[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 9882]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 9882]]

                          EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

  ISRAEL'S WITHDRAWAL FROM SOUTH LEBANON: THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. NICK J. RAHALL II

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 6, 2000

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, on May 25, 2000, this body unanimously 
adopted a resolution commending Israel for its ``redeployment'' from 
Lebanon. I voted yes, despite the extremely one-sided nature of the 
resolution, even down to the use of the word ``redeployment,'' which 
most of the world terms as withdrawal.
  Let us not forget. This is a valiant victory for the people of 
Lebanon who have suffered immensely both before, but more tragically 
since, the Israeli occupation lasting over 22 years. Now our own 
government can pride itself on one less U.N. Resolution which it so 
embarrassingly failed to enforce for more than two decades.
  The following article, which appeared in the May 26, 2000 edition of 
the Los Angeles Times, and written by Hussein lbish, communications 
director for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), 
puts into much more balance the recent House action.

               [From the Los Angeles Times, May 26, 2000]

          Know Now That Arab Lives Are as Worthy as Israelis'

                           (By Hussein Ibish)

       As the Lebanese people have finally liberated themselves 
     from more than two decades of Israeli occupation, most 
     American commentors are reacting with only one concern: Will 
     northern Israel be safe from attack?
       The focus on this misleading question is the result of a 
     widespread acceptance of the official Israeli line that its 
     22-year rampage in southern Lebanon was in essence a futile 
     quest for peace in a hostile region. This view is consistent 
     with the pattern of putting Israeli lives and concerns over 
     those of Arabs, but it is completely inconsistent with the 
     history of the occupation and the experiences of its Lebanese 
     victims.
       It is blind to the tens of thousands of Lebanese civilians 
     killed by Israel during the occupation, the hundreds of 
     thousands made homeless and the scores of destroyed villages 
     and cities. It forgets the ghastly massacres of unarmed 
     civilians for which the Israelis have been responsible in 
     Lebanon, including the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila 
     refugee camps and the U.N. base at Qana. It ignores the 
     Lebanese civilians held hostage to this day in Israeli 
     prisons and the hundreds of Lebanese men, women and childien 
     held prisoner and tortured at the notorious Khiam detention 
     center run by the Israeli-controlled militia, the South 
     Lebanese Army. It does not acknowledge the pain of the 
     Lebanese nation at being divided for almost a quarter of a 
     century and subject to continuous attacks on its civilian 
     population and infrastructure.
       No wonder, given this history, that the scenes of 
     liberation from south Lebanon have been truly extraordinary. 
     Hundreds of Lebanese streamed back into villages and towns 
     from which they had been expelled by Israel. Tears of joy 
     flowed as relatives were reunited after years of separation. 
     Hundreds of civilians stormed Khiam, freeing about 140 
     prisoners and exposing the hideous apparatus of torture and 
     terror employed there.
       These scenes have potentially far-reaching implications. 
     Can others in the Middle East living under foreign military 
     occupation, such as the Palestinians in the West Bank and 
     Gaza, have failed to register what real liberation looks 
     like?
       Everywhere Hezbollah fighters, derided by the Israeli and 
     U.S. governments as ``terrorists,'' conducted themselves in 
     an exemplary manner, handing prisoners over to government 
     troops and ensuring that the liberation was not marred by 
     acts of vengeance. These supposed fanatical terrorists were 
     once again shown to be a disciplined and responsible 
     liberation force.
       How quickly it is forgotten that Hezbollah is itself a 
     product of the Israeli occupation, founded in 1982 with the 
     aim of driving out the Israeli army and freeing the south of 
     the hellish experience of occupation. The fretting about 
     potential Hezbollah rocket attacks on northern Israeli towns 
     is misplaced, given that since 1996 Hezbollah has almost 
     always carried out such attacks in response to Israeli 
     killings of Lebanese civilians, often only after repeated 
     atrocities. By contrast, in recent months Israel repeatedly 
     attacked Lebanese civilian targets, such as power stations, 
     in response to attacks on its soldiers in Lebanon.
       The Israeli army may have fled Lebanon in chaos and 
     humiliation, but not without issuing dire threats of massive 
     attacks against Lebanon. Israel's retreat from Lebanon is 
     incomplete and insufficient. Israel was driven out of most of 
     southern Lebanon by an extraordinary campaign of popular 
     resistance, but continues to occupy the Shabaa Farms area. It 
     holds numerous Lebanese hostage.
       There is every indication that Israel still feels it can 
     attack the Lebanese people with impunity. Israel's foreign 
     minister, David Levy, recently threatened that Israel would 
     continue to target Lebanese civilians ``blood for blood, 
     child for child.''
       The international community, while paying lip service to 
     Lebanese territorial integrity, failed to exert any pressure 
     on Israel to end its occupation. Instead it was left to 
     resistance groups such as Hezbollah to enforce U.N. Security 
     Council Resolution 425, which in 1978 demanded Israel's 
     unconditional withdrawal from Lebanon ``forthwith.''
       The United States, Israel's main patron, financier and arms 
     supplier, has been particularly culpable by repeatedly using 
     its diplomatic muscle, including its Security Council veto, 
     to protect Israel from international criticism after its 
     invasions and atrocities. Rather than helping enforce 
     Resolution 425, which it voted for, the U.S. government line 
     has been that ``all foreign forces should withdraw from 
     Lebanon.''
       This was an obvious ploy intended to buy time and space for 
     Israel by drawing a false moral and legal equivalence between 
     Israel's brutal and illegal occupation of south Lebanon and 
     the Syrian presence in Lebanon. Syria's role there is 
     controversial, supported by many and oppposed by others as 
     overbearing, while the Israeli occupation was universally 
     despised, as was amply demonstrated by the instantaneous 
     collapse of its proxy militia. Had the United States been 
     willing to stand by interntional law rather than making 
     disingenuous excuses for outrageous Israeli conduct, the 
     international community might have been able to act 
     responsibly toward Lebanon.
       The obvious questions now are: Will Israel be forced to 
     complete its withdrawal from all of Lebanon, or will it be 
     allowed to hang on to the Shabaa Farms, where it has built a 
     ski resort and a settlement for Ethiopians? Will Israel be 
     seriously pressured to release the Lebanese hostages, or will 
     it yet again be granted an exception to the most basic 
     international human rights norms? Will Israel be made to pay 
     the reparations it owes to the Lebanese for the invasions, 
     bombings and occupation, as is supposed to now be the norm 
     for international aggressors? When will the American 
     government and media acknowledge that Lebanese and Arab lives 
     and rights are as important and worthy as those of Israelis?
       Finally, and most importantly, will the international 
     community at long last live up to its responsibility to 
     prevent Israel from ever again invading or bombing Lebanon 
     and murdering its people?

     

                          ____________________