What did Arab foreign ministers really achieve in the Lebanese capital Monday? Dina Ezzat in Beirut searches for answers It was day 26 of Israel's bombardment of Lebanon; one of the worst days of aggression against Lebanese civilian targets, including villages, houses, infrastructure and moving vehicles. For the Lebanese, it was just another dawn in a bloody war lasting a month. For Arab foreign ministers, it was the day they were to go to Beirut, meet together, and demonstrate the solidarity that their respective peoples have been forcefully pressing for. The extraordinary Arab summit that was held in Beirut Monday, upon the proposal of Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faissal and with high- level attendance, was the second extraordinary gathering of Arab foreign ministers since the beginning of the Israeli aggression. Like the first meeting, which took place in the second week of the war, this week's meeting offered no spectacular results. Indeed, little of what the Lebanese -- those with and against Hizbullah -- were hoping for was realised. Having arrived in Beirut at noon, the Arab foreign ministers convened a short and closed meeting with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora. Forty-five minutes later they went into open session, marked by a tearful speech by Siniora, before withdrawing in private discussion for about two hours. Then it was lunchtime. "So they came here to visit, eat a fabulous Lebanese lunch and run straight back home," commented one unimpressed Lebanese journalist. This was not the only cynical voice in the press corps. Nor was it only the Lebanese who were jaded having waited nearly four weeks for the humble level of official Arab support to develop. Expectations of the Arab foreign ministers were very limited. And in very sad fashion, the outcome lived up to the anticipation. The resolution adopted by the ministerial meeting, following a proposal tabled by the Lebanese government, offered no sign of defiance in the face of Israeli aggression. There were no measures to be taken, or even deliberated, by Arab countries to retaliate against Israel or international silence -- not to mention US support for the aggression. There were just words of solidarity with Lebanon, which had been previously voiced, and promises of reconstruction assistance. Despite fresh Israeli atrocities, the resolution did not go beyond pledging support for the seven-point plan proposed by Siniora in Rome last month. Lebanese diplomats say that their government did not request anything further of the Arab ministers because they did not expect much. For their part, Arab diplomats say that nobody was expecting Egypt or Jordan to suspend diplomatic relations with Israel, nor for Saudi Arabia and other oil-producing Gulf states to announce a suspension of their oil production to prompt an end to US bias towards Israel. "Of course they were not going to do any of this. Of course they just had to come for a few hours to save face before their peoples," commented a Lebanese cameraman as he was told of the cancellation of the press conference that Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa and Emirate Foreign Minister Mohamed Ben Zayed were scheduled to convene at the end of the short ministerial meeting. "What would they have to tell us? They have nothing to tell us that would be different from the statements they made upon their arrival," the cameraman said. The press conference was left to Siniora, whose speech at the opening session of the meeting made six references to the willingness of his government to "expand its control over the entire Lebanese territories" -- the slug reference to deployment of the Lebanese army in South Lebanon after six years of strict Hizbullah control in the wake of the Hizbullah-led liberation of South Lebanon in 2000. In coordinated tone with statements made by Arab officials, Siniora told unmoved reporters that the ministerial meeting took the side of his government in its efforts to get an immediate ceasefire and restore its sovereignty fully. Siniora, who became emotional more than once when stressing in his open session speech his country's Arab affiliation, was happy to announce full ministerial support to his seven-point peace plan proposing an end to hostilities, Lebanese army control of the south upon a prompt Israeli withdrawal, and a coordinated release of prisoners on both sides. Siniora's proposal would limit the dominance of Hizbullah in the south -- to the satisfaction of Israel and disappointment of Syria and Iran, who sympathise with Hizbullah's defiance -- and opens a door for ending Israel's occupation of the Shebaa Farms. It was not an easy task, some insiders say, to get the entire ministerial meeting to back this plan in full. Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moallem, for one, inaugurated the closed session by expressing reservations on the seven-point plan. Al-Moallem attempted to stir a debate over the Lebanese text by seeking to include in a final resolution indirect reference to the right of Hizbullah to have a special status in peace deal decision-making with Israel. According to informed sources, Al-Moallem wanted the final resolution to include a commitment by the Lebanese government to seek the views and consent of all political parties in Lebanon prior to pursuing any deal to end the war. Further, he wanted specific reference made to the resistance of Hizbullah. The Lebanese prime minister, who insisted that his government was elected by popular mandate and that it is not expected to solicit, as it exercises its prerogatives, a stamp of approval of Hizbullah, flatly rejected both demands. Siniora also insisted that it was the entire Lebanese people who were standing fast in the face of aggression -- not just Hizbullah. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit, reportedly cut short a growing confrontation between Siniora and Moallem, whose presence in Lebanon was protested by certain segments of the Lebanese public. "We are in accordance with the draft Lebanese resolution as it is. We are here to support Lebanon and we should support this resolution," Abul-Gheit reportedly said as he waved the text of the resolution. Most Arab foreign ministers applauded in what many participating diplomats qualified as a sign of growing impatience with any political position that could hamper desperate -- and as Arab diplomats themselves acknowledge, "humble" -- diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire. "Syria wants to support Hizbullah. Some may agree and some may not agree. At the end of the day nobody is really talking about the elimination of Hizbullah. What we are talking about is an end to this war," commented an Egyptian diplomat. He added that a crucial factor to end this war was to secure the ability of the Lebanese government to "extend its authority over all Lebanese territory". There is a growing consensus within Arab diplomatic quarters that reaching a security "understanding" between the Lebanese and Israeli governments is essential to end hostilities, because while Israel has failed -- to the surprise of many -- to eliminate the combat capacity of Hizbullah, it has not yet lost the war. "The Israelis are driven by their military deterrence mentality. Israel has for six years wanted to deter Hizbullah. Now it has an opportunity and does not want to let go of it," commented one diplomatic source. He added that while Hizbullah is "showing great steadfastness," Israel "is not without the military capacity or the public support to continue the war," adding that "for both Israel and Hizbullah the level of pain is becoming irrelevant in comparison to the level of endurance. And the more endurance each side will show, the longer the war will get." Arab foreign ministers were realistic enough to realise that their meeting in Beirut would not bring an end to the Israeli war because they neither have the means nor are willing to use the few cards they have to obtain this objective. The best that Arab foreign ministers hoped for -- or would offer -- was to move towards reducing the number of days this already long and destructive war would continue. Reducing the suffering, Lebanese sources say, is the maximum that Beirut, at the official level, was hoping to achieve. In a parallel political show, Arab officials, at the highest level, were again privately and publicly blaming Hizbullah for Lebanon's misery. They were again affirming their utter opposition to suspending, much less severing, diplomatic ties with Israel or to block oil exports to the West. They were also, again, exchanging accusations on the root causes of Arab impotence to stop the war against Lebanon. Meanwhile, in the hope of persuading the international community -- particularly the United States -- of the ability of the Lebanese government to bring Hizbullah under control in return for an end to Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories (including the Shebaa Farms), Arab foreign ministers delegated Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa, Qatari Foreign Minister Hamad Ben Jassem (whose country is a current rotated member on the UN Security Council) and the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates, who chaired the Arab ministerial council, to fly to New York for talks with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and members of the Security Council to amend, if possible, the draft ceasefire resolution proposed by France and the US and rejected by the Lebanese government and Hizbullah as inadequate. The task of the Arab delegation is to ensure inclusion in the final draft of the resolution, which is likely to be voted on soon, clear reference to an immediate ceasefire (fudged in the current draft), the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon, and more equitable language regarding an exchange of prisoners. "If they can get us this within days then we will have something to thank them for," commented a Lebanese driver. "We don't want anybody to fight for us. We don't want to fight in the first place. We just want this war to come to an end and for Lebanon to be able to lead a normal life. We want people to be able to eat and wash. We don't want more dead bodies recovered from underneath the rubble," he added. As Arab foreign ministers were exiting Lebanon on military and private planes before sunset Monday, Israel was further intensifying its bombardment. The onslaught has become so heavy that UN humanitarian agencies are suspending operations in southern Lebanon. Arab foreign ministers might have felt that their mission was achieved to the greatest extent possible, as some of them inferred, but for the Lebanese -- as many stated with utter sadness -- Monday was just another day to be killed while the long and sometimes jovial diplomatic game failed to deliver results. With Arab diplomacy preparing for yet another ministerial meeting -- to be held in Cairo at the headquarters of the Arab League within 10 days -- possibly followed by an Arab summit to be held in Mecca, upon a Saudi initiative, within a few weeks, the Lebanese are bracing themselves for indefinite Israeli aggression.
