from Israel. Moderate and pro-Syrian dailies in Lebanon stressed the government's efforts "to bring about the highest possible cooperation" with the UN and to bring calm to the South. Lebanese President Lahoud's visit to the South was seen as particularly "reassuring" for Christian villages. Papers of varying political stripes emphasized that while Lebanon "will strongly adhere to its claim" to the Shebaa Farm, "diplomacy is the best way" to regain the area.
EUROPE: In Britain, France, Germany and Italy, there was considerable focus on the UN's ability to ensure stability in southern Lebanon. Hizballah was urged to repay Israeli Prime Minister Barak's withdrawal "gesture" in kind and to use "restraint." Most judged that in the Middle East, "peacemakers," such as Mr. Barak, "deserve support."
EAST ASIA: An Indonesian daily focused on the Lebanese government's task of promoting national "reconciliation," particularly between SLA forces and Hizballah. Japanese and South Korean papers judged that "the future course" of the Middle East peace process "depends on the Hizballah and other Islamic extremists, and how they behave in southern Lebanon."
WESTERN HEMISPHERE: Canadian papers judged that Mr. Barak may have correctly gambled "that Hizballah's desire for political influence in Beirut is greater than any dream it may have at striking at Israel itself."
EDITOR: Gail Hamer Burke
EDITOR'S NOTE: This survey is based on 56 reports from 33 countries, May 23 - 25. Editorial excerpts are grouped by region; editorials from each country are listed from the most recent date.
ISRAEL: "The Day After"
Independent Haaretz featured this editorial (5/25): "It is too early to conjecture whether the unilateral withdrawal will prove to be the right thing to have done with respect to quiet on the northern border, but it is likely that this indeed will be the case, and the international support for the move is important.... It is to be hoped that henceforth, southern Lebanon will become a peaceful region of the neighboring country to the North.... May 24 is an important benchmark in the history of the region and an important day for Barak and his government. Barak has kept an explicit commitment both in its essence and in its timing. He pursued his aim unflinchingly, despite external and internal difficulties, including from the direction of the IDF, and he dared to change a long-standing policy instead of relying, like his predecessors, on the status quo. In a country that has grown accustomed to leadership in battle, at best, this is a refreshing change that gives cause for hope. U.S. President Bill Clinton, Syrian President Hafez Assad and PA Chairman Yasser Arafat will have to draw their conclusions from this in advance of the coming stages in the peace process. Barak can draw encouragement from this for his future moves."
"A Strong, Swift And Elegant Move"
Editor Yaacov Erez commented on page one of mass-appeal, pluralist Maariv (5/25): "The IDF has carried out the pullout from Lebanon in a strong, swift and elegant fashion.... The date was carefully chosen and verified. It was a tightly kept secret.... In a matter of hours, all IDF outposts in Lebanon were evacuated and the army reached the Israeli border.... This is how Ehud Barak has made good on his commitment before the elections. What had looked like an electoral promise of the type generally forgotten after popular consultations, became the first pledge of the prime ministe--and was delivered. Above all, this happened following the failure on the Syrian track. As he recruited even part of the opposition, Barak turned an election promise into a central objective on Israel's national agenda."
"Limits Of Force And Separation Of The Tracks"
Analyst Meir Shtiglitz pointed out in mass-circulation, pluralist Yediot (5/25): "At this stage, one lesson must be learned.... What was could not be achieved by force will not be achieved by more force. It is high time to recognize the painful fact that it was Hizballah, not Syria nor Iran...that hit Israel over the last decade. Hizballah's objective was--and remains...the eviction of Israel from the Lebanese disgrace.... There is very little in common between developments in the 'peace process' and the events at the Israeli-Lebanese border. Assad can indeed accelerate some actions of Hizballah and boast about them, but had he given in to Israel's threats and tried to get in the way of the fighters of Islam, he would have discovered the limits of his own power.... Israel must cease to expect that any dramatic development in the talks with Syria will bring about tranquility along its northern border. This has not happened--and will not happen."
"The IDF Has Withdrawn--Literally"
Former editor Moshe Ishon wrote in nationalist Hatzofe (5/25): "The hundreds of soldiers leaving Lebanon were joyful.... So were the politicians, principally Ehud Barak.... There was no
reason for merriment: They had messed up the IDF and Israel with a pullout that was unruly and dangerous, both to the safety of the soldiers and to that of the tens of thousands of
residents along the Lebanese border.... The responsibility lies with Israel's political and military leadership.... The SLA soldiers had forged a blood alliance with the Israeli fighters. For 20 years they walked hand in hand with Israel. On the day of trial, they found themselves on their own.... The rushed withdrawal from southern Lebanon should not be presented as a victory."
"Leaving Lebanon"
The independent Jerusalem Post editorialized (5/24): "The flight of many residents of northern towns seems to indicate a lack of confidence that Israel's primary objective--a secure border--will be achieved. Whether peace is achieved depends... on the new deterrence policy emerging from Israel.... For the war to end, messages from the United States and the UN to Syria and Lebanon must go beyond the usual request for calm in the region. The United States and the UN need to hold these countries equally responsible for the full implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 425.... Ensuring that Hizballah does not continue its war against Israel is therefore not just Israel's problem, but that of Lebanon, Syria, and the UN."
LEBANON: "Hizballah Action, Strong New Trump Card In Lebanese Officials' Hands"
An editorial by George Alam in pro-Syria, leftist As-Safir stated (5/25): "International contacts with Beirut have been accelerated in the last 48 hours to bring about the highest possible level of cooperation between Lebanon and Terje Larsen, and help him implement UN plans for the South.... Lebanon is preparing a written memo that specifies its position towards Annan's report.... It is believed that Lebanon will strongly adhere to its claim for Shebaa and talk about its right to resist in order to liberate these farms. However, instead of using the statement 'Lebanon's right to resist to regain these farms,' Lebanon will use 'Lebanon's right to use a variety of legitimate means to regain these farms.' This means that Lebanon will try to be more diplomatic and abandon the expression 'resistance.'... Lebanon's motive for plunging itself into such difficult negotiations with the UN is the seriousness of the situation in the South and the pressures exerted by the UN and France to make Lebanon comply with all UN conditions. Sources say that the United States tried to take advantage of the attack against Lebanese civilians on the first day of the withdrawal and ask Lebanon to send in the Army--contrary to the mechanism stipulated in 425.... Some sources say that the United States suggested to an 'army' of foreign journalists that they cover the massacres that might happen between Hizballah and the SLA. However, Hizballah's performance was a real surprise to the American and international press."
"Lahoud's First Step"
Gebran Tueni stressed in moderate An-Nahar (5/25): "President Lahoud should be thanked for visiting the liberated South. He should be thanked for this basic and necessary step at this sensitive point in time.... The people only want the authorities, and his visit complied with people's request.... We call on the president again to send the Army and the ISF into the South.... The Lebanese are bored with militias and parties and were reassured when President Lahoud came.... The Lebanese do not want revert to chaos and do not want this victory over Israel to be a victory of one part of the Lebanese over another part of the Lebanese.... We should warn Hizballah, which is the basic reason behind this 'wedding celebration,' that its image could be damaged as a result of the performance of some of its members.... .As for Shebaa...Lebanon has to wait for the implementation of Resolutions 242 and 338 or send an official request to the UN asking to separate the issue of Shebaa from the region. Resorting to force to regain Shebaa might lead to loosing the South again. Diplomacy is the best way to regain Shebaa."
"Two Syrian Readings Of The Israeli Withdrawal"
An article by Ibrahim Hmaydi in pan-Arab Al-Hayat maintained (5/25): "Optimistic Syrians believe that the internal developments in the Syrian arena are an effort to pave the way for a peace agreement with Israel.... They believe that such a peace agreement can never be signed without implementing these reforms first.... The Baath regional conference is expected to come up with an ideological position on the Arab-Israeli struggle. Pessimistic Syrians, however, believe that Barak is using the option of 'Lebanon First' and intends to postpone resolving the Syrian issue.... They believe that the two tracks will be eventually separated."
SYRIA: "The South Lesson"
Mohamed Khair al-Wadi, chief editor of government-owned Tishreen, averred (5/25): "Subsequent to the Israeli defeat in south Lebanon, Barak admitted that establishing a security zone in South Lebanon was a tragic mistake and that it never offered security for Israel. Such a confession exposes the deep crisis of Israel's policy.... Israel's policy of occupation has proved its failure in Lebanon.... It aggravated Israel's problems. Barak's confessed mistake doesn't prove that he has learned the painful lesson. The only proof that he did learn the lesson is when he takes specific measures, the first of which is withdrawal from the Golan and admitting the Palestinian people's rights."
"A Historic Victory"
Turki Saqr, chief editor of government-owned Al-Baath, commented (5/25): "Barak's threats against Syria and Lebanon will not do Barak any good. The language of threats has proved that it is a worn-out means that is frequently used by Israeli leaders.... Barak is wrong in his belief that threats can break cohesion between the Syrian and Lebanese tracks. He is wrong if he believes that Syria has become weak and isolated, and that his anti-peace stand is welcome in the international arena."
"The Resistance Weapon"
Mohamed Ali Buza, a commentator in government-owned Al-Thawra, wrote (5/24): "The lessons of South Lebanon and the failure of the Zionist scheme shows that resistance is the only language Israel understands."
WEST BANK: "Why Doesn't Israel Withdraw Peacefully From Palestinian Lands?"
Independent, moderate Al-Quds editorialized (5/24): "It took Israel two decades, thousands of victims, major destruction on both the Lebanese and Israeli side, hundreds of air raids, and high financial costs to keep its occupation in South Lebanon.... Israel must realize and learn from the Lebanese lesson when dealing with the Palestinian issue. The Palestinians have chosen peace and negotiations as a means to achieve their legitimate and just demands. So far, Israel is stalling and evading the withdrawal from the Palestinian lands, but the logic and lessons of history confirm that this withdrawal will come sooner or later. It is a known fact that this withdrawal is inevitable. So, why don't they withdraw peacefully from the Palestinian lands?"
"The Intifada Power Element"
Hani Habib opined in independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam (5/24): "For Barak's misfortune, the humiliating withdrawal of his army [from South Lebanon] came concurrently with the escalating Palestinian Intifada, which has spread all over against the Israelis as a result of Barak government's lack of commitment [to peace] and failure to fulfil its obligations of the
various agreements. In our opinion, this renewable Intifada is important because it forms a constant warning to Barak's attempts to dodge his commitments and pledges. Certain efforts may be able to calm down this Intifada, but it will break out again with a new momentum and impose itself again as a crucial element of the Palestinian-Israeli power struggle."
EGYPT: "Another Hizballah Needed For Golan, Palestinian Territories?"
Ahmed El-Berry held in pro-government Al-Ahram (5/25): "Is it exaggerating to say that the brave Lebanese resistance attacks is the main reason for Israel's escape?... The resistance youth threw themselves into martyrdom to confront Israeli troops.... The resistance foiled Barak's calculations about a procrastinated withdrawal.... Israel had to implement UNSG Annan's report about the need for its withdrawal.... However, what will Israel do with the occupied Syrian Golan and Palestinian rights?... Israel has been adopting the policy of tracks, which was only an Israeli maneuver to gain more time. Will it change this policy, or will it find a formula about Israeli security as it did with Jerusalem and building new settlements in the Palestinian territories? What tracks and what security about which Israel is talking? Israel knows that the situation in the occupied territories will not calm as long as it pursues the same policy and has not returned rights to their owners? Does Israel need another Hizbullah to force it out of Golan and the Palestinian territories as well?"
"Downside Of Withdrawal Is Israeli Plot To Turn Lebanese Against Syria, Palestinians"
Mohamed Sid Ahmed, columnist for opposition weekly Al-Ahali, declared (5/24): "Among the designed aims of Israeli withdrawal is to turn Lebanon against Syria...and ignite the situation between Lebanese and Palestinians.... For the Israeli withdrawal to be a victory for the Arab liberation movement, the positive side should be reinforced and the negative side confronted...a mission that all Arab parties should carry.... Egypt, in particular, should have a leading role."
JORDAN: "Another Wall Collapses"
Daily columnist Urayb Rintawi wrote on the op-ed page of center-left, influential Arabic daily Al-Dustur (5/24): "Another wall collapses so quickly that it brings back to remind the collapse of the Berlin Wall... The resistance forces have taken the place of the deteriorating army, the army that has finally been conquered. Nobody waited for the results of research into the deployment of international forces. Nature hates a void and the void of occupation is taken up by the resistance.... What is happening in Lebanon stands witness to the restricted thinking of the Israeli leadership and its subservience to the arrogance of force and the ideologies of the extremist right-wing. It is a living showcase of how the tables can be turned."
ALGERIA: "Israel Acts First, Then Consults"
Independent, French-language El Watan decreed (5/25) that Prime Minister Barak's decision to withdraw "without consultations or coordination" with the Lebanese authorities was "a confirmation of Israel's conduct of the Mideast Peace Process. In other words, Israel acts and then consults."
BAHRAIN: "An Invitation To All Arabs To Resist American-Israeli Hegemony"
Semi-independent Akhbar Al-Khalij ran this comment (5/23) by Abdulmalik Salman: "Israel pulled out its defeated forces and was taught a lesson that it will never forget. However, the most important lesson will be for the Arabs to understand that Lebanon achieved victory against Israel because it rejected all (Israeli) offers to negotiate and insisted on fighting the occupation until all its territories were liberated. The Lebanese victory is an invitation to all Arabs to resist
American-Israeli hegemony and oppose all attempts to make the Arab nation surrender to their (the Americans' and Israelis') will."
KUWAIT: "Palestinians In Lebanon Must Hand Over Their Weapons"
Independent Al-Anba carried this piece by Mohammad Yousef (5/24): "Lebanon is going through a new era in which it will regain its freedom and independence. The Lebanese government, with the support of all Arab nations, has only to get rid of the Palestinian armed forces that are present in Lebanon. Their presence in Lebanon is illegitimate, so why should they remain, especially after their leader made peace with Israel? All Arab countries should exert pressure on the Palestinians to hand over their weapons to the Lebanese authorities and comply with Lebanese laws. Lebanon has suffered long enough due to the Palestinian cause."
"Revival Of Intifada And Jihad"
Independent Al-Anba ran this piece by Abdel-Hadi Al-Saleh (5/24): "The recent uprising in Palestine forced Barak to postpone his trip to Washington and the continued confrontation between the two sides proved how much the Palestinians hate Israel. The Palestinian movement inside Palestine and the Islamic resistance in Lebanon revived the belief that resistance must continue until all occupied land including Jerusalem are liberated."
"Lebanese Expelled Israel Without Negotiations Or Terms"
Center-left Al-Taleea opined (5/24): "Israel has been defeated. The Lebanese resistance expelled its troops by force. The Lebanese expelled Israel without any negotiations or terms. It is something that the Arabs united could not do during their confrontation with Israel. The Lebanese have proved that a people unencumbered can do miracles and the Arabs' problem stem from their regimes and leaders."
SAUDI ARABIA: "Greater Lebanon...Greater In Jihad"
Managing editor Jaser Al-Jaser insisted in Riyadh-based, moderate Al-Jazira (5/25): "The most important lessons (of the withdrawal) are: That the defeat of the Israeli occupying forces...confirms what true Jihad (holy war) could achieve, and proves to those unfaithful believers what Islamic Jihad could accomplish.... The victory of the Islamic resistance, and the surrender by a major regional military power, provides motivation for the liberation of other Arab occupied lands by (applying) the same approach and methods.... The liberation of the Lebanese territories--without engaging in unequal, humiliating negotiations--will motivate those who have already fallen into these negotiations to reconsider their positions.... The success of the Lebanese Mujahideen in expelling the invaders from their territories will encourage Palestinian Mujahideen to further inflame their Intifada...and to intensify their jihad."
"Popular Resistance Defeated Israel Where Arab Armed Forces Could Not"
London-based, internationally circulated Al-Sharq Al-Awsat opined (5/24): "The Lebanese experiment has proved that, in the absence of military balance between Israel and Arabs, the best strategy against Israel is popular resistance. Regular Arab armed forces failed to achieve a decisive victory against the war machine of Israel.... But the Palestinian intifada, an unarmed struggle against heavily armed forces, forced Israel to recognize the PLO as the sole negotiator (for the Palestinian people). The Lebanese resistance has reconfirmed this lesson.... Lebanon deserves loud applause, and also large economic assistance, especially from the EU and the United States."
TUNISIA: "Recorded In History "
An editorial by senior editor Noureddine Achour in Arabic-daily As-Sabah stated (5/25): "History will record what the Lebanese people have achieved through their continuous resistance against Israeli occupation.... The Israeli government's quick withdrawal from South Lebanon, before the announced date, was surprising... Although it was carried out under the cover of night, the withdrawal could not hide the fact that "the undefeated army" had been defeated... Despite all this, we should acknowledge that Barak's government has take a 'positive step' by acknowledging that its occupation of South Lebanon could not go on and taking steps to correct that wrong.... Now that the withdrawal has been completed, how will Barak's government deal with the Palestinian issue and with Syrian concerns over the Golan Heights?"
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES: "Liberation Accomplished Without Negotiatons"
Sharjah-based Al-Khaleej held (5/23), "We congratulate Lebanon, the Lebanese and the resistance for the collapse of the Israeli occupying army and their agents and for the great flight of Barak's soldiers and his agent, Antoine Lahad.... The liberation of South Lebanon was accomplished without any negotiations, concessions or bargaining. Israel was forced [to vacate], despite the will of its generals who are still determined, as they retreat in defeat, to commit massacres against those who stood up to liberate their villages."
"UAE Tough Policy OnIsrael Was Justified"
Commenting on the Israeli decision to cut short the talks in Sweden because of a surge in violence in the West Bank and Gaza, the English-language Gulf News (5/23) editorialized, "The UAE's tough policy on Israel appears fully justified. Unlike some other Arab countries, the UAE has refused to have anything to do with Israel as long as the final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is not signed.... The United States and other should focus on the root cause of the violence. It is this cause which needs to be addressed. Suspending talks is no solution; it will only exacerbate the problem."
BRITAIN: "Out But Not Down"
The conservative Times had this editorial (5/25): "The political fallout from the Israeli withdrawal may harm Mr. Arafat, the Lebanese government and even the interests of Syria more than it does Mr. Barak. Mr. Arafat's position is unenviable..... Careless rhetoric could trap him into Palestinian militancy just when, off-stage in Stockholm, all-important negotiations with Israel on a final settlement are entering the stage of concrete trade-offs.... However clumsily, Israel has shed a burden. Syria has lost a bargaining chip and also denied Lebanon its best chance for peace with Israel. It is a very Arab 'victory.'"
"Israel Must Make Peace With Palestine"
The centrist Independent's lead editorial declared (5/25): "Mr. Arafat is under immense pressure to step up his demands and, if there is no deal in September, to take the potentially explosive step of a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood. After humiliation in Lebanon, however, Israel's mood will be: 'Thus far and no further.' Yet it must go further.... South Lebanon is a very dangerous place. It will remain so until Israel deals with the root of the problem and makes peace with the Palestinians."
"The Leaving Of Lebanon"
The liberal Guardian held in its lead editorial (5/24): "It is a time for cool heads in the Middle East. This is, above all, a very hazardous moment. This present danger should concentrate minds about the future. By most estimates, there are five months left for Mr. Barak to attain his objective of a comprehensive peace and a final settlement of borders. It remains the best chance in years. At this moment of crisis, this policy needs support. But as the Middle East's bloody history shows, peacemakers are more often cursed than blessed."
FRANCE: "Israel Withdraws From Lebanon"
Georges Marion wrote in left-of-center Le Monde (5/24): "Barak's hopes for an orderly withdrawal calmly replaced by UN troops has been compromised. Now that Hizballah, which is particularly sensitive about matters of honor, is occupying the great majority of the territory, it is hard to see what would incite it to allow international troops to come between its forces and the Israelis. It is almost certain that Israel will now have to get used to its new neighbor, with its hostile approach and its unpredictable intentions.... The Israeli debacle will not go unnoticed by the Palestinians. In their eyes, a strong guerrilla movement has managed to push out the region's biggest power, which is also the power they have been fighting against.... Their strategy against Israel may be influenced by this observation."
GERMANY: "Where Are The Troops For The UN?"
Wolfgang Guenter Lerch noted in a front-page editorial in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (5/25): "There has been talk of beefing up UNIFIL and expanding its military mandate. But where are the troops? Talks with the Syrian and the Lebanese are now more urgent than ever. Whether such talks will actually take place, however, also depends on the governments in Beirut and Damascus. In view of Hizballah's triumphalism and tensions in the autonomous regions controlled by the Palestinian Authority, the omens are not good."
"Israel's Vietnam"
Thorsten Schmitz judged in centrist Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (5/25): "Barak's decision in favor of a unilateral withdrawal from South Lebanon...is playing with fire.... On the other hand, the astute strategist Barak is capable of turning even the greatest defeat into...gain. Israel's withdrawal...strengthens Israel's standing within the international community. Barak can count on international backing if the Hizballah continues attacking the North and Israel decides to retaliate."
"Disaster In Lebanon"
Wolfgang Guenter Lerch noted in a front-page editorial in right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (5/24): "Israel has made it clear that it will march back into Lebanon again if the Hizballah attacks northern Israel, now just over the border. But what would that help? It would mean returning to square one. And Israeli retaliatory attacks are just what the Hizballah is counting on, because they would contribute to destabilizing the entire region again and thus prepare a favorable situation for more aggression.... Since the 1991 Madrid conference, Syria has officially been in peace talks with Israel. But it hardly looks as if Syria will rein in the Hizballah. Damascus is too much concerned with the 'post-Assad era' and the inevitable infighting to act decisively in Lebanon now--assuming Syria's leaders even want to do so. Perhaps the current strategy of the regime in Damascus is to let Israel 'stew' for a while. On the other hand, the secular nationalism prevailing in Syria goes together with the Hizballah's theocratically-inspired militant ideology of struggle like fire and water. The Lebanese, who are currently celebrating
the Hizballah, could soon discover, to their chagrin, that Hizballah's success is Janus-faced. In the end, the government in Beirut wants just one thing: peace."
ITALY: "The Possibility To Start Over Again"
Ugo Tramballi opined in leading business Il Sole-24 Ore (5/25): "It would be a mistake to compare this rapid withdrawal with the American escape from Saigon. Israel remains the regional military power and having left Lebanon does not mean that it will soon yield the other occupied territories.... But something has indeed happened.... At last, Lebanon has the opportunity to start all over again.... Syria also has an opportunity.... The Israeli withdrawal forces Lebanese to ask themselves why there are still 40,000 Syrian soldiers in their country. Syria no longer has the excuse of using Southern Lebanon to wage war against others which would lead it to the Golan Heights."
"Lebanon Is Not Vietnam"
According to an editorial in provocative, classical liberal, opposition Il Foglio (5/25): "Now the Damascus regime cannot avoid making a choice. Either it will prevent irregular militias in Lebanon from attacking Galilee or it risks an armed reaction, in which it might also be directly involved.... This situation is not the same as in Vietnam. If not because the Israeli army does not resemble at all the one escaping from Saigon. We should instead note that if Israel decided to play its cards by itself this is so also because international organizations are impotent. "
AUSTRIA: "Israel Is Playing A Dangerous Poker Game"
Foreign affairs writer Andreas Schwarz stressed in conservative Die Presse (5/24): "Once the Israelis have departed from the security zone, the blame for possible Hizballah attacks against Israel will be put on Syria. Now Damascus is under pressure to keep the devil it once called in check, and Damascus would lose its face--especially in its efforts to gain international recognition--if it did not succeed.... Israel is playing a dangerous poker game. If the chaos spills over, if Israel once again has to look after things in south Lebanon itself and establish security by means of bombs--then the hasty withdrawal might have been a little too courageous after all. In the medium term, in any case, Israel has put the ball very skillfully into the Syrian camp."
"UN Mandate In Lebanon...Sufficient To Control The Situation"
Foreign affairs editor and Middle East expert Gudrun Harrer observed in liberal Der Standard (5/24): "At least, the withdrawal was so thorough that it will be hard for the former 'resistance fighters' to find a pretext for continuing their fight against Israel.... After all, the Lebanese government emphasized that it claims sovereignty over the evacuated territory and thus wants to cooperate with the UN. The UN mandate in Lebanon would theoretically be sufficient to control the situation--provided that UNIFIL is quickly reinforced."
BELGIUM: "An Opportunity To Take On The Lebanese, Syrian, Palestinian Questions"
Foreign editor Gerald Papy contended in independent La Libre Belgique (5/25): "It seems crucial to take advantage of this 'favorable moment'--which won't last--to solve the Lebanese, Syrian, and Palestinian questions. Very discreet on the Lebanese question, the inescapable American sponsor of the Arab-Israeli peace process should promptly intervene. Bill Clinton's legacy is also at stake."
CZECH REPUBLIC: "Israel Has Cost Israel Too Much"
A commentary by Frantisek Sulc for economic daily Hospodarske Noviny asserted (5/25): "The decision of the Israeli government to terminate after 22 years the occupation of south Lebanon is undoubtedly a step forward. This point of disagreement between the Jewish state and its Arab neighbors could not be resolved,...and the Israeli military presence has brought a considerable security and a political price. Its result was Israel's exhaustion and inability to reach results. The Israeli government's decision reflects a more amicable position of the cabinet; Barak follows a direction that could not have been possible during the government of his predecessor, Netanyahu. Even though there are opinions that Barak has betrayed Israel and lost Lebanon, the public mostly supports the government's decision."
DENMARK: "Lebanon Has Become Israel's Vietnam"
Centrist Kristeligt Dagblad commented (5/24): "The majority of the population does not wish to see more Israeli soldiers return in body-bags.... Israel is, at this late stage, in the process of scoring points with the international community...and this will put wind in Barak's sails. But a lot depends on how other countries in the region react. If Syria and Iran see advantages in peace, this may be able to be reached. As many countries have seen in the past, it is sometimes easier to move an army in than withdraw it."
HUNGARY: "Pullout That Surprised The World"
Independent Hungarian daily Nepszava concluded (5/25), "After the pullout from Lebanon the international pressure is likely to increase more than ever before on those Arab forces, countries, that do not declare the legitimacy of the Israeli state. That means that the Jewish state has taken a useful action from its own point of view too. But it would have been more useful for itself if it had decided on the move a bit sooner."
NORWAY: "A New Uncertainty In The Middle East"
The newspaper of record Aftenposten commented (5/25): "Normally there is all reason to salute the end of an occupation of another country's territory with happiness. This is also the case in the latest instance: Israel's withdrawal from an area in south Lebanon that the Israelis have held as a 'security zone' since 1978.... But the way that the withdrawal has been done casts a shadow over the happiness, even though it is uninhibited among Hizballah's supporters... But the Israelis did not wait for the Lebanese authorities to fill the gap, or for the international community to build a force that could control the situation.... With that, we have a new element of uncertainty in the Middle East, as if this area did not have enough problems from before.... Much will, therefore, depend on how Syria--Hizballah's supporter--acts in the near future, while the UN and other affected parties try to find out how to fill the vacuum after Israel, so that the conditions can be stabilized in the short and long run. Syria can restrain the most eager warriors if the country wants to, but the will is worn thin after very long negotiations with Israel about giving back the Golan Heights."
POLAND: "Peace Without Prospects"
Ryszard Malik wrote in centrist Rzeczpospolita (5/24): "In terms of resources, technologies and people, Israel is the only real military power in the Middle East, one that can bomb at any time many places in the entire region and show its military dominance. The world, though, will not approve such actions. To put it briefly, this would not pay off for Israel. Israel has no other way now but to turn its withdrawal from Lebanon into a propaganda success, and display the peaceful face of the Israeli authorities while pointing to Syria and Palestine as those that are
blocking the understanding."
RUSSIA: "Barak As Good As His Word"
Yury Yershov commented in reformist Vremya MN (5/25): "The head of the Israeli cabinet, taking office in June of last year, said he will pull out Israeli troops from South Lebanon by July of this year to settle the situation in all of the Middle East soon afterward. He is as good as his word on the first part of his promise.... Had Lebanon tamed the Hizballah hotheads, peace would have long since prevailed in the Middle East. The trouble with Beirut is that it is not the master of its own house, looking to Damascus every time it wants to do or say something. Syrian President Hafez Assad will not talk with the Israelis without preliminary conditions and seems quite content with tension on the Israeli-Lebanese border and uncertainty in relations between the Israelis and the Arabs. Barak, it seems, has planned it right. From now on Damascus will have to bear responsibility for the situation in the region and terrorist acts against Israel and Lebanese Christians. Maybe that will force Assad to sit down at the negotiating table with Jerusalem."
"Positive Move"
Sergei Sumbayev stated in centrist army daily Krasnaya Zvezda (5/25): "No doubt, the troop withdrawal from south Lebanon is a positive move, really attesting to Israel's new policy toward its neighbors. But rather than defusing the situation, it has made it worse. Experts predict Hizballah strikes against targets in northern Israel. Aggravation on the Lebanese-Israeli border may affect the nascent peace process in the Middle East."
SPAIN: "A Pullback For Peace"
Conservative ABC opined (5/25): "Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon has sparked a mostly joyful response among the Israeli population, who see it as the end of an unpopular conflict that cost the lives of a thousand soldiers. Some political observers, however, view it as Israel's first military defeat in its 50-year existence.... Now it is to be hoped that the 8,000 blue helmets requested by Kofi Annan will permit the UN to provide security for the area, as the great powers search for ways to turn the pullback into a decisive step towards peace in the Near East."
"Israel: Between Intifada And War"
Independent El Mundo remarked (5/23): "Israel has begun its withdrawal from south Lebanon, and Barak is determined to conclude final status negotiations with the Palestinians this year.... Hizballah, Hamas and other radical groups see the withdrawal as a victory of force over dialogue.... The unilateral pullback, which may have been an error on Barak's part at this stage in his negotiations with Arafat, leaves a vacuum that Christians and Muslims, who have been competing for the control of Lebanon since time immemorial, are hurrying to fill as the Syrian army looks attentively on. This is a powder keg ready to explode in the absence of an agreement between Jerusalem and Damascus."
TURKEY: "Peace Ahead?"
Soli Ozel expressed this view in intellectual/liberal Yeni Binyil (5/25): "Israel's sudden withdrawal, even with its tanks and ammunition left behind, from southern Lebanon has boosted the morale of the Arab world. Prime Minister Barak decided to pull back because the Israeli public was fed up with years of heavy casualties in Lebanon. Despite its efforts to prevent a withdrawal, Syria has failed and lost the significant trump card it used against Israel. Now
Barak is expected to make bold moves on the Palestinian and Syrian fronts in order to get closer to full implementation of the peace process."
CHINA: "Worry In The Wake Of Withdrawal"
Chen Keqin wrote in the intellectually-oriented Guangming Daily (Guangming Ribao, 5/25): "Media believe that it is easy for Israel to withdraw troops from south Lebanon, but difficult to extricate itself out of the remaining problems in the region. Obviously, historical feuds, religious disputes and ethnic confrontation cannot be completely eliminated through one withdrawal. There is still a long way to go before the Middle East region achieves genuine peace."
JAPAN: "Israeli Troops' Pullout To Further Peace Talks?"
Liberal Asahi remarked in an editorial (5/25): "Although we welcome Israel's...withdrawal from south Lebanon, the prospects for Middle East peace remain uncertain.. Hizballah guerrillas...vow to fight it out with the Israelis, who say that, if attacked, they will also launch a massive counterattack against Lebanon. The creation of new chaos in the former occupation zone must be avoided. The Israeli military withdrawal must be used as an important tool for furthering Middle East peace talks. We call for self-restraint on the part of Israel, Syria and Lebanon."
INDONESIA: "No Reconcilation If Hizballah Keeps Up Its Pursuit Of SLA"
Leading, independent Kompas predicted (5/25): "There will be no reconciliation if Hizballah guerrillas continue pursuing the remnants of the South Lebanon Army (SLA). Reconciliation will also not occur if what is left of the SLA continues to secretly cooperate with Israel, or works in Israel's interests instead of those of the Lebanese. There is also the question of whether Hizballah will cease its warfare after the Israeli withdrawal. The situation will remain fragile if the guerrillas continue attacking Israel, which would prod the Jews into harsh retaliation.... With its enemies gone, the problem is now [defining Hizballah's] role. It will not be easy for the Lebanese government to compromise with them.... A Lebanese failure to accommodate Hizballah's wishes could frustrate the guerrillas and convert them into troublemakers."
SOUTH KOREA: "Withdrawal Completed Amid Seeds Of Conflict"
Government-owned Daehan Maeil deemed (5/25): "It remains to be seen where the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon will take the Middle East peace process. Despite the skepticism the withdrawal has provoked, it has improved Israel's chances of achieving the action's immediate goal, which is to bring Syria to the negotiating table. An expected UN peacekeeping presence in southern Lebanon, in addition to the economic aid promised by the EU for reconstruction, has improved Israel's prospects. The future course of the Middle East peace process, it seems for now, depends on the Hizballah and other Islamic extremists, and how they behave in southern Lebanon."
"Withdrawal Amid The Air Of War"
Reporter Kang Sung-man observed in the independent Hankyoreh Shinmun (5/24): "The strategy of taking one step backward now in order to take two steps forward later, it seems, lies behind Israel's earlier-than-anticipated withdrawal from southern Lebanon. The goal is to get the Hizballah. Once Israel withdraws from the region, as has been required since 1978 by the UNSC, Israel would have complete justification to engage in open warfare with the guerrillas, as
well as the Lebanese, if they attack Israelis in its northern border region. Having carried out the UN requirement to withdraw, the Israelis will no longer have to refrain from making efforts to eradicate their enemies.... The Israeli withdrawal, in other words, has put an end to a 22-year-old occupation of southern Lebanon, but it may well have opened a whole new future conflict, more ferocious than the one in the past."
VIETNAM: "The Middle East Peace Process Is Casting A New Shadow "
Xuan Hanh wrote in Sai Gon Giai Phong, mouthpiece of Ho Chi Minh City's Communist Party (5/24): "The West has always suspected that Syria and Iran have backed and agitated Hezbollah troops in their attacks on Israel. It is these continued attacks on Israeli troops that cause the extremists in Tel Aviv to exert pressure on Prime Minister Edhuk Barak, thus making the Middle East peace process even more protracted. So, it is not by chance that Mr. Barak vowed to retaliate against any attack on Israeli troops as they withdraw from southern Lebanon.... This is a 'diplomatic' tactic by Ehud Barak and also the price that the Palestinians must pay for the withdrawal. Any mistake, which are impossible to avoid in this situation, can be used as an excuse for Israel to delay the implementation of its commitments."
CANADA: "Lebanon's Liberation"
The liberal Toronto Star (5/24) editorialized: "It is easy to miss the main point in the smoke and fury of Israel's hasty, stumbling retreat from southern Lebanon.... This looks more like war than establishing conditions for peace. Yet Prime Minister Ehud Barak is complying with United Nations resolutions demanding an end to this long, at times brutal, invasion.... Young Israeli soldiers kissed the earth on returning home from a 'security zone' that is anything but.... The Arab world, too, has cause to celebrate. This is the last battleground where Israelis and Arabs still strafe and bomb each other on a routine basis.... Because Israelis are the invaders--albeit in their own defense--they can expect to garner little credit for this pullout. Still, every withdrawal requires political courage. All are prerequisites for peace. As such, they merit a response in kind.... The Lebanese and their Palestinian cousins have reason to celebrate this liberation. But their guns should be fired in the air, in joy, not turned against Israel in hatred. That was what dragged Israeli troops into Lebanon in the first place, with terrible results."
"Not With A Bang"
The leading Globe and Mail (5/24) observed that "Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak is gambling that Hizballah's desire for political influence in Beirut is greater than any dream it may have at striking at Israel itself. He also is betting that his gambit of unilateral withdrawal will not spoil his chance for a more important peace treaty with neighbouring Syria. In cutting his losses in Lebanon, these are chances well worth taking."
ARGENTINA: "Lebanon: Israel's 22-Year Long Occupation Comes To An End"
Daniel Blumenthal, business-financial Ambito Financiero's Tel Aviv-based correspondent, opined (5/24): "In the plans for an 'orderly evacuation' which are now in a drawer at the Israeli Army's General Command, the UN was supposed to play a highly important role, filling the vacuum that would result in the region. UN Secretary General Koffi Annan asked for an increase in the number of troops to 8,000 men. But now, this too is uncertain, more so after the United States showed its lack of involvement (in the matter)."##
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
