The article discusses the threat of Israeli expansion in southern Lebanon under the premise of “Greater Israel” and assesses the Lebanese army’s ability to counteract this movement. It highlights the historical context of armed resistance and legal rights granted under international law, questioning the implications of disarming resistance movements against a backdrop of military inaction and emerging popular resistance efforts.
Southern Lebanon has increasingly become a focal point of tension due to the Israeli regime’s expansionist ambitions, which are rooted in a distorted biblical interpretation. This initiative involves proposed settlements in southern Lebanon as a component of “Greater Israel,” garnering support from members of the Knesset and investment companies that are launching settlement projects in the area.
The ramifications of such colonial ventures are grave, as history has demonstrated that what seemed improbable decades ago, such as settlement establishments in the West Bank, became reality, defying international law and United Nations resolutions. The current ambitions concerning northern Galilee, which is essentially southern Lebanon, could similarly materialize if left unchecked.
The absence of a robust deterrent force from the Lebanese army could potentially invite renewed incursions into Lebanon, as evidenced by the ongoing situation in Syria. Reports indicate that the Lebanese army has received directives from the United States prohibiting the collection of weapons from the resistance located south of the Litani River, complicating the security dynamics of the region.
Conflicting information has emerged regarding the fate of weapons left by resistance fighters; some reports suggest they may be stored in warehouses, while others indicate plans for their destruction per Israeli requests relayed to Washington. Amidst this uncertainty, the call for the resistance to maintain exclusivity over its weaponry has emerged, leading to a dismissal of the broader historical context of resistance against oppression.
Some factions within Lebanon advocate for what they term the exclusivity of arms, articulating a political framework that aligns with modern nation-state concepts but neglects the inherent right of resistance against occupation. Historical precedents of armed resistance, as seen in various nations such as Algeria and South Africa, testify to the legitimacy of standing against aggression and occupation.
International law, including United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 45/130 and Article 51 of the UN Charter, supports the right to armed struggle in the face of colonial domination. The legitimacy of resistance arises from the just cause it defends, centered on the liberation of the land and securing dignified existence for its people.
The Lebanese resistance, encompassing various forms, has successfully liberated the south after enduring 22 years of occupation and has maintained a deterrent force for nearly fifty years. In contrast, while individual soldiers of the Lebanese army have demonstrated bravery, the army has historically struggled to effectively confront the Israeli military. Past divisions within the army have culminated in instances where factions acted against the interest of Lebanese sovereignty.
In recent months, the local populace of southern Lebanon has displayed effective popular resistance, playing a pivotal role in hastening the withdrawal of Israeli forces, a development that complements, rather than contradicts, the efforts of the Lebanese army and diplomatic initiatives. This ongoing dynamic raises critical questions regarding the army’s capacity to safeguard southern Lebanon from potential Zionist expansionism and whether disarmament of the resistance movement is warranted given the army’s response to Israeli violations.
In conclusion, the situation in southern Lebanon remains precarious due to the Israeli regime’s expansionist objectives, which threaten the region’s stability. The repeated calls for exclusive arms and the narrative of disarming resistance movements overlook historical and legal precedents supporting the right to resistance. The Lebanese army’s capabilities are under scrutiny as popular resistance emerges as a crucial force in deterring Israeli incursions and protecting Lebanese sovereignty.
Original Source: www.tehrantimes.com
