motives behind Israel's invasion ?

Question

It's about annexation, stupid!

Officially, Israel's ground invasion of Lebanon is an act of self-defense against Hezbollah's threat, aimed at creating a security buffer zone until the arrival of a "multinational force with an enforcement capability". But increasingly, as the initial goal of a narrow strip of only a few kilometers has now been extended up to the Litani River deep in Lebanon, the real motives behind Israel's invasion are becoming crystal-clear.

It's about (de facto) annexation, stupid. This is a war to annex a major chunk of Lebanese territory without necessarily saying so, under the pretext of security buffer and deterrence against future attacks on Israel.

Already, since the Six Day War, Israel has annexed the Sheba Farms, considered part of the Syrian Golan Heights, although the government of Lebanon has long complained that the 25-square-kilometer area was a part of Lebanon. Now the Israeli army is sweeping the area south of the Litani River as a temporary occupation.

"We have no intention of extending our operation more than 70 kilometers north of our borders with Lebanon," stated Lieutenant-Colonel Hemi Lini on the Lebanese border on July 17, one week after the war's outbreak.

This would put Israel, assuming for a moment that the Israel Defense Forces' operations prove ultimately successful, in control of the Litani River, thus fulfilling Israel's founding fathers' dream, stretching back to Chaim Weizmann, head of the World Zionist Organization, who in 1919 declared the river "essential to the future of the Jewish national home".

Consequently, contrary to the pro-Israel pundits' reassurances that this war is not about occupation, all the tangible signs indicate the exact opposite, ie, the distinct possibility of a "war of acreage" whereby Israel would expand its territory, acquire a new strategic depth, and simultaneously address its chronic water shortage by exploiting the Litani.

Access to the Litani would translate into an annual increase of water supply by 800 million cubic meters. This in turn might allow Israel to bargain with Syria over the Golan Heights, source of a full one-third of Israel's fresh water. However, a more likely scenario is Israel's continued unwillingness to abide by United Nations Resolutions 242 and 338 calling for its withdrawal from the Syrian territories.

The entire Western media have settled on a naive perspective of the reasons for Israel's invasion of Lebanon, namely as a defensive measure against Hezbollah. Conspicuously absent is any serious consideration of a viable, alternative explanation while focusing on, in essence, the same ingredients as in the 1982 invasion: "deceit and misleading statements" by leaders, "inaccurate announcements" by the military spokesmen, and "gross exaggeration" of threats, to paraphrase a candid reflection of an Israeli general, Yehoshafat Harkabi.

Following this scenario, Israel has dropped leaflets throughout southern Lebanon warning the civilians to leave or risk their lives, as they would be considered "Hezbollah sympathizers" if they refused to leave. Reminiscent of Israel's annexation of Palestinian lands in 1948 and beyond, the present war is causing mass refugees, who in all likelihood will not return to their homes any time soon.

The geostrategic and water dimensions of Israel's quest to possess southern Lebanon notwithstanding, the question is, of course, whether or not the world community will tolerate such a development that would remake the map of the Middle East.

There are plenty of reasons to think that in light of the United States' complicit silence on Israel's violation of the territorial integrity of Lebanon, Israel will somehow manage to ride out the international criticisms and stick to its undeclared plan to annex southern Lebanon. However, what is less certain is that the combined efforts of Hezbollah and the rest of Lebanese society, not to mention other Arab contributions, will prevail over Israel's appetite for a decent part of Lebanon.

With the military balance disproportionately in Israel's favor, we can safely assume that the new Operation Litani will succeed and thus create a "new Middle East" with a "greater" and geographically expanded Israel and a shrunken or diminished Lebanon.

If so, then the chronology of events narrated by future historians will closely follow this line of thought: that Israel deliberately provoked Hezbollah into action, after a six-year hiatus, by pressuring Hezbollah's ally, Hamas, which was subjected to a campaign of terror, financial squeeze and intimidation.

The laying of such a trap by Israel would not have happened in a vacuum of strategic thinking on Israel's part. The fact that Hezbollah fell into the trap is a result of several factors, including an adventurist element lending itself to the "reckless" action of Hezbollah on July 11 with respect to crossing the Blue Line and attacking an Israeli patrol.

Since then, the Israelis have put on the mask of being reluctant warriors, delaying their troops' entry into south Lebanon and thus perpetuating Israel's self-image as disinterested in any imperial grand objectives. Yet the facts on the ground speak louder than words and, indeed, what fact is more important than Israeli leaders' announced intention to occupy up to the Litani River?

Again, what is understandably omitted in those announcements, adopted as the real reasons by CNN and other US networks, is Israel's predatory lust after Litani's water sources, as well as for new geographical and strategic depth. This in turn might explain the otherwise inexplicably blatant overreaction of Israel to a border incident with Hezbollah.

Instead of searching for answers in the Israeli collective psyche or in the context of action, we must probe the answer in the writings of Israel's founding fathers, including Theodor Herzl and David Ben-Gurion, commonly yearning for Israel's control of the Litani River. As a timely addition to their old wish, Israel today has a security-related explanation, justifying the territorial takeover in the near future in terms of the lessons of the present war, the main lesson being Israel's dire need to gain strategic depth to avoid rocket attacks.

Indeed, the verdict will soon be out in Israel about the precious lesson of Lebanon War II, that is, how to prevent future rocket attacks in the only feasible way, that is, direct control of southern Lebanon.

By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

Answer 1

WE ARE ONLY THE BATTEL GROUND TOGET TO IRAN AND SYRIA IS IT WHAT BUSH WANT FOR SURE ITS THERE EXCUSE TO GET THERE SOON YOU WILLL SEE THEY WILL GET TO SYRIA AND IRAN

Answer 2

Chaim Weizmann, head of the World Zionist Organization, wrote (around 1919-1920) to Prime Minister David Lloyd George that Lebanon was "well-watered" and that the Litani was "valueless to the territory north of the proposed frontiers. They can be used beneficially in the country much further south." He concluded the Litani was "essential to the future of the Jewish national home.'" Yet the British and French mandate powers kept the Litani entirely in Lebanon.(40)

Israel could increase its annual water supply by 800 MCM (approximately 40% of its annual water consumption in 1993) if it had continued access to the Litani through continued/permanent occupation of southern Lebanon.(38) Another reason for Israel to want the Litani is that, especially along the Israeli coast, many aquifiers are stressed and their water is increasingly brackish.(39)

Answer 3

Water for blood.
Hopefully, sometime soon, the American people will wake up, and elect a leader with an understanding of what is happening.
(I fear this will only happen after more 9/11 type atrocities)
When Israel doesn't have 'Big Brother' blindly supporting its naked acts of aggression, or when 'Big Brother' is so weakened that it cannot afford to back Israel, maybe then we will have peace in the Middle East.
I shake my head in wonder at the naivete of the American people, can't they see that they will be treated exactly the same as Israel, (maybe more harshly) by this new crop of 'terrorists' that Olmert and his stooges have created?
Anyway, Israel (and by extension, America. And the rest of us) is going to pay a very high price for the water from the Litani. Water for blood.

Answer 4

nah , ur wrong , imo there are two main motives ... for one, there was a very real and continueing breech of Israeli territory and safety by armed militants .. this had been going on for quite some time and then the graduation to cross-boarder raids to kidnap israeli citizens was the last straw .... secondly i believe they are working in tandem with the US to systematically overthrow all threats to US or Israeli interests so that the entire region can be a secure military base for defense against a menacing and very real threat developing in asia.

Answer 5

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the world’s major sources of instability. Americans are directly connected to this conflict, and increasingly imperiled by its devastation.

It is the goal of If Americans Knew to provide full and accurate information on this critical issue, and on our power – and duty – to bring a resolution.



121 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 763 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000

1,084 Israelis and 4,131 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000.

7,633 Israelis and 30,603 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000

The U.S. gives $15,139,178 per day to the Israeli government and military and $232,290 per day to Palestinian NGO’s.


Israel has been targeted by at least 65 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by none

1 Israeli is being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 9,599 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel.


0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 4,170 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since September 29, 2000.

The Israeli unemployment rate is 8.9%, while the Palestinian unemployment is estimated at 25-31%.


60+ new Jewish-only settlements have been built on confiscated Palestinian land between March 2001 and July 11, 2003. There have been 0 cases of Palestinians confiscating Israeli land and building settlements.

Answer 6

Do you think that the people of Lebanon would be worse off under Israeli occupation than they have been anyway for the past 30 years?

Answer 7

I know, I know. You will not find many people on here that will believe you. I have an idea, why don't you buy up a bunch of broadcast networks like the Zionists did so that you can brainwash the Americans as they did. I have to say, they are doing a great job at swaying opinions of Americans. Not too difficult when so many are morons to start with.

Answer 8

Well, if Israel wanted to get more land they wouldn't have given up any in the first place. Frankly, I hope Israel takes over the whole country of Lebanon, then there will be no more fighting.

Answer 9

hmm im not convinced that israel ever made a rescue attempt for the 2 soldiers kidnapped....if this even happened. so far in their constant bombing of lebanon they havnt killed even 1!!!!! terrorist. its all civilians. im not sure how i could ever make a decent debate on that. i wouldnt be surpised though to hear in the future that on the invaded land america lands troops their to attack iran or syria.

Answer 10

you are stupid if Israel wanted more land they wouldn't have given up the Gaza strip and forced all their people to move and leave their homes they had bought. The Arabs that live in Israel live in peace and free until terrorists groups attack them, they experience more freedom under the government of Israel then the Arab governments. I hope Israel gets rid of Hammas.

Answer 11

If Hezballah deems itself an army, then it should act as one.

Stop hiding behind the skirts and homes of women and children and act like a fighting force, led by Generals, not by "has been" gang members.