ISRAEL, LEBANON: The Blue Line and other observations

This week's cross-border shooting raised questions about the delicate balance between Israel and Lebanon and how long it will last. The border is a tight-rope negotiated by the Israel Defense Force, the Lebanese Armed Forces, UNIFIL and Hezbollah, their unofficial but powerful partner.

Who tripped what wire this week?

When Israel withdrew from south Lebanon in May 2000, it pulled back to what is called the Blue Line. Israel refers to it as the border. It also erected a fence. It doesn't follow the Blue Line, however. Its route, says Amir Peretz, defense minister during the Second Lebanon War, was dictated by topography, not diplomacy. The fence and line are only meters apart at some points; in others, they are hundreds of meters from each other.

The areas between the fence and the 2000 withdrawal line are called "enclaves" by Israel. It was in one such enclave that the IDF uprooted a tree to install a surveillance camera in a blind-spot. It's also these places that heighten concerns that soldiers could be captured. The Lebanese army saw this as a violation of Lebanese sovereignty, but Israel said it was within its rights on its own soil. Initial responses were wishy-washy but subsequent statements by the U.S. and UNIFIL sided with Israel on this one.

Few people know exactly where the Blue Line runs and its marking is incomplete. UNIFIL, the LAF and IDF have been marking it, using various means from historic 1920s maps to the latest in mapping and GPS technology to identify and mark it so that civilians and armies know where it runs. In the video above showing the process, UNIFIL explains: The Blue Line is not the border, the technical fence is not the Blue Line, but under no circumstance may anyone cross the Blue Line. No wonder there are disputes.

The situation underscores the danger of leaving territorial disputes open. The tiniest of hangnails have a way of turning into huge cliff-hangers, providing interested parties with excuses.

  ************

Different people came away from this week's events with different lessons, depending on where they stand on issues of regional diplomacy.

Efi Eitam, formerly a senior army officer and hardline lawmaker, pointed to the ongoing erosion of U.N. Security Council resolution 1701 that ended the Second Lebanon War. Hezbollah, he said, is eating away at the main points of the resolution, which Israeli leaders had praised, though prudently, as a great achievement. First, Hezbollah "took care" of the prohibition on the transfer of weapons, which now run freely from Syria and Iran, he said. Next, they took care of UNIFIL and restricted its activity in south Lebanon and last, they are getting the LAF to fight its war. If Lebanon's official army, a branch of sovereignty, is infiltrated or indoctrinated to the extent that they fight Hezbollah's war in Lebanese uniform, this is another step backward for Lebanon's future, Eitam said this week.

Zalman Shoval, a senior Likud policy adviser and twice-ambassador to the U.S., said that if anything is to be learned from the incident it is that international forces are not to be trusted with Israel's security, a point to remember in any future agreement. Palestinians and some Europeans have suggested that in the event of Palestinian statehood, security would be entrusted to a UNIFIL-like force or NATO.

Ami Ayalon, former navy commander, Shin Bet chief and left-leaning legislator, advised people to stay away from conspiracy theories linking the recent incidents but pointed to the reality that made them coincide and likened it to riding a bike. One of the first things every kid finds out is that movement is key. And right now, Israel is totally static: There's no peace process with the Syrians or Palestinians, and Israel's international standing is terrible. This lack of movement makes every local incident a dangerous one that can knock Israel off the bike, Ayalon told Israeli radio. 

A similar point was made by publicist Ari Shavit of Haaretz newspaper. Likening the situation to the border skirmishes that ultimately led to the 1967 war, he writes that the incident didn't break the calm but cracked it, for now. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must realize that the good years are coming to an end and that he must take action "to change the strategic landscape." Deterrence for its own sake is "no longer a tenable strategy," Shavit said.

Outsiders are observing the situation too. In a recent report written for the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, wrote that Israel could decide that the security threat of Hezbollah, which has steadily rearmed amid violation of 1701, "has reached intolerable levels and take pre-emptive military action." Read the memo titled "A Third Lebanon War" here and Amir Oren's analysis here. Oren, a defense commentator for Haaretz, wrote that the first, second and maybe third Lebanon wars are misnomers; really, he said, they're different battles in a 40-year war.

-- Batsheva Sobelman in Jerusalem

Above: UNIFIL video from November 2009 explaining the Blue Line. Credit: YouTube

Comments

[atrayu]

Now that the UN has declared Israel innocent in this will there be justice for the people that the terrorist killed?

[Stefano888]

Perhaps if Israel signed bilateral agreements with Gaza and Lebanon rather than make strategic unilateral withdrawals, such provocations or errors become unnecessary or less probable.

[Josh]

Wow comments are ridiculous, 1st off The soldiers were never in Lebanon, being in eye sight across even a disputed border doesn't warrant military action, especially since Israel coordinated it's actions with UNIFIL, we all heard Lebanon's version, which has been proven false from the 3rd party that was involved, do we still need to give legitimacy to BS by mentioning lies to distort the truth in a twisted ideal that is the only way to be faire?

Next Hezbollah isn't Lebanon, they fly a different flag, and receive orders from a different government, so no Hezbollah's wars aren't Lebanon's wars until the Lebanese government handed over control of the country to Hezbollah with veto power.

Lebanese soldiers didn't fire into the air, they sniped an Israeli officer, but I guess it just another act of war against the Jewish state that is being justified on the grounds that Israel is a Jewish state, and therefore it's justifiable to randomly kill there soldiers for no logical Eason.

[Reuven]

What can exactly be the Lebanese point of view? According to UNIFIL, Israel's Army was on Israel's side of the Blue Line, that is in Israel's sovereign territory.
This is so clear cut that even the UN is not blaming Israel. This article is a report on a situation and not a debate so I don't see why do we need to read some Lebanese propaganda.

[Fred]

The Lebanese army only shot in the air... And the area isrealis penetrated was disputed land and thus the isrealis were basicly sending one of their young soldiers to no mans land

[Fred]

It is the duty of the Lebanese army to defend it's borders from armed isrealis crossing over. By protecting Lebanon the army would overcome hizbollahs role and rule over the south

[atrayu]

"The U.N. force confirmed that Israeli troops were operating inside Israeli territory."

So where is the justice for the man they murdered?

[Anonymous Author]

Found this on reddit, really readable entertaining history of the region, Lebanon in particular:

http://www.tremblethedevil.com/table-of-contents/imperial-hiccups

[S Toren]

"The hour of judgment shall not happen until the Muslims fight the Jews. The Muslims shall kill the Jews to the point that the Jew shall hide behind a big rock or a tree and the rock or tree shall call on the Muslim saying: hey, O Muslim there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him, except the Gharqad tree which will not say, for it is the tree of Jews."

You mean, this type of "significant" tree ?

You have a wooden head and a stone instead of a heart Stefano.

and you a tree hugger too?

[ABG]

Funny how shooting rocket propelled grenades into Israel needs a Lebanese point of view. So Stefano, this isn't a "murder"? Funny how everything Israel does is considered in the worst possible way by doctorates such as yourself. Massacres, genocide, war crimes..... Here's the LAF shooting Israelis on the Israeli side of a border in full view of supposed international peace officers, and you're going with the complaint that this article is biased.

Right. Because an Israeli was shot dead by the Lebanese. There must be a Lebanese point of view that answers Why!

And then there's Ahmed.... Hezbollah can't be defending Lebanon against Israeli aggression unless your version of Israeli is EXISTENCE. That is why they shoot the missiles into Israel.

It's exactly what I thought. Truth, Justice, and Logic are all Zionist tools to hold the Arabs and their simpleminded Jew hating allies down.

[Andrew]

I have to agree with everyone here that the viewpoints are biased not to say that it wasn't informative though.

[Ahmed Hussein]

Not a single line let alone a paragraph on the Lebanese point of view.
"they are getting the LAF to fight its war. If Lebanon's official army, a branch of sovereignty, is infiltrated or indoctrinated to the extent that they fight Hezbollah's war in Lebanese uniform, this is another step backward for Lebanon's future"

What an incredible statement! That is as if Hezbollah is from Mars. Hezbollah is a Lebanese organization that is defending Lebanon against Israeli aggression. Hezbollah's war is Lebanon's war.

What a wonderful UNBIASED report, Shame on you Los Angeles Times.

[Stefano888]

Probably the best explanation of the ambiguities of the Israel-Lebanon border problems. It might have been useful to describe if not explain the salience of symbolic trees and other things in the conflict zone, including the use of understandings and codes, between and among the parties.

[Mike Brown]

This is an amazingly biased article. All the political figures quoted are from Isarel. Did the author think about asking a Lebanese politician? What a disappointing article.

Mike

[Roger Duffy]

Ummm...why were all the people quoted from the Israeli side of things? I'm not saying they weren't in the right in this case, but couldn't we have had a single quote from UNIFIL or the LAF? Makes a mockery of the byline of the blog without it.

[d]

"different people, different lessons"? what in the hell are you talking about?