Jerusalem Issue Brief
Institute for Contemporary Affairs
founded jointly at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
with the Wechsler Family Foundation
Vol. 6, No. 1 -17 July 2006
The Opening Round of Iran's War Against the West
Dore Gold
Since the 1982 Lebanon War, the United Nations Security Council has
repeatedly demanded that all foreign forces leave Lebanese territory. This
evacuation of outside armies and terrorist groups was rightly seen as the
prerequisite for the pacification of the volatile Israel-Lebanon border and
the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty.
It was disturbing to see Secretary-General Kofi Annan shaking hands with
Hizballah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah on June 20, 2000, during a visit to
Beirut. The UN strategy was to give Hizballah some recognition and thereby
obtain good behavior on its part.
In 2002, Lebanese media reported the arrival of Iranian Revolutionary Guards
to train Hizballah in the use of Fajr 3 and Fajr 5 medium-range missiles
with a range of 70 kilometers, deployed in southern Lebanon and aimed at
Israel's northern cities. So in return for Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon,
it acquired a more powerful Hizballah, as well as Iranian forces taking up
positions directly on its borders.
The chief aims of the entire Western alliance - including Israel - in the
current conflict are: full implementation of UN Security Council resolutions
that call for the complete dismantling of Hizballah and the deployment of
the Lebanese army along the Israel-Lebanon border; and the removal of all
Iranian forces and equipment from Lebanese territory, along with any
lingering Syrian presence.
Defeating Iran's opening shot in this Middle Eastern war is not just Israel's
interest, but the collective interest of the entire civilized world. Israel's
strategy depends upon isolating the Hizballah insurgency in Lebanon from any
reinforcement from Iran and its allies by air, land, or sea.
The UN and Lebanon
Since the 1982 Lebanon War, the United Nations Security Council has
repeatedly demanded that all foreign forces leave Lebanese territory. This
evacuation of outside armies and terrorist groups was rightly seen as the
prerequisite for the pacification of the volatile Israel-Lebanon border and
the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty. When the Israeli government
completed its withdrawal from its security zone in southern Lebanon in 2000,
one might have expected that this international principle would have been
asserted, and a concerted UN effort begun to rid Lebanon of the Syrian army
and other foreign forces - notably those of Iran.
Unfortunately, the situation in Lebanon was totally neglected, and ominous
developments followed. Israel's withdrawal to what the UN called the "blue
line" was recognized by Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a full Israeli
withdrawal from Lebanese territory. His determination was confirmed by the
UN Security Council on July 27, 2000, with the adoption of Resolution 1310.
But the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hizballah claimed that Israel
actually had more land to give to Lebanon. In particular, they wanted a tiny
sliver of Golan territory, called the Shebaa Farms, that had been disputed
between Israel and Syria.
This outstanding grievance, which had no international backing, was used to
justify Hizballah's continuing war against Israel. But rather than
forcefully reject Hizballah's stand, different UN agencies seemed to treat
the organization as a legitimate party to Lebanon's conflict with Israel. It
was disturbing to see Secretary-General Kofi Annan shaking hands with
Hizballah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah on June 20, 2000, during a visit to
Beirut. The UN strategy was to give Hizballah some recognition and thereby
obtain good behavior on its part. To make matters worse, UNIFIL, the UN
peacekeeping force, sent liaison officers to Hizballah. But this approach
only legitimized an organization that, prior to 9/11, was widely viewed as
more dangerous than al-Qaeda.
What made Hizballah's decision to maintain its dispute with Israel so
dangerous was Iran's decision to deploy medium-range missiles in southern
Lebanon, aimed at Israel's northern cities. In 2002, Lebanese media reported
the arrival of Iranian Revolutionary Guards to train Hizballah in the use of
these new weapons, known as the Fajr 3 and Fajr 5, which, unlike the older
Soviet-made Katyusha rockets, had a range of up to 70 kilometers. Israel had
withdrawn from Lebanon, but in return, not only had it acquired a more
powerful Hizballah, but also Iranian forces taking up positions directly on
its borders.
The situation was eerily reminiscent of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Then,
the Soviet Union had only unreliable intercontinental ballistic missiles for
striking the U.S., so they positioned shorter-range missiles in nearby Cuba
instead. Today, the Iranians have a 1,300-kilometer-range Shahab missile for
striking Israel, and are working feverishly to improve its capabilities,
while investing in longer-range missiles aimed at Western Europe. Teheran
doubtless calculates that if the West tries to take measures against its
nuclear program, its Lebanese arsenal could hold Israel hostage. The
difference between 1962 and 2006 is that, while President Kennedy made sure
that the Soviets withdrew their missiles from Cuba, the international
community has done nothing about the growing missile threat in Lebanon.
International attention was drawn again to Lebanon in 2005 after the
assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri by Syrian agents and the "Cedar
Revolution" that followed. The UN Security Council called yet again (in
Resolution 1559) for all non-Lebanese forces to leave Lebanon. This time it
added a call "for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and
non-Lebanese militias," and repeated its 2004 call to the Lebanese
government "to ensure its effective authority throughout the south,
including the deployment of Lebanese armed forces." The UN Security Council
wanted the Lebanese Army sitting on the Israeli-Lebanese border - not
Hizballah.
Had UN resolutions on Lebanon been implemented, then no Israeli soldiers
would have been kidnapped in northern Israel this month and there would be
no Hizballah rockets raining on Israeli civilians in Haifa, Nahariya, Safed,
and Tiberias.
So what should be the aims of the entire Western alliance - including
Israel - in the current conflict? The chief goals are:
First, full implementation of UN Security Council resolutions that call for
the complete dismantling of Hizballah and the deployment of the Lebanese
army along the Israel-Lebanon border instead.
Second, the removal of all Iranian forces and equipment from Lebanese
territory, along with any lingering Syrian presence.
A Regional War
At the same time, there is a need to recognize that this is a regional war.
Iran is seeking to dominate Iraq, particularly its southern Shia areas - the
provinces where British troops are deployed - and hopes to encircle both
Israel and the Sunni heartland of the Arab world. Syria is Iran's main Arab
ally in this effort. There is no question that Iran's main aim is to
dominate the oil-producing areas by agitating the Shia populations of
Kuwait, Bahrain, and the eastern provinces of Saudi Arabia.
Defeating Iran's opening shot in this Middle Eastern war is not just Israel's
interest, but the collective interest of the entire civilized world. Israel's
strategy depends upon isolating the Hizballah insurgency in Lebanon from any
reinforcement from Iran and its allies by air, land, or sea. Hence, Israel
has had to bomb the runways of Beirut International Airport and the
Beirut-Damascus highway, and impose a naval blockade around Lebanon.
The Gaza Front
Finally, there is a second front in this war: the Gaza Strip. The Hamas
movement, which came out of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, has decided to
throw in its lot with Shia Iran and Hizballah. Indeed, just after Israel
withdrew its settlements from the Gaza Strip last August, Hizballah moved
its headquarters for coordination with the Palestinians from Beirut to Gaza
itself. Iran is paying for Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians.
Like Hizballah, Hamas has embedded its military capabilities in civilian
areas. Israeli planes drop leaflets to warn Palestinian civilians of
impending attacks, even if they give the terrorists advance warning as well.
Israel must protect its own civilians from ongoing missile attacks, whether
from Lebanon or the Gaza Strip. The first duty of any government is the
defense of its citizens. It is also Israel's legal right as enshrined in
Article 51 of the UN Charter. International media are focusing on Israeli
air strikes on Beirut, leading viewers to forget that Israel is the victim
in this conflict. Its air force would not be in the skies of Lebanon and its
tanks would not be in northern Gaza if Israel had not been attacked first.
In this context, primary responsibility for what is happening rests squarely
with Iran and its local proxies. Our common adversaries want to replace the
hope for Arab democracy with a dictatorial theocracy. The international
community must see the UN resolutions on Lebanon implemented and
international security restored. That is the first step towards securing a
pluralistic Middle East, founded on representative government and respect
for international law.
Dore Gold is the President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and
served as Israel's ambassador to the UN from 1997 to 1999.
This Jerusalem Issue Brief is available online at:
www.jcpa.org/brief/brief006-1.htm
Dore Gold, Publisher; Yaakov Amidror, ICA Program Director; Mark Ami-El,
Managing Editor. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (Registered Amuta), 13
Tel-Hai St., Jerusalem, Israel; Tel. 972-2-5619281, Fax. 972-2-5619112,
Email: jcpa@netvision.net.il. In U.S.A.: Center for Jewish Community
Studies, 5800 Park Heights Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21215; Tel. 410-664-5222;
Fax 410-664-1228. Website: www.jcpa.org. © Copyright. The opinions expressed
herein do not necessarily reflect those of the Board of Fellows of the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
The Institute for Contemporary Affairs (ICA) is dedicated
to providing a forum for Israeli policy discussion and debate.
To subscribe to the Jerusalem Issue Brief list, please send a blank email
message to:
brief4-subscribe@jcpa.org
| 
