(April 17) - Israel's air strike at a Syrian radar site in Lebanon early yesterday morning signals that the rules have finally changed: Israel will not tolerate attacks across the northern border. Rather than contemplate "retaliation," Syria and Lebanon should implement their responsibilities under United Nations Security Council Resolution 425, now that Israel has done its part to the letter.
Resolution 425, passed on March 19, 1978, has three parts: a call for "strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon," a call on Israel to "immediately" withdraw from Lebanon, and the decision to establish the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
As usual, Resolution 425 was biased in that it was much more definite about Israel's need to withdraw than it was about the need to stop the attacks that precipitated Israel's presence in the first place. Yet now that Israel has withdrawn, the other components of 425 remain glaringly unimplemented: restoring Lebanon's "political independence," its "effective authority" in the south, and ensuring "international peace and security" along the border with Israel.
Israel has kept its side of the bargain, as certified by the United Nations. The "Blue Line" that serves as a temporary border between Israel and Lebanon was demarcated by the UN with considerable effort and with full participation by both countries. The whole point of this exercise was to grant Israel its right to sit peacefully on its side of the line, while the Lebanese restored their sovereignty and rebuilt their economy on their side.
The spoilers here are Iran and Syria which, through their proxy, Hizbullah, have blithely continued to use Lebanese territory to attack Israel without suffering the consequences. Though the Lebanese government predictably condemned Israel's air strike, anyone who cares about the independence of Lebanon should be thanking Israel. As long as the Lebanese government does not have the power or the will to resist its exploitation by Iran and Syria, Israel will have to act against those foreign forces directly. As a by-product of protecting its own security, Israel will also be strengthening the hand of Lebanese who are tired of their country being a combination launching pad and punching bag.
Nor will the silent cheers for Israel be limited to Lebanese patriots. In Jordan, another perennial target of Syrian aggression and intimidation, The Jordan Times just observed Sunday that "the presence of some 35,000 Syrian troops in Lebanon cannot and must not be considered either 'normal' or permanent by any party in the region and beyond." It is also telling that, though Jordan condemned the air strike, the visit here of Jordanian Foreign Minister Abdulilah Khatib took place yesterday as scheduled.
The United States, for its part, can well say "I told you so" to Syria, since it has been warning Damascus for months that continuing to give Hizbullah free rein will produce an Israeli reaction. Two reactions to the strike within Israel, however, if not surprising, are still disturbing and disappointing.
MK Abdul Malik Dahamshe (United Arab List) rushed to send a condolence letter to the Syrian government, expressing concern for the deaths of Syrian soldiers manning the radar site that Israel destroyed. By showing once again that his sympathies are with Israel's enemies (and not for the Israeli soldier who lost his life), Dahamshe is slighting his Israeli Arab constituency, whose hopes to be treated as loyal citizens are harmed by his extreme disloyalty.
Opposition leader Yossi Sarid (Meretz) criticized Dahamshe, but he, too, criticized the Israeli action. Sarid's baseless complaints are unfortunate, because they look like opposition for the sake of opposition. Sarid should understand that there is no law that the opposition must oppose everything the government does, even if it is acting prudently against foreign threats.
It is ironic that Sarid should raise the specter of "Sharon's 18-year war in Lebanon." The entire rationale of Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon was that it would gain us the right to take precisely the type of action that was taken yesterday. By opposing our legitimately exercising deterrence from this side of the border, it is Sarid, not Sharon, who risks eventually forcing Israel back into Lebanon.