Assessing the Lebanese Army’s Ability to Safeguard Southern Lebanon Against Israeli Settlement Efforts
The article discusses the challenges faced by the Lebanese army in protecting southern Lebanon from Israeli encroachment, the historical context of resistance rights, and international legal backing for armed struggle against colonialism. It highlights the ongoing tension between military action and community resistance, questioning the effectiveness of current military strategies in the region.
In Southern Lebanon, a pervasive narrative propagated by Israel claims the area represents northern Galilee, with efforts underway to establish settlements as part of a vision for “Greater Israel.” This movement has gained backing from some Knesset members and investment companies promoting settlement projects in the region. The implications of such expansion reveal alarming parallels to the historical establishment of settlements in the West Bank, achieved despite international disapproval and the Oslo Accords.
The potential threat presented by these developments necessitates vigilance. Historical examples, such as the situation in Syria, illustrate that a failure to maintain a robust deterrent by the Lebanese military may lead to renewed invasions. Reports indicate that the Lebanese army has received directives from the United States to refrain from stockpiling weaponry linked to resistance forces active in southern Lebanon, further complicating the region’s security landscape.
Debate continues over the fate of weaponry previously left by resistance fighters, with conflicting reports suggesting some ammunition may be secured or destroyed at the request of Israel. Furthermore, the current political climate has seen a call for restricting arms, articulated in a manner suggesting that such a stance is the key to sovereignty, particularly among anti-Hezbollah factions who appear to prioritize Western alignment over resistance efforts.
Historical context shows that resistance is a natural response to oppression and has played a significant role in global struggles against colonialism and occupation, from Algeria to Vietnam. United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 45/130 corroborates this by asserting the legitimacy of armed struggle as a means of achieving independence and liberation. Also, Article 51 of the UN Charter affirms the right of states to engage in self-defense against armed aggression.
The legitimacy of armed resistance, therefore, is grounded in the foundational right of oppressed peoples to defend their land and ensure their security and dignity. The diverse spectrum of Lebanese resistance ultimately led to the liberation of southern Lebanon after a prolonged 22-year occupation, establishing a protective deterrent for nearly half a century.
While the Lebanese army has demonstrated valor, it has historically struggled to deter Israeli actions. The recent historical context indicates that sections of the army have aligned with external powers, leading to divisions within Lebanon. In contrast, a resurgence of popular resistance among local residents has effectively pressured Israeli forces to withdraw from certain occupied villages, displaying a resilient community response against aggressive incursions.
The question remains if the Lebanese army possesses the capacity to safeguard southern Lebanon from potential Zionist encroachment. This inquiry is particularly pertinent in light of the observed inadequacies of the army over the past months amid ongoing Israeli violations, underscoring the necessity for strategic discourse on the viability of disarming the resistance movement given these realities.
In summary, the situation in southern Lebanon encapsulates a significant conflict rooted in historical narratives, resistance rights, and the evolving military landscape. The Lebanese army faces substantial challenges in deterring Israeli intentions as community resistance emerges as a critical element. The international legal framework supports the legitimacy of armed struggle against colonial oppression, highlighting the importance of resistance movements. Therefore, addressing the army’s capacities and the broader dynamics of defense remains vital for the future stability of southern Lebanon.
Original Source: www.tehrantimes.com
