Qana outcry creates Israeli dilemma
By Frank Gardner
BBC News, Jerusalem

The tragedy of Sunday's explosion in Qana that killed more than 50 Lebanese civilians has presented Israel with a dilemma.

Does it press on regardless with its campaign to destroy Hezbollah militarily, or does it respond to widespread international condemnation of its actions in Lebanon and wind down its operations there in anticipation of the new UN-mandated stabilisation force?

From here in Jerusalem, there are mixed signals.

On the one hand, the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice left Israel on Monday with a pledge by Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to suspend air strikes across Lebanon for 48 hours, to allow for an investigation into the Qana bombing and for Lebanese civilians to move northwards. She also appeared confident that a more lasting ceasefire was within sight.

On the other hand, the Israeli air force resumed air strikes in Lebanon within hours, targeting suspected Hezbollah positions in the south on Monday in support of its ground troops there.

Operation

Israeli spokesmen have said this is within the terms of the agreement. There has also been a robust statement by Israel's Defence Minister Amir Peretz in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset.

If an immediate ceasefire is declared, the extremists will rear their heads anew
Israeli Defence Minister Amir Peretz

Amid loud heckling from Israeli Arab deputies - at least one of whom had to be escorted out of the chamber - he declared that far from agreeing to any immediate ceasefire Israel would "expand and deepen its offensive".

He added: "If an immediate ceasefire is declared, the extremists will rear their heads anew. In a few months we will be back in the same place."

But underlying these words is mounting concern in Israel that three weeks of intensive bombardment and repeated operations on the ground have apparently failed to break the back of Hezbollah's fighting capability.

Most Israelis did not expect this offensive to last this long; they were certainly unprepared for the torrent of world condemnation for the many hundreds of civilian casualties caused by Israeli air strikes in Lebanon.

Israelis see themselves as fighting a terrorist organisation that they view as the vanguard of a state (Iran) dedicated to their destruction.

Many see this as a fight for national survival and cannot understand why the world is not more sympathetic over the deaths of Israeli citizens deliberately targeted by Hezbollah's rockets. (To date, more than 50 Israelis have been killed in the conflict since 12 July, while more than 750 Lebanese have lost their lives).

Political solution

Increasingly, certain Israeli analysts and columnists are calling for a political solution with some even suggesting it is time to invite Israel's old foe Syria to the negotiating table.

But the one thing nearly all Israelis agree on is that they do not want to see a return to the status quo three weeks ago whereby Hezbollah's fighters were deployed and dug in right up to the northern Israeli border, together with an arsenal of rockets and missiles.

One of the questions now likely to be dominating discussions in Israel's security cabinet is how to deal with southern Lebanon in the weeks and possibly months before the international stabilisation force arrives and deploys there.

Here, Israel finds itself in a Catch 22 situation.

If it withdraws all its forces back over the border, it risks seeing Hezbollah's fighters filling the military vacuum and reoccupying the ground.

If it remains in place, it will be seen as an occupying force, providing a rallying point for widespread Arab anger and a target for Hezbollah's surviving forces to attack.

If it withdraws but continues to harass Hezbollah with air strikes, it risks another Qana.

New force

This week the diplomatic focus shifts to New York where the UN Security Council is expected to mandate the terms of a ceasefire, a political settlement for Lebanon and the multinational stabilisation force to support the Lebanese government forces as they move into southern Lebanon.

But what has yet to be agreed on are the rules of engagement - ie, in what circumstances this new force would use firepower to keep the peace.

The existing UN force in south Lebanon, Unifil, has been there for years yet has been almost totally ineffectual in preventing either Hezbollah rocket attacks or Israeli incursions and air raids.

For the new force to work, it will have to be accepted by all parties and, it will have to have teeth.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/5232750.stm

Published: 2006/07/31 17:31:17 GMT

© BBC MMVI