THE HANDSTAND

AUGUST 2006

text of un resolution

Text: UN Lebanon resolution

The text of Resolution 1701, passed unanimously by the UN Security Council aimed at ending the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Security Council,

Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, in particular resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978), 520 (1982), 1559 (2004), 1655 (2006), 1680 (2006) and 1697 (2006), as well as the statements of its president on the situation in Lebanon, in particular the statements of 18 June, 2000, of 19 October, 2004, of 4 May 2005, of 23 January 2006 and of 30 July 2006;

Expressing its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel since Hezbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July 2006, which has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons;

Emphasising the need for an end of violence, but at the same time emphasising the need to address urgently the causes that have given rise to the current crisis, including by the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers;

Mindful of the sensitivity of the issue of prisoners and encouraging the efforts aimed at urgently settling the issue of the Lebanese prisoners detained in Israel;

Welcoming the efforts of the Lebanese prime minister and the commitment of the government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a UN force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from southern Lebanon;

Determined to act for this withdrawal to happen at the earliest;

Taking due note of the proposals made in the seven-point plan regarding the Shebaa farms area;

Welcoming the unanimous decision by the government of Lebanon on 7 August 2006 to deploy a Lebanese armed force of 15,000 troops in south Lebanon as the Israeli army withdraws behind the Blue Line and to request the assistance of additional forces from Unifil as needed, to facilitate the entry of the Lebanese armed forces into the region and to restate its intention to strengthen the Lebanese armed forces with material as needed to enable it to perform its duties;

Aware of its responsibilities to help secure a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution to the conflict;

Determining that the situation in Lebanon constitutes a threat to international peace and security;

1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

2. Upon full cessation of hostilities, calls upon the government of Lebanon and Unifil as authorised by paragraph 11 to deploy their forces together throughout the South and calls upon the government of Israel, as that deployment begins, to withdraw all of its forces from southern Lebanon in parallel;

3. Emphasises the importance of the extension of the control of the government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory in accordance with the provisions of resolution 1559 (2004) and resolution 1680 (2006), and of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, for it to exercise its full sovereignty, so that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon;

4. Reiterates its strong support for full respect for the Blue Line;

5. Also reiterates its strong support, as recalled in all its previous relevant resolutions, for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders, as contemplated by the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement of 23 March 1949;

6. Calls on the international community to take immediate steps to extend its financial and humanitarian assistance to the Lebanese people, including through facilitating the safe return of displaced persons and, under the authority of the government of Lebanon, reopening airports and harbours, consistent with paragraphs 14 and 15, and calls on it also to consider further assistance in the future to contribute to the reconstruction and development of Lebanon;

7. Affirms that all parties are responsible for ensuring that no action is taken contrary to paragraph 1 that might adversely affect the search for a long-term solution, humanitarian access to civilian populations, including safe passage for humanitarian convoys, or the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons, and calls on all parties to comply with this responsibility and to cooperate with the Security Council;

8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution based on the following principles and elements:

  • Full respect for the Blue Line by both parties;
  • security arrangements to prevent the resumption of hostilities, including the establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river of an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL as authorised in paragraph 11, deployed in this area;
  • Full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state;
  • No foreign forces in Lebanon without the consent of its government;
  • No sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized by its government;
  • Provision to the United Nations of all remaining maps of land mines in Lebanon in Israel's possession;

9. Invites the secretary general to support efforts to secure as soon as possible agreements in principle from the government of Lebanon and the government of Israel to the principles and elements for a long-term solution as set forth in paragraph 8, and expresses its intention to be actively involved;

10. Requests the secretary general to develop, in liaison with relevant international actors and the concerned parties, proposals to implement the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), including disarmament, and for delineation of the international borders of Lebanon, especially in those areas where the border is disputed or uncertain, including by dealing with the Shebaa farms area, and to present to the Security Council those proposals within 30 days;

11. Decides, in order to supplement and enhance the force in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operations, to authorize an increase in the force strength of Unifil to a maximum of 15,000 troops, and that the force shall, in addition to carrying out its mandate under resolutions 425 and 426 (1978):

  • a. Monitor the cessation of hostilities;
  • b. Accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the South, including along the Blue Line, as Israel withdraws its armed forces from Lebanon as provided in paragraph 2;
  • c. Coordinate its activities related to paragraph 11 (b) with the government of Lebanon and the government of Israel;
  • d. Extend its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons;
  • e. Assist the Lebanese armed forces in taking steps towards the establishment of the area as referred to in paragraph 8;
  • f. Assist the government of Lebanon, at its request, to implement paragraph 14;

12. Acting in support of a request from the government of Lebanon to deploy an international force to assist it to exercise its authority throughout the territory, authorizes Unifil to take all necessary action in areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilised for hostile activities of any kind, to resist attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the mandate of the Security Council, and to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Lebanon, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence;

13. Requests the secretary general urgently to put in place measures to ensure Unifil is able to carry out the functions envisaged in this resolution, urges member states to consider making appropriate contributions to Unifil and to respond positively to requests for assistance from the Force, and expresses its strong appreciation to those who have contributed to Unifil in the past;

14. Calls upon the government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel and requests Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11 to assist the government of Lebanon at its request;

15. Decides further that all states shall take the necessary measures to prevent, by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag vessels or aircraft;

  • a. the sale or supply to any entity or individual in Lebanon of arms and related materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, whether or not originating in their territories, and;
  • b. the provision to any entity or individual in Lebanon of any technical training or assistance related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of the items listed in subparagraph (a) above, except that these prohibitions shall not apply to arms, related material, training or assistance authorised by the government of Lebanon or by Unifil as authorised in paragraph 11;

16. Decides to extend the mandate of Unifil until 31 August 2007, and expresses its intention to consider in a later resolution further enhancements to the mandate and other steps to contribute to the implementation of a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution;

17. Requests the secretary general to report to the Council within one week on the implementation of this resolution and subsequently on a regular basis;

18. Stresses the importance of, and the need to achieve, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, based on all its relevant resolutions including its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973;

19. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

Hezbollah's leader has said his group will abide by a ceasefire plan agreed at the UN to end fighting with Israel.

However, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah said on TV that Hezbollah would continue fighting as long as Israeli soldiers remained in Lebanon.

Lebanon has now also approved the UN resolution, which calls for a "full cessation of hostilities".

The ceasefire will become effective at 0500GMT on Monday, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announced. He said he was "very happy" that the prime ministers of Israel and Lebanon had agreed to halt hostilities from then, but he added that "preferably, the fighting should stop now".

Israel has extended an offensive in south Lebanon, tripling its ground troops there. Some Israeli troops have reached the key target of the Litani River, the army says.

Eleven Israeli soldiers were killed and more than 70 wounded in the fighting on Saturday. Israel also confirmed a helicopter had been shot down in southern Lebanon, causing some casualties. It is the first such loss to hostile fire in the conflict.

Israel's Cabinet will discuss and take a formal vote on the UN ceasefire resolution on Sunday.

'War not ended'

On Hezbollah's al-Manar TV channel on Saturday, Sheikh Nasrallah said the UN resolution was "unfair" in holding his group responsible for the fighting. But he added: "We will not be an obstacle to any decision taken by the Lebanese government."

Ceasefire on paper, fire on the ground

TOI-Billboard, August 12, 2006
--The Other Israel's weekly comment--Overview of this week's Occupation Magazine's daily picks attached

So, it goes on.

For the past week and more we had lived under the illusion that when the UN Security Council solemnly resolves to cease the fire, the fire will indeed cease. The media certainly helped create this feeling, reporting extensively and minutely on the the ups and downs of the negotiations between the French and the Americans. And when on Friday the news from New York told of an approaching breakthrough, commentators started talking of the war as if it already were a thing of the past. And a great variety of nationalists and demagogues started crying and howling over "the surrender" and "the betrayal".

They could have saved their breath. Olmert and his Defence Minister Amir Peretz heard last night's news from New York while closeted in the Army's Supreme Headquarters, with the generals making the final preparations for what seems the biggest ground offensive in this war. And after midnight the headlines on the internet websites seemed taken directly from Orwell: "Government to approve UN Ceasefire resolution, major ground offensive into Lebanon goes ahead on schedule".

Looking carefully at the text approved at that hallowed hall of international diplomacy, things become a bit clearer. For the framers of that new UN Security Council Resolution, 1701 (a number which we will undoubtedly hear quoted ad nauseam in the coming weeks and months) - have left a loophole in their "cessation of hostilities". Or rather a gaping opening wide enough to allow the passage of hundreds of tanks and fighter airplanes and tens of thousands of soldiers, the full four divisions reported to be now charging northwards.

The fifteen members of the Security Council have solemnly and unanimously determined that "the situation in Lebanon constitutes a threat to international peace and security" and therefore called for "the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations". However, as anybody knows who had ever attended a lesson in Basic Civics at a Tel-Aviv elementary school, the Israeli Defence Forces never have and never will conduct any offensive military operation. Each and every one of their operations, in this war as in its predecessors, is purely defensive and is conducted solely in order to defend a peace-loving population against unprovoked aggression, for which reason the IDF coat of arms is the Sword and Olive Branch, and third grade pupils are required to paste that coat of arms in their copybooks and write under it the caption "our army hates war and wants only peace".

So, it continues. The number of Israeli soldiers in Lebanon has tripled in the past twenty-four hours, according to Chief of Staff Halutz, all of course involved in the purely defensive race to conquer all the territory up to the Litani River, which the generals expect to take "four days to a week" and then involve "several weeks of mopping up" (not that the army was very effective in "mopping up" the limited parts of Lebanon which it already invaded two and three weeks ago). So far, at least 19 people are reported killed since the diplomats affixed their signatures to that solemn document, and a Lebanese contact just informed us that the villages east of Saida, left untouched since the war broke out, had today gotten a lethal "visit" from the Israeli Air Force.

And so, we must continue as well. A few hours from now, there will be hundreds of us answering the call of Yesh Gvul to climb the hill overlooking Military Prison 6 at Atlit, shouting words of greetings and solidarity and warm support into the plainly visible prison courtyard - to the five soldiers who preferred imprisonment over participation in the Lebanese folly and madness, and also for their fellow-prisoners and guards. Climbing that hill is a tradition dating back to the First Lebanon War, a tradition which it seems we need to revive, like so much else.

At least, the stifling atmosphere of "national unity" which characterized the past weeks seems to have decisively dissipated. "The Big Three" of Israeli literature - "Amos Oz, A.B. Yehoshua and David Grossman - have come out against the war, three weeks after they had endorsed it in public. (Some 60 younger authors, who opposed the war from the first minute, had been constantly snapping at these three's heels). Also, the magnitude of the Lebanon invasion and its similarity to the fiasco of 1982 (except that the guerrillas now seem much better organized and armed...) at last nudged mainstream groups such as Peace Now and the Meretz Party out of their complacency and the "support from the left" which many of their leaders gave to this vicious war on its inception. On Thursday they were in their hundreds in front of the Ministry of Defence, with big signs reading "There is No Military Solution!", and cracks start to appear in the Labor Party support for the mad careering of Party Leader and Defence Minister Amir Peretz - once a staunch dove and militant trade unionist, now the the most hawkish of hawks.

As things stand, it seems that all of us - radicals and moderates, those who opposed the madness from its inception and the latecomers - will still have to go and protest again and again. And meanwhile, the occupation and oppression of the Palestinians are still there, to any who tended to forget. Yesterday afternoon, the weekly anti-Wall procession at Bil'in was viciously attacked by the army and Border Guard troops. Limor, a young Israeli activist, was hit in the head by one of the misnamed "rubber bullets" - which is actually made of metal. After emergency surgery at Tel-Hashomer hospital, he is now under medically induced coma, and only when he wakes up will it be possible to asses the permanent damage. Due to Lebanon, the case got very meagre media attention; updates will appear on the International Solidarity Movement website http://www.palsolidarity.org

This is what any Draft Resolution has to take account of....

Collective punishment against Lebanese civilians

36 collective massacres occurred against the Lebanese civilians since the onset of the Israeli assault (from July 12-August 11). Israel violated all conventions related to the prohibition of collective punishment whereas it perpetrated voluntarily crimes against civilians and their properties, namely Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting collective punishment and Article 48 forbidding military actions against civilian populations and infrastructure. These collective massacres are as follows:

13 July: Dweir massacre killed a family of 12 members,

15 July: Marwaheen (Israel asked the inhabitants of this village to evacuate this village and while they were leaving the air strikes killed 22 of them),

16 July: 5 massacres in Tyre (an air raid struck a building killing 12 and injuring 50), Borj Shamali (5 persons amongst them 2 babies), Aytaroun (an air raid killed 11 persons, 10 of them are from the same family possessing the Canadian nationality), Abba (10 were killed most of them belong to the same family) and on the entrance of Abbassiyeh (9 were killed under the rubble)

17 July: Rmayleh (Chemical bombs were thrown on displaced convoy killing 12 and injuring many)

18 July: Aytaroun: an air strike hit a house where many were hiding killing 13, 6 of them were babies

19 July: 4 collective massacres: Nabi Sheet in North of Bekaa (two families of 8 members were killed under the rubble of a house), Maaraboun (three pickup trucks with agricultural workers were hit by an air strike killing 7), Tyre (air raids targeted residential areas killing 20 at least), Srifa (air strikes targeted 10 houses killing 27 and wounding 30 others, the victims remained several dauys under the rubble).

25 July: higher Nabatiyeh (an air strike targeted a residential house killing 7)

28 July: Haddatha (an air strike targeted a three-storey residential building killing 6 from the same family)

29 July: 2 massacres in Noumayriyeh (an air strike killed a family of 7 and their neighbor under the rubble) an Ayn Arab (an air raid killed 6 civilians and injured 3, many of them remained under the rubble for several days)

30 July: 2 massacres in Qana (an air strike targeted a three-storey residential building where more than fifteen persons were hiding from Hashem and Shalhoub families destroying it and killing them under the rubble) and Yaroun (6 members of the same family were killed: 3 women and 3 children from Khanafer family)

31 July: 3 massacres were revealed by the Israeli truce, in Hareess (16 corpses of two families were under the rubble of two residential houses), Halloussiyeh (more than 10 corpses for Mwanness family were still under the rubble), 12 corpses were found on the roads and inside vehicles between Qoleyleh and Al-Jebbeyn (one of them was a corpse of an eight-year old child)

2 August: The commandos operation on a hospital in Baalbeck killed 13 civilians, including women, children and Syrian workers

4 August: One of the bloodiest day after Qana: 3 massacres in Qaa (28 Syrian agriculture workers were killed while they were packaging peaches), Taybeh (a two-storey residential building was targeted by Israeli air raid killing 7 who were elderly and unable to leave their homes, Ayta Shaab (an air strike targeted a house making 10 victims)

6 August: 2 massacres in Ansar (an air strike targeted the house of Ibrahim Assi killing him, his wife and their two daughters as well as their neighbors, while the rescue workers were removing the corpses an other air strike hit the house and the rubble), Al-Jubbeyn (this village was heavily targeted by air strikes that killed Kassem Akeel, his wife, his daughter and another victim)

7 August: BLACK MONDAY: Air strikes hit heavily many areas while the Arab foreign ministers were holding their meeting: Houla (6 air strikes targeted the Husseini club in the village where many people from the village sought a safe haven after the destruction of their houses. The premises was destroyed on them, 5 were killed while 60 were rescued safe miraculously), Ghassaniyeh in Zahrani area (an air strike hit at dawn at Abdallah Khalil Tohmeh two-storey building killing him, his wife and his two sons as two brothers and two others making the death toll 8), Ghaziyeh (air strikes hit residential neighborhoods killing 15), Shiyyah (an air strike hit a residential building in the crowded Al-Hajjaj area killing 56, especially that there were in the building displaced from Beer Al-Abed, Hayy Maawad and Haret Hreyk), Breetal (air strikes targeted residential houses killing 13)

8 August: Air strikes resumed on Ghaziyeh during funeral procession of the previous day’s 15 victims killing 14 and injuring 24

9 August: Mashgharah (an air strike targeted a four-storey building killing 8 persons from the same family

11 August: Akkar in North Lebanon (an air strike targeted at dawn Al-Hayssa bridge killing 11 and injuring 15)" (It is based on Jana Nasrallah article in Annahar 12th Aug.) www.angryarab.blogspot.com

The End of Illusions
by Jonathan Cook
August 8, 2006

If there were any remaining illusions about the purpose of Israel's war against Lebanon, the draft United Nations Security Council resolution calling for a "cessation of major hostilities" published over the weekend should finally dispel them. This entirely one-sided document was drafted, noted the Hebrew-language media, with close Israeli involvement. The top adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert talked through the resolution with the U.S. and French teams, while the Israeli Foreign Ministry had its man alongside John Bolton at the UN building in New York.

The only thing preventing Israeli officials from jumping up and down with glee, according to Aluf Benn of the daily Ha'aretz newspaper, was the fear that "demonstrated Israeli enthusiasm for the draft could influence support among Security Council members, who could demand a change in wording that may adversely affect Israel." So no celebration parties till the resolution is passed.

Instead, in a cynical ploy familiar from previous negotiating processes, Israel submitted to the U.S. a list of requests for amendments to the resolution. When Israel agrees to forgo these amendments, it will, of course, be able to take credit for its flexibility and desire to compromise; Lebanon and Hezbollah, on the other hand, will be cast as villains, rejecting international peacemaking efforts.

The reason for Israel's barely concealed pleasure is that Hezbollah now faces an international diplomatic and public relations assault in place of the unsuccessful Israeli military one. Israel and the United States are trying to set a series of traps for Hezbollah – and Lebanon too – that will justify Israel's reoccupation of south Lebanon, the further ethnic cleansing of the country, and a widening of the war to include Iran, and possibly Syria.

The clues were not hard to decode. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice characterized the aim of the resolution as clarifying who is acting in good faith. "We're going to know who really did want to stop the violence and who didn't," she said. Or, in other words, we are going to be able to blame Hezbollah for the hostilities, because we have offered them terms of surrender we know they will never agree to.

The main sticking point for Hezbollah is to be found in the resolution's requirement that it must stop fighting and begin a process of disarmament at a time when Israeli forces are still occupying Lebanese territory and when there may be a lengthy, if not interminable, wait for their replacement by international peacekeepers. Not only that, but the resolution allows Israel to continue its military operations for defensive purposes: Hezbollah only has to look to Gaza or the West Bank to see what Israel is likely to consider falling under the rubric of "defensive."

Hezbollah has been stockpiling weapons since Israel's withdrawal in May 2000 precisely to create a "balance of deterrence," to make Israel more cautious about sating its demonstrated appetite for occupying its neighbors' lands, particularly when the neighbor is a small country like Lebanon without a proper army and divided into many sectarian groups, some of which, for a price, may be willing to collaborate with Israel.

This time, however, as Israeli troops struggle back toward the Litani River and their initial goal of creating a "buffer zone" similar to the one they held on to for nearly two decades, the Lebanese are rallying behind Hezbollah, convinced that the Shi'ite militia is their only protection against Western machinations for a "new Middle East."

Israel and Washington, however, may hope that, given time, they can break that national solidarity by provoking a civil war in Lebanon to deplete local energies, similar to Israel's attempts at engineering feuds between Hamas and Fatah in the occupied Palestinian territories. Certainly, it is difficult to make sense otherwise of Israel's bombing for the first time of Christian neighborhoods in Beirut and what looks like the intended ethnic cleansing of Sunni Muslims from Sidon, which was leafleted by Israeli war planes over the weekend.

In the U.S.-Israeli view, a nation of refugees living in an open-air prison cut off from the outside world and deprived of food and aid – a more ambitious version of the Gaza model – may eventually be persuaded to take their wrath out on their Shi'ite defenders.

Hezbollah understands that the proposal to bring in a force of international peacekeepers is another trap. Either the foreign troops will never arrive, because on these Israeli-imposed terms there can be no cease-fire, or, if they do arrive, they will quickly become a proxy occupation army. Israel will have its new South Lebanon Army, supplied direct this time from the UN and subsidized by the West. If Hezbollah fights, it will be killing foreign peacekeepers, not Israeli soldiers.

But Israel knows the international force is almost certainly a non-starter, which seems to be the main reason it has now, belatedly, become so enthusiastic about it. Senior Israeli government officials were saying as much in the Hebrew-language media on Sunday.

Israel's justice minister, the increasingly hawkish Haim Ramon, summed up the view from Tel Aviv:

"Even if it is passed, it is doubtful that Hezbollah will honor the resolution and halt its fire. Therefore we have to continue fighting, continue hitting anyone we can hit in Hezbollah, and I assume that as long as that goes on, Israel's standing, diplomatically and militarily, will improve."

Israel hopes it will be able to keep hitting Hezbollah harder – at less cost to its troops and civilians, and with improved diplomatic standing – because in the next phase, after the resolution is passed, the Shi'ite militia will find that one arm has been tied, figuratively speaking, behind its back.

Not only will Washington and Israel blame Hezbollah for refusing to agree to the cease-fire, but they will seek to use any retaliation against Israeli "defensive" aggression – including, presumably, further invasion – as a pretext for widening the war and dragging in the real target of their belligerence: Iran.

This subterfuge was voiced over the weekend by Israel's ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman, who told the BBC that if Hezbollah fired at Tel Aviv – which it has threatened to do if Israel continues attacking Beirut – this would be tantamount to an "act of war" that could only have been ordered by Iran. In other words, at some point soon Israel may stop blaming Hezbollah and turn its fire – defensively, of course – on Iran.

This linkage is being carefully prepared by Olmert. On Monday, according to the Hebrew-language press, he told some 50 government spokespeople what message to deliver to the foreign media: "Our enemy is not Hezbollah, but Iran, which employs Hezbollah as its agent." According to Ha'aretz, he urged the spokespeople "not to be ashamed to express emotion and appeal to feelings."

So in the coming days, in the wake of this U.S.-Israeli concoction of an impossible peace, we are going to be hearing a lot more nonsense from Israel and the White House about Iran's role in supposedly initiating and expanding this war, its desire to "wipe Israel off the map," and the nuclear weapons it is developing so that it can achieve its aim.

The capture of two Israeli soldiers on July 12 will be decoupled from Hezbollah's domestic objectives. No one will talk of those soldiers as bargaining chips in the prisoner swap Hezbollah has been demanding; or as an attempt by Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, to deflect U.S.-inspired political pressure on him to disarm his militia and leave Lebanon defenseless to Israel's long-planned invasion; or as a populist show of solidarity by Hezbollah with the oppressed Palestinians of Gaza.

Those real causes of hostilities will be ignored as more, mostly Lebanese, civilians die, and Israel and the U.S. expand the theater of war. Instead, we will hear much of the rockets that are still landing in northern Israel and how they have been supplied by Iran. The fact that Hezbollah attacks followed rather than precipitated Israel's massive bombardment of Lebanon will be forgotten. Rockets fired by Hezbollah to stop Israeli aggression against Lebanon will be retold as an Iranian-inspired war to destroy the Jewish state. The nuclear-armed Goliath of Israel will, once again, be transformed into a plucky little David. Or at least such is the Israeli and American scenario.