Lebanon and Syria: My Interview With L'Indipendente

What's happening in Lebanon: interview with former British Ambassador Craig Murray
11 December 2024 - 19:00

The current situation in Lebanon is more delicate than ever. Despite the entry into force of the fragile cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel, the Jewish state continues to violate the terms of the agreement, claiming that it is only conducting defensive operations. At the same time, in Syria, the opposition front to Assad has conquered Damascus, bringing down a dynasty that lasted over half a century without its ally Hezbollah being able to do anything. Against this backdrop of uncertainty, Craig Murray travelled to Beirut to report on what is happening from the ground.

Craig Murray is a former British diplomat, writer and human rights activist. He served as UK ambassador to Uzbekistan from 2002 to 2004, exposing human rights abuses in that country, and dedicated his post-diplomatic career to global justice issues. At the top of the list was the Palestinian cause, for which – in the current climate of repression in the UK – he was detained by the police, as has happened to other journalists.

I know you are currently in Lebanon: where exactly are you and what is the current situation in the country?

Right now I am in the capital, Beirut. The city is relatively quiet, but there are Israeli drones flying overhead all the time. They have not bombed Beirut since the agreement came into force, but there have been many violations by Israel in the south of the country. I have been there three or four times since the agreement was signed, and the situation is still very tense.

A few days ago, Israel killed about six people, including a shepherd, while other shepherds have disappeared. As these small-scale violations continue,
so does the bombing. The problem I think lies in the fact that the ceasefire agreement is extremely one-sided. It stipulates that all Lebanese groups must cease all operations against Israel, while Israel must cease only offensive operations against Lebanon: the qualification 'offensive operation' applies to only one party to the agreement.

In southern Lebanon, the Israeli army is advancing and conquering more territory?

Yes. And, again, this is a problem with the agreement. The ceasefire establishes a demilitarised zone extending from the Litani river southwards: both sides have to leave the area completely. During the conflict, Israel had not managed to take any territory in the demilitarised zone. It only got as far as the Litani river once, helicoptering troops there to take a few photo-ops and bringing them quickly back. In
short, Israel is exploiting the ceasefire agreement to claim the right to operate as far as the Litani river, despite never having arrived there during the fighting. In addition, Israel is claiming that all its current violations are only defensive in nature. Even when they shoot shepherds and kill people at funerals. The fact is that Hezbollah is designated by the US and Israel as a terrorist organisation; for them, the Israeli
attacks therefore do not count as violations of the agreement because they are considered anti-terrorist operations.

At present, what role does the United States play in this picture?

The United States is in charge of the 'mechanism' – as it is called – for monitoring compliance with the agreement. The document introduces a distinction I have never seen in any agreement – something extraordinary, indeed. It says that the UN will 'host' the monitoring committee, although that the US will 'chair' it. However, 'hosting' has no meaning in diplomatic or practical terms. What that comes down to is
this: the UN will be allowed to provide tea and biscuits, while the US will actually run the show, although – and this is indeed extraordinary – they are one of the parties in the conflict, not an arbiter! The bombs that fall in Lebanon are supplied and paid for by the US.

What about the rest of the Western powers? What interests of theirs are at stake?

UNIFIL, which is the only Western force on the ground, is to have a role in monitoring the ceasefire agreement. France, the former colonial power, will also work with the US in monitoring the cease-fire. Paris is very anxious to maintain its role here in Lebanon, and its status as the former colonial power is very important to Macron. So much so that, in exchange for being included in the committee, Paris agreed to reverse its position on the ICC and Netanyahu and announced that the Israeli prime minister could visit the country without fear of being handed over to the ICC.

Given the composition of the monitoring committee and the continuous violations that we mentioned earlier, what do you think is Israel's ultimate goal?

I have no doubt that Israel's ultimate goal is the annexation of southern Lebanon, which is part of the expansion plan for Greater Israel. The Jewish state has a long history of Zionist propagandists claiming the Litani river as its northern border, which would mean moving the country's current border some 25 miles further north. And there are Zionists who believe it should go even further north.

An interesting story to better understand this point concerns one of the Israeli soldiers killed during the invasion. He was a man wearing a full military uniform and carrying a weapon, but who turned out to be a 72-year-old archaeologist: the Israeli army takes archaeologists along to look for signs of ancient Jewish settlements
and thus come up with an excuse for annexation. Moreover, it would seem that these objectives have been coordinated with the rebel forces in Syria, supported by Israel and the US. It is no coincidence that the rebel attack started on the day the ceasefire in Lebanon came into effect.

Speaking of Syria, how is the front line in Lebanon changing now that Damascus has fallen?

Hezbollah now finds itself caught in the middle. These Syrian rebels are the same people who were in al-Qaeda and ISIS, and ISIS previously occupied the mountains above the Beqaa valley. They were defeated by Hezbollah in the past, but they still