14 farms and a dialogue

On March 14 2006, the 14 leaders of Lebanon reportedly agreed that 14 farms along the border with Syria and Israel are Lebanese. According to Berri, who announced the agreement after adjourning the National Dialogue till March 22, there was unanimous agreement among the attendees that the farms are Lebanese.  More ambiguously, however, our leaders reportedly "affirmed their support to the government in its efforts to prove the identity of the farms and its borders in accordance with UN regulations. "

Before delving into what this means, it should be noted that the agreement included (translation as faithful to Arabic text as possible without being too literal):

Agreement on the UN investigation committee, the international tribunal and expanding the mandate of the investigation committee.  (yes, we needed an agreement on this!)

The Palestinian issue: Encourage the cabinet to solve the issues of Palestinian weapons outside the camps in six months and follow up "on efforts in following up on living, economic and humanitarian matters."  The text continues with "the affirmation that the state is responsible and committed to protecting the camps from any attack, and rejecting the settlement of Palestinians and affirming their right of return."

Lebanese Syrian relations:  1. Syria should not be made into a source of security threats to Lebanon and vice versa. Ensure the safety of both Syrian and Lebanese citizens (presumably and hopefully in Lebanon!), control the borders and call on the cabinet to take the appropriate measures.  2. Establish friendly ties based on trust, embodied in establishing diplomatic ties and embassies. 3. Activate and support the joint committee to close the file of missing persons in both countries. (yes, both countries!)

Presidency and "resistance weapons": Discussions on these issues were postponed till a later session, to be held on March 22.

One could conclude from the above that Amal and Hizbullah did a good job representing Syrian interests in the dialogue. The end result so far is a contradictory set of agreements that will neither change certain parties' loyalties nor move the country forward. For how can you reconcile an agreement on a UN investigation that will undoubtedly implicate the Syrian regime with another that states that Lebanon cannot "be made" a source of threats to that regime? So if the UN report, due soon, finds the Syrian government guilty, what would be an acceptable reaction from the Lebanese cabinet?

The issue of the Shebaa farms, we can safely say, was not resolved, mostly because the principal issue, the weapons of Hizbullah, was postponed. Meanwhile, what does it to mean to agree that the farms are Lebanese, and then call on the cabinet to prove the identity of the farms and its borders in accordance with UN regulations?

There is a myth that if the Shebaa farms are found to be Lebanese, Hizbullah's arms will become legitimate and Lebanon automatically gains the right to armed struggle against Israeli occupation.  This myth stems from a widely-shared illusion that resistance against occupation is legitimate until the end of days. Nothing can impair the right of groups or individuals to defend themselves against armed attacks, it is believed. Here, Article 51 of the UN charter, is often cited:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

The UN Security Council HAS taken measures. As far as it's concerned, Israel's occupation of Lebanon has ended. No groups in Lebanon have the right to engage in "self-defence" against Israel. Not only would we be acting outside international law, but should we decide to continue fighting, we are no longer protected by the Fourth Geneva convention, which does not apply when occupation ceases. So if Hizbullah tomorrow shells Israeli posts in the Shebaa farms, Israel can take us to the security council and actually have a legitimate case against us. For Hizbullah, technically, is waging a liberation war on behalf of Syria, which until 1967, had internationally recognized sovereignty over the area.

It is not clear everyone in the "March 14" grouping is aware of the above. Some probably think they clinched a compromise by inserting the bit about "acting in accordance with UN regulations."

One would hope that acting "in accordance with UN regulations" means the cabinet would formally request that Syria, which established sovereignty over the Shebaa farms in the 1950s, give the territories "back" to Lebanon. Furthermore, Syria would have to agree to border demarcation with Lebanon, after decades of refusing to do so. Lebanon would have to suddenly reverse an official policy of not laying claim to these territories (until 2000, that is).

If we really want the Sehbaa farms, then we must acknowledge that what we have here is territorial dispute between Lebanon and Syria, a consequence of poorly demarcated borders and historical Syrian refusal to recognize Lebanon as an independent and sovereign country.  Because Syria would never give Lebanon this card, Lebanon will need to take Syria to the International Court of Justice and establish the territory as Lebanese.

It is not clear that anyone other than Jumblatt is openly aware of the dangers of agreeing to something Hizbullah and Amal will now use to legitimize their armed struggle against Israel. Hariri and Aoun may have just given the pro-Syrian parties a gift by agreeing to the identity of the farms without guaranteeing an agreement on Hizbullah's weapons and who is qualified to wage a war of "resistance". 

Let's hope they know what they're doing.

UPDATE. Berri reportedly also said: "The resistance will keep its weapons until the liberation of every inch of Lebanese territory." Hizbullah's Mohammad Raad has apparently made a similar statement (hat tip Tony), declaring a consensus on Lebanese "sovereignty" over Shebaa, meaning the "resistance" can continue its open-ended and illegal war.

It appears like Aoun, Hariri and Geagea have just surrendered to Hizbullah and Syria.

Comments

[Ghassan Karam]

The Lebanese are doing one more time what they do best. Resolve an issue by pretending that it is not there and by refusing to take a stand. I have no doubt that many will argue that the Lebanon that will ultimately emerge from this crisis will be a better place than the Lebanon that was under the direct Syrian tutelage, and they might be right but that is not good enough. It seems that recreating the Lebanon that existed thirty years ago will satisfy the majority and that is their right. I have no interest in reviving that Lebanon because in essense it was as bankrupt , sick and diseased as the Lebanon of recent years. We had a chance to create a different state, a modern state, a democratic state and a just state but we just did not have the will and the desire to do that. Again it is our privilege to make a choice and we seem to have made ours in favour of the status quo.

Alas, the vision of a truly new Lebanon have died. Don't ask for whom the bells toll because ,dear country ,they toll for thee.

I think it was too much for the Lebanese to handle sudden change eventhough the winds of change were howling and the opportunity was ever so present to progress lebanon into its next epoch.Lebanon has been shackled for such a long time,that when it had its moment in the sun,it stopped,basking in the rays,like a prisoner let free after so long,he freezes momentarily enjoying the sunshine in great disbelief that this is actually happening.
For Lebanon to become the modern democratic nation that so many have cried for in the past,evenmore,the present,thanks to a spirited people who have had enough,it needs more time....it needs re-rooting,re-soiling and re-seeding,only then will the confessional net that have had the Lebanese poeple intermeshed disperse.We need to perceive retrospectively the negative branches of our history,and only then shall we plant the positive seeds of our future.
Shebaa? where the hell is that,did anyone give a damn before?why now,when the time to progress do we bicker about Shebaa,the palestinian camps,and other excuses that take the light away from the important subjects.Its gonna take a hell lot longer than we think,but atleast the wheels are in motion,so dont look at it so bleakly,even amidst the turmoil,the political stagnation,there was a voice that thundered"we want the truth,we have had enough",hopefully the power and energy behind the spirit of the million man march,would cause a torrent that will wash away the injustices that the Lebanese people have lived under for so long.

[JoseyWales]

To me too, this smacks of non-debate on side issues. Our people keep sticking their heads in the sand (to be polite), and still hope for a heathy outcome?

In the sane world, people get the documents first, and then decide on the nationality of Shebaa. Not the other way around.

But again who cares? Don't get me wrong, the farms, if Lebanese, should be returned. But really don't we have other more pressing problems now? All know this is a Hezb/Syria ploy, call them on it, don't fall for it.

This is an old theme of mine: frame the debate, you frame the outcome. In Lebanon, the debate is alawys framed to the detriment of the Lebansese from the onset: Palestinian issues, right of return, Shebaa, Syria's security.... To hell with all that, if the issues are not framed with OUR current and future security and well-being in perspective, we will, and are, losing everytime.

We operate in an environment where the security of the citizen (and state) and getting a job for Ahmed Shmoe in Tripoli, come way behind Jibreel's whims, Bashar "concerns", right of return issues, Shebaa etc....

Hell just yesterday two gvmnt ministers Fatfat and Rizk said (I paraphrase, check Naharnet)): only expect a half-assed wobbly solution because Lebanon's fate is linked to all these regional factors.

Your job, MORONS, is to devise (imperfect) ways to protect/isolate/insulate your people from all that. We cannot be in perpetual crisis management, we need long term solutions, and if YOU don't have them RESIGN.

[Dr Victorino de la Vega]

The goateed merchants of the temple and their Druze war criminals friends thought they’d seize the Baabda presidential palace before spring in a “white coup”: after all, they had the support of Washington’s Neocon Komitern and Riyadh’s Salafist Sanhedrin…

And then came General Michel Aoun: he single-handedly turned the table on the “resistants of the eleventh hour” who had sheepishly done Syria’s bidding for more than two decades.

By allying himself with Sayyed Hassan, Aoun was able to free the Lebanese polity from the shackles of Cheney and Chirac: he laid the foundation of a third Lebanese Republic where Christians, Shiites and secular Sunnis can finally live in peace.

[Ghassan Karam]

Vic,
I hope that you are right and that a third republic is finally established on solid secular grounds. But why is it that only the Sunnis need be secular? RWad the implied refernce to non secular Christians and non secular Shiites intended or was it an error?