If Syria Is
Expected To Withdraw from Lebanon, Shouldn’t Israel Withdraw From the
Occupied Territories?
By Bill Fletcher,
Jr.
http://www.commondreams.org/
I have been following events in Lebanon
very closely for quite some time, but I have been especially concerned
about developments since the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik
Hariri. There are two points about recent events that continue to gnaw at
me.
The first is the alleged Syrian
connection. While the Bush administration and many in the US media have
either implied or alleged that the Syrian government was behind the
assassination, going so far as to assert that this connection is obvious,
I remain unconvinced. What I keep asking is this: what would the Syrians
have to gain by such an assassination at this time? Syria has been ‘under
the gun’ of the Bush administration for quite some time. The so-called
“Syrian Accountability Act,” which imposed sanctions on Syria, was one
step in an escalation of tensions. The allegations by the Bush
administration of Syrian collaboration with the Iraqi resistance, and
their simultaneous underplaying of Syrian assistance to the USA in anti-Al
Qaeda operations, has set the tone for relations between the two
countries. Thus, my question remains: what would the Syrians have to gain
by such an assassination right now?
To be honest, it seems that there are
other parties that have a greater interest in such an assassination
precisely because the Syrians would be blamed. A focus on Syria would
increase the likelihood of US military (covert or overt) action against
Syria and further the country’s isolation. And, of course, there is no
Soviet Union for the Syrians to turn to for assistance. It, therefore,
makes little sense that the Syrians would carry out such a high profile
action at this time when they would know that the ramifications could be
disastrous.
The second point concerns the demand
for a Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon. Leaving aside, for a moment, the
Syrian rationale for their troops being in Lebanon, it should go without
saying that all countries should enjoy the right to national
self-determination. That should mean that countries do not invade one
another, or station their troops in a permanent occupation or
semi-occupation of another country.
That said, we now are treated to
regular sermons by the Bush administration about the unfair and illegal
existence of the Syrian deployment of troops to Lebanon without any
acknowledgement that (1)the US is occupying Iraq, with no end in sight,
and (2)to the south of Lebanon there is an occupation and military
deployment that has been going on since 1967. Needless to say I am
referencing the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands.
What is so striking about the Bush
silence (and hypocrisy) around the Syrian troop question is that in 1967,
shortly after the 6-Day War during which Israel occupied vast tracks of
Arab land, the United Nations issued a resolution calling for the
immediate end to the Israeli occupation and their pull out from the
territories. In the nearly thirty-eight years since then, the Israeli
government has ignored this resolution and all subsequent calls for
withdrawal, and instead instituted an internationally illegal program of
establishing settlements on Palestinian land. During this time the US,
under various administrations, has done nothing to pressure the Israelis
to withdraw: no sanctions, no coalition of the willing, no nothing.
So, we are told that somehow Syrian
troop deployments in Lebanon
are bad, while Israeli troops and settlements on Palestinian territory are
either acceptable or are to be treated with respectful silence.
When one considers these facts, and
contrasts them with the actual statements by the Bush administration, does
anyone have to ask why the US has so little moral credibility when it
comes to international affairs? Does anyone have to further ask why the US
is increasingly hated in the Arab and Muslim worlds? In an era when those
in power do not seem to be constrained by the facts on the ground, perhaps
an answer to these questions is too obvious to verbalize.
Ahmed Amr
is the editor of
www.NileMedia.com. This article can be published and distributed at
will.
March 4, 2005
BACK TO TOP ■
COMMENT
© 2004 Bulatlat
■ Alipato Publications
Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.