Confusion among Lebanese politicians is compounding the crisis in southern Lebanon, writes Nicola Nassif* At a time when every second counts, diplomats are biding their time, waiting perhaps for Israel to get ready to talk. The Israelis, who have attacked Lebanon ferociously since 13 July, want to achieve a military victory first. Only then would they be willing to discuss a ceasefire. Not since the Israeli army pulled out of southern Lebanon on 25 May 2000 has Israel attacked the country with such firepower. And over the last few days, mediation efforts have foundered over the conditions set by Israel and Hizbullah. Israel says it would consider a ceasefire only once their two soldiers, captured at the so-called Blue Line in South Lebanon on 12 July, are released. Israel also wants Hizbullah to disarm, pull back and be replaced at the borders by Lebanese army units. Hizbullah, for its part, wants an unconditional ceasefire, followed by a prisoner swap. The international community has taken Israel's side in this conflict, calling for the release of the captured soldiers and the implementation of United Nations Resolution 1559, which calls for the disarmament of Hizbullah and the deployment of the Lebanese army at the borders. Two international meetings have addressed the crisis so far, and neither has called for a ceasefire. The UN Security Council met on 15 July and the G8 on 16 July, and both have more or less endorsed Israel's position. In the absence of a political denouement, the Lebanese government looks befuddled. Should it send the Lebanese army to the south? Should it endorse France's proposal to deploy an international force along the borders? The Lebanese government is having trouble deciding, simply because Hizbullah is not prepared to pull out of the south. In an attempt to reassure the international community, Prime Minister Fouad Al-Siniora said that Lebanon observes the 1949 truce treaty and intends to deploy the army at the borders -- easier said than done. The deployment of the Lebanese army in the south would endanger Hizbullah's status as a resistance group. Firstly, the Lebanese army is likely to be deployed in Shebaa Farms, an area that Hizbullah takes credit for liberating. Secondly, Hizbullah cannot pull back 20km from the borders, as Israel demands -- at that distance, it would have no chance of engaging the enemy or an excuse to hold on to its weapons. In other words, the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south would end Hizbullah's status as a resistance group. Should Hizbullah pull out of the south, Resolution 1559 would be implemented and Hizbullah would no longer be a threat to Israel. On the upside, no one could accuse Hizbullah of being a pro-Syrian militia, bent on undermining the Al-Siniora government. There is a battle of wills underway. Hizbullah refuses to pull out from the south; and yet the cabinet on 13 July declared that the government intends to deploy the army in the south. Hizbullah is part of the Lebanese government; and yet it challenges the government. Tensions remain high. When Al-Siniora told the nation that the government intends to deploy the army in the south, he did so without prior consultation with Hizbullah. In the cabinet meeting that was held on 13 July, Hizbullah's minister Mohamed Fanish expressed reservations over the decision to "impose state sovereignty" across the country, prompting Al-Siniora to assure him that the army would not be sent to the south. According to official records, the cabinet meeting recorded two reservations voiced by Fanish: firstly, that Hizbullah should retain the right to resist Israel's occupation of Shebaa Farms; and secondly, that the sovereignty of the state should not call for the deployment of the army along Lebanon's international borders. In response to the reservations, the cabinet opted for a wording that emphasised the need to "confront" Israel's aggression. Hizbullah refuses to discuss army deployment in the south as long as Israel's offensive continues. It argues that the matter of army deployment in the south should be decided at a national dialogue conference bringing together all Lebanese leaders. The deployment in the south must be discussed by the Lebanese in their own time and without foreign pressure. That is Hizbullah's position, but it is being questioned by others in the country and within the government. * The writer is a senior Lebanese columnist at An-Nahar newspaper.
