July-War Secrets: Exposed by Nabih Berri and Retold by Ali Hassan Khalil(1)
TRANSLATED from Lebanese Daily As-Safir- Local Editor
Siniora to Ali Hassan Khalil and Haj Hussein Khalil: "The Sayyed (Sayyed Nasrallah) Deceived Us..." Both "Israeli" Captives Must Be Handed Over to Government; Otherwise, Country Will Be Ruined
UN Secretary General's Personal Representative for Lebanon Geir Pederson to Speaker of the Parliament of Lebanon: Hizbullah Must Immediately Hand over its Arms... And if You Do Not Set Both Captives Free, Then "Israel" Will Be Set Loose.
As-Safir Newspaper
Rights are preserved when proceedings are made, the recordings of which expose black and white political stances of the meeting politicians as these recordings are made with visible ink rather than secret ink, avoiding, thus, any unwanted outcomes.
However, as history is faked for the sake of certain political parties' dreams, it is a legitimate must that the proceedings be leaked and exposed to everyone.
Those were years men made... Withering threatened the blooms of these years, and sleep threatened their awareness; yet, their steadfastness faced the world's arsenal and the cities of decision. So can we get mad because of a cable?! And can we fake the history whose men, witnesses, and papers haven't died yet?!
Time hasn't faded in forgotten books; it is still fresh, retelling the Story of July eagerly and ready to recall the incidents of this Story - even its very beginnings; that is, ever since "Israel" decided to lock the last Southern gate and withdraw. This would make us avoid boredom... For history's sake, we recorded the near, painful past we experienced upon the acts of fellow partners; yet, we didn't write all incidents as some of them were so painful. As for the incidents, they looked very much like today's alignments and stances on the local, Arab, and international levels.
One April evening, a month before the Liberation in 2006, MP Berri sensed the incidents of the days yet to come; hand in hand with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, he expressed more than boastfulness about defeating "Israel", for the victory of men from Jabal Amel (Mount Amel) would be too weighty for the Arab-Islamic World.
As if foreseeing the political future and monitoring the Lebanese-Arab restriction yet to come, Berri felt that the Arabs and some Lebanese parties would follow the policy of hammering nails into coffins and would not tolerate the victory coming from the South.
The man (Berri) wasn't experienced in political discoveries; neither did he use a magic crystal, nor summon the kings of jinn. He was simply starting to read the stances that would later become quite obvious. Six years after the approaches made by former Premier Fouad Siniora, chief of "the Future Party" Saad Hariri, and chief of "the Lebanese Forces' Executive Board" Samir Geagea (during both dialogue sessions on March 14/June 8, 2006), some of the commanders of Hizbullah and "the Amal Movement" have reminded MP Berri of that, saying, "You've been totally right as you've worried about us defeating "Israel" in May 2000." Berri's concern existed before the little group of Hizbullah and the Amal Movement became doubtful and worried as they pursued the negotiations, in addition to the suggestions of Premier Siniora and his team ("the March-14 Alliance) throughout 33 days of the "Israeli" Aggression in July/ August, 2006.
In fact, the meeting MP Nabih Berri and Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had on April 28, 2000, was preparatory for the stage of the "Israeli" withdrawal from the occupied borderline as well as for the post-withdrawal stage.
As usual, the senior aides of Sayyed Nasrallah and MP Berri arranged for the meeting. At 8:30, MP Berri's chief of private guards came up to the third floor where MP Berri and I were discussing issues concerning our party, for the Amal Movement's Presidential Board had decided to assign me in charge of the region of the occupied borderline.
Lowering the curtains of the lounge in that sea-overlooking floor was a precautionary procedure introducing the meeting.
In the parking lot of the Second Presidential Palace, the chief of the private guards and I escorted Sayyed Nasrallah after His Eminence, Haj Hussein Khalil, and Sayyed Ibrahim Amine As-Sayyed (Head of Hizbullah's Political Bureau) got off their car. After greetings and hugging with MP Berri at the lounge's entrance, Sayyed Ibrahim Amine As-Sayyed made a joke before going into a long discussion.
The meeting commenced with the evaluation of the stage following the previous meeting as well as the incidents occurring between both meetings. Then, the talk involved the moment of the "Israeli" Military's withdrawal from the occupied lands of the South and the victory of the resistance choice - the outcome of continuous sacrifices throughout the years of the Occupation until its very last days.
Confident, MP Berri said his analysis, in addition to some data, confirmed that ""Israel" can no longer bear its casualties in the South, and it will withdraw before May's end." Berri seemed resolute and convinced, and his prediction was supported by Sayyed Nasrallah, who confirmed that data, saying, ""Israel" is definitely going to withdraw; yet, we have to estimate that this might take some long time, whereby "Israel" might need to make arrangements regarding its agents." Still, MP Berri saw that "Israel" wouldn't care for making arrangements for "its worthless agents", emphasizing the necessity of readiness and preparedness before May's end.
The necessity of protecting civilians after the Liberation, particularly the Christians, took part in the discussion, for both men were adherent to protecting all civilians from any harm. Afterwards, Berri stood up, inviting Sayyed Nasrallah to dinner.
Actually, the repeated dinners Berri and Sayyed Nasrallah had changed a habit Sayyed Nasrallah had had for long years; refusing to eat the southern "Frakeh" (which is prepared by mixing raw, mashed meat with burghul [bulgur wheat grains] and adding salt; also adding marjoram sometimes). Sayyed Nasrallah said his mother would really like him to eat "Frakeh", but he would apologize every time; however, Haj and MP Berri made it seem very appealing to Sayyed Nasrallah as the residents of the bordering villages would mix more burghul with the meat and add marjoram, which would make Sayyed Nasrallah repeat, "ensuring against any effect of the raw meat." ("Frakeh" with the "ensuring" marjoram has become a main course for both men's dining tables, whether in Ain el Tineh [MP Berri's residence] or in Haret Hreik [Sayyed Nasrallah's residence].)
Moving along with the meeting attendees from the lounge to the dining room, MP Berri placed his hand on Sayyed Nasrallah's shoulder and said, "Sayyed, "Israel" is defeated, but we should not get overjoyed upon such defeat and be lost in the ecstasy of victory, for this matter is too great to be tolerated by Arabs, Muslims, and probably some Lebanese people. Personally, I'm not worried, but I feel that the responsibility is going to be much bigger. A quiet, expressive smile was Sayyed Hassan's comment, conveying more than an emphasis and meaning.
Furthermore, MP Berri and Sayyed Nasrallah, who were up to the minute with the dailies of the "Israeli" Aggression on Lebanon until August 14, considered the incidents occurring between the day of this meeting and July 12, 2006, accurately regarding the stage following Premier Rafik Hariri's martyrdom, the National Dialogue held, in addition to the approaches and discussions made during the Dialogue sessions in the Parliament.
Geagea's Prophecy of the Coming War
In the morning of March 14, 2006, the discussion of the Dialogue session involved the issue of the Shebaa Farms and proving their Lebanese identity. The chief of the Lebanese Forces' Executive Board Samir Geagea shook his head, carrying some papers in his hands and speaking as if confidently, "Brothers," (Again he shakes his head, pushing it forward this time.) "It's a form that must be considered; I suggest that we approach the issue from a different perspective and that we move to other standards." He began reading some pieces of the Armistice Agreement with "Israel" (which took place between Lebanon and "Israel" on March 23, 1949, ratifying the international border between occupied Palestine and Lebanon as "the armistice line"), making preservations on some of the context. Then he added, "Stopping violations can only happen through international telecommunications. I don't think we're maintaining a military balance with "Israel"; the solution lies in making a new armistice fortified by intensified, international forces, whereby we deploy 15,000 international soldiers for 25 or 50 years in order to keep Lebanon fortified; otherwise, we will still live the tense situation of an open war with "Israel" and the West.
The presence of international forces shall ensure our safety against such dangers; war is coming." As soon as Geagea finished his suggestion, the chief of the Future Party Saad Hariri said, "I understand this offer."
In the session of June 8, 2006, Geagea replied to Sayyed Hassan's view as respects the Defensive Strategy, "The center of gravity with respect to Sayyed Hassan is that Hizbullah's arms impose a kind of deterrent horror balance, and thus, it's an unrealistic presumption. The talk of a close "Israeli" coup is no longer a secret, and the discussion amid the "Israeli" military media is whether "Israel" should strike coldly or wait for a certain event. I believe that such operation is now within reach even though it is known that "Israel" is going to pay a certain price for this.
The solution lies in asking for international forces, which are influential. For instance, the Serbs cannot return to Kosovo as international forces are assigned to carry out combative missions on both sides, and they are given planes and boats. So let's make use of this chance and this moral alternative for arms so as to avoid such war outcome."
"The Sayyed" Replies to Geagea
In his approach, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah replied to Geagea, "... Saying that the Resistance's arms are ineffective and not deterrent to "Israel" is inaccurate. To clear this, our performance method shows we do not accept to let the enemy specify the battle timing. What's important is how to make the enemy feel that the cost of any military adventure is very high. In fact, "the April Agreement" and "the July Agreement" have confirmed the importance of missiles in protecting villages and infrastructure as these missiles now threaten the enemy's settlements." Sayyed Nasrallah went further, explaining, "Hizbullah doesn't seek an integrated, regional war... And I don't say that only the Resistance protects Lebanon; the Resistance, alongside with the Lebanese Army, does so..." Now MP Berri interfered, "At this point, I'd like to say that I insist on the presence of the Army alongside with the Resistance, for each has its role and space in the battle. Never have they contradicted, and neither will they do. Confrontation needs everybody's powers."
Sayyed Nasrallah proceeded, "The "Israelis" are betting on separating the Army, government, and people from the Resistance; nevertheless, I, as well as MP Berri, say we all must be on one side. As for the international forces' protection, the United Nations has become in charge of Kosovo, but Lebanon isn't going to witness such situation. Besides, is "Israel" going to be bound by the Seventh Chapter (of the UN Charter, which sets out the UN Security Council's powers to maintain peace)? This is impossible."
Again MP Berri interfered, "I remind you that the United Nations Qana Headquarters was bombarded, and 102 people were martyred; then the UN issued a resolution regarding the necessity of covering the costs of the Headquarters' demolition: only a million dollars, but "Israel" paid nothing. Neither is the Sixth Chapter (of the UN Charter, which deals with peaceful settlement of disputes) nor the Seventh a deterrent to "Israel". The problem with the West and the United States is that "Israel" is an exception, whereby it is unbound by resolutions; accordingly, the probable exception for handling this situation is the Resistance. The hole cause is the is the Resistance's arms, which are used for the liberation's continuation and Lebanon's protection. Hence, we must not fear these arms. It is true that the West is interested in them, for the West is interested in whatever aggravates "Israel". Let the UN kindly push "Israel" to withdraw from Shebaa and hand over all captives; then, we'll have another discussion."
Hariri: Syria Was Confused After "Israeli" Withdrawal
Now, Premier Fouad Siniora said, "Let's recall this in the first place: The Lebanese people want a clear agreement regarding the arms; they want to know what the destination will be if the Shebaa Farms are liberated."
The chief of the Future Party Saad Hariri talked, too, "When "Israel" withdrew in 2000, the Syrians were unpleased and confused, inventing (the issue of) the Shebaa Farms. Our responsibilities require that we do not underestimate people so that they do not underestimate us."
MP Berri replied to Hariri, "This is inexact; as if you haven't heard me explaining about the Farms and the properties!" (MP Berri had earlier given a detailed explanation concerning this issue.)
Sayyed Nasrallah: "Frankly, none has an interest in claiming that the Resistance's arms are a problem, and I consider that it is my national responsibility and duty to sustain mu work until liberating the land and (Lebanese) captives perfectly and providing protection for Lebanon."
MP Berri: "Even when it comes to death, you're envied!"
The Political Incidents of July 12, 2006
At 9:00 AM, I was en route to the Parliament, where a session regarding special projects for "the Development and Reconstruction Council" was to be held by the common parliamentary committees and to be attended by former Minister Al-Fadel Shalak. Then, news of the Captivation Operation of the two "Israeli" soldiers arrived, and I received a call from MP Berri, whereby he asked me to head to the Governmental Palace to talk to Premier Fouad Siniora about the Lebanese stance. Earlier, Berri had had a call with Siniora and talked about this issue, bearing words that could not be discussed on the phone, whereby Siniora held Hizbullah for what would happen.
I headed to the big Place... I waited for minutes in the house annexed to Siniora's office, where there was none. It was a chance to make some phone calls and ge3t an idea concerning the situation on earth in the South, more regions of which were being cannonaded. Then Siniora showed up where I'd been waiting for him, whereas Haj Hussein Khalil left Siniora's office without seeing who the latter was going to meet now. Siniora appeared anxious and tense, trying to prevent the unarranged papers in his hands from falling. Then he talked to me, "Lebanon does not endure what's happened. We're not in the atmospheres for this, and thus, I shall not hold responsibility. Let me be clear; we don't know what's happened (the Captivation Operation), so we're not responsible. What has happened is dangerous and offers excuses to "Israel". I'm going to request that both "Israeli" soldiers be handed over to the government; otherwise, the outcome will be dangerous. The country will be ruined; Hizbullah is responsible, and all parts must push (Hizbullah to hand over the captives)."
I answered Siniora, "We're facing a challenge, and all parts are responsible. As for you not being informed of the Operation, this is normal. We, too, weren't informed, and I believe that many Hizbullah commanders weren't informed either because this is typical of the Resistance's work."
Siniora: "The Sayyed (Sayyed Nasrallah) said he had no plans while we were holding the Dialogue session. We've been deceived."
Immediately, I answered him, "As far as I can remember, The Sayyed said he was committed with freeing the (Lebanese) captives... And the Operation is a part of the captives-freeing choices."
Siniora, "Well, I can't ruin the country for their sake (Hizbullah)."
So I said to him, "MP Berri sees you should consider the choices carefully since any conviction upon what's happened will only benefit "Israel", allowing it to exploit our contradictions. Therefore, I hope that you make no such stance. As for the way the captives' issue is handled, leave it getting handled and don't place yourself in an internal confrontation; thus, you won't place yourself in an external confrontation, which we don't want you to have anyway."
Siniora: "I've received some phone calls and made others, and everyone's holding us responsible for this escalation. Major General Alain Pellegrini (former UNIFIL Force Commander) told me the Operation violated "the Blue Line" (which is known as "the armistice line", too). I've just informed Haj Hussein Khalil of this, and I want you to declare this stance." Afterwards, he began talking about the cost of confrontation and the difficulty of enduring it, adding that things couldn't be seen from a single perspective. He said, "I've informed Khalil (Haj Hussein Khalil) that they have to bring me the ("Israeli") captives so that I can immediately initiate resolving this problem through diplomatic and political communications."
Michel Suleiman Seemed Very Firm
I went back to Ain el Tineh, and a ministerial assembly had been held in the Palace, where the discussion involved the same context that Siniora and I had discussed. The assembly stressed that Hizbullah must hold its responsibilities and make a stance, forsaking the Captivation Operation. More and more news arrived in Ain el Tineh; the atmospheres of war were becoming clearer, and so was the readiness on earth. MP Berri instructed the (commanders of) the South Region so that everyone would be alert and steady... He was asking about the readiness for rescue operations, considering the bombardment of Al-Qassemieh Bridge.
Then, MPs Muhammad Jawad Khalifeh and Talal Al-Sahli informed him of a meeting the Ministerial Council was to hold at 5:00 PM in the temporary headquarters near Al-Omari Mosque downtown. Thus, he gave directions regarding adherence to two issues: avoiding a division that would deactivate the government, in addition to concentrating on the "Israeli" aggressions and not making any conviction or stance against the Resistance's Operation. Also, MP Berri called the Army Commander (now the President) General Michel Suleiman, who seemed very firm. Berri emphasized the necessity of making the Lebanese Army handle its responsibilities.
Furthermore, MP Berri got a call from China, where MP Hariri was visiting. Hariri tried to reflect an impression concerning his affection by what was occurring; yet, his spirituality sounded more like that of Siniora: denouncing the Operation timing.
MP Berri then had a meeting with the UN Secretary General's Personal Representative for Lebanon Geir Pedersen, who made a very negative stance, implying that MP Berri should keep himself away from this confrontation. He said, "We denounce the Captivation Operation as it is an unprecedented act that places the country (Lebanon) in very difficult situations. Hizbullah has to hand over its arms at once." He added that what'd occurred had violated "the Blue Line", and if both "Israeli" captives weren't going to be set free without any restrictions, then "Israel" would be set loose and behave like it wanted. He said, too, that he had called the Lebanese leaderships including General Michel Aoun, warning them from standing by Hizbullah.
MP Berri: "Yes, dangers exist; I don't deny we're facing a challenge, but let's approach the reality of the subject: The Resistance is legitimate, and a part of its work is freeing the (Lebanese) captives. I'm not speaking about the timing but about the principle. As long as the Occupation exists and the captives aren't freed, the Resistance shall exist. I've asked all of you (the sides convicting the Resistance), and I've asked you (Geir Pedersen) in person for the mine maps tens of times since 2000; yet, they haven't been handed over so far. "Israel" respects none, so how are we going to free the Lebanese captives? Show me one way, and I'll support you. I advise all of you not to rush. I'll talk to Hizbullah, and I believe we can reach an understanding. At least I can say responsibly that Hizbullah is ready to cease fire, so are the "Israelis" ready to do so?" Now, Geir Pederson made a quick reply, whereby he seemed prepared for such suggestion, "The solution lies in handing over the captives, deploying the Army, and making the government solely in charge of the South." Pedersen then left without reaching an agreement except for staying in touch with Berri.
Berri to Both "Amal" Ministers: Our Stance Is Limited by Not Blowing Government
During the ministerial session that was held at night, things between Premier Siniora and his (March-14) team (on a side) and the ministers of Hizbullah and the Amal Movement (on another side) reached a harsh extent, whereby Siniora insisted on enlisting a text stating that the government had no knowledge of what was going on and held no responsibility for that.
Several calls were made, and MP Berri informed the ministers that the limits which could be reached in such stance were to make preservations on a certain paragraph without stirring the problem of government blowing, for the priority - as he said - was the unity of stance at such time in spite of the bitterness of what was being said. Besides, MP Berri informed both "Amal" ministers of the necessity of suggesting the issue of the ministerial statement which discusses the legitimacy of the Resistance, as well as the necessity of dealing quietly with the issues, iterating - at the same time - that if this limit was crossed, both ministers' vision would be clear: having the same stance as Hizbullah and President Emile Lahoud. Berri then informed Haj Hussein Khalil, who had already reached Ain el Tineh, that this was direction and the interest.
However, the Premier seemed convinced with the ambassador's stances, saying that he heard clear talk from Geir Pedersen, Bernard Emie (the French ambassador to Lebanon), and Jeffery Feltman (the American ambassador to Lebanon), whereby they said things had become greater than the government thought they were, and thus, a clear stance had to be made. Indeed, the statement of the government was issued, stating that the government had no knowledge of the Captivation Operation and that it held no responsibility for what had happened and was happening on the international borders...
Haj Hussein Khalil: Operation Timing was Left for Brothers Acting on Earth
Along with the group in Ain el Tineh Divan, Berri had listened to Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's press conference and commented positively on his clarity, firmness, openness, and positive signs he gave to the other sides. Haj Hussein Khalil was among the group in the Divan, and he informed MP Berri of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's message, "We've received Siniora's Message and listened to him, and we tell you that we don't seek war; yet, we're ready for it. What we want is to exchange captives, and there exist open channels for this.
Still, under no circumstances are we to hand over the ("Israeli") captives to the Lebanese government, for we don't want to embarrass the government that can do nothing in case "Israel" doesn't stick to a certain agreement. We're ready for indirect negotiations, and we don't seek any escalation; yet, neither do are we going to say this, nor are we going to ask for a truce."
MP Berri: "I emphasize that the political speech be made ultimately carefully so that we do not affect the national unity in such circumstance." (The leaderships of the March-14 Alliance were starting to issue stances, posing questions on the Operation timing, purposes, and who it served. The most significant stances have been those of (former) President Amine Al-Gemayel, MP Boutros Harb, Samir Geagea, and Fares Saaid.
As a matter of fact, MP Berri's major concern was to tolerate any dislodgement that might happen; whereas Haj Hussein Khalil exposed the Operation details and incidents, "The Operation timing was left for the brothers (fighters) acting on earth; even Hizbullah's command had no knowledge of the timing, whereby the fighters had been instructed to monitor weak points of the enemy along the occupied region, and the group that performed the captivation had been positioning and monitoring for days, in accordance with the usual way. The fighters of this group had their own (performance) style, and they, in particular, were camouflaging in the way (........). Once they informed their command, they received quick directions regarding dealing with the target." Haj Hussein Khalil continued, "As the "Israelis" reacted in the region, the fighters were in a safe location, and now I tell you that the captives are in a place which the "Israelis" can't reach.
The "Israelis'" reaction in the region has made them pay an extra price." He repeated, "The Sayyed tells you we don't seek any escalation. If there's talk of fire cease, then we have no problem. Neither do we have a problem with direct negotiations."
Source: As-Safir newspaper, Translated and edited by moqawama.org
Siniora to Ali Hassan Khalil and Haj Hussein Khalil: "The Sayyed (Sayyed Nasrallah) Deceived Us..." Both "Israeli" Captives Must Be Handed Over to Government; Otherwise, Country Will Be Ruined
UN Secretary General's Personal Representative for Lebanon Geir Pederson to Speaker of the Parliament of Lebanon: Hizbullah Must Immediately Hand over its Arms... And if You Do Not Set Both Captives Free, Then "Israel" Will Be Set Loose.
As-Safir Newspaper
Rights are preserved when proceedings are made, the recordings of which expose black and white political stances of the meeting politicians as these recordings are made with visible ink rather than secret ink, avoiding, thus, any unwanted outcomes.
However, as history is faked for the sake of certain political parties' dreams, it is a legitimate must that the proceedings be leaked and exposed to everyone.
Those were years men made... Withering threatened the blooms of these years, and sleep threatened their awareness; yet, their steadfastness faced the world's arsenal and the cities of decision. So can we get mad because of a cable?! And can we fake the history whose men, witnesses, and papers haven't died yet?!
Time hasn't faded in forgotten books; it is still fresh, retelling the Story of July eagerly and ready to recall the incidents of this Story - even its very beginnings; that is, ever since "Israel" decided to lock the last Southern gate and withdraw. This would make us avoid boredom... For history's sake, we recorded the near, painful past we experienced upon the acts of fellow partners; yet, we didn't write all incidents as some of them were so painful. As for the incidents, they looked very much like today's alignments and stances on the local, Arab, and international levels.
One April evening, a month before the Liberation in 2006, MP Berri sensed the incidents of the days yet to come; hand in hand with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, he expressed more than boastfulness about defeating "Israel", for the victory of men from Jabal Amel (Mount Amel) would be too weighty for the Arab-Islamic World.
As if foreseeing the political future and monitoring the Lebanese-Arab restriction yet to come, Berri felt that the Arabs and some Lebanese parties would follow the policy of hammering nails into coffins and would not tolerate the victory coming from the South.
The man (Berri) wasn't experienced in political discoveries; neither did he use a magic crystal, nor summon the kings of jinn. He was simply starting to read the stances that would later become quite obvious. Six years after the approaches made by former Premier Fouad Siniora, chief of "the Future Party" Saad Hariri, and chief of "the Lebanese Forces' Executive Board" Samir Geagea (during both dialogue sessions on March 14/June 8, 2006), some of the commanders of Hizbullah and "the Amal Movement" have reminded MP Berri of that, saying, "You've been totally right as you've worried about us defeating "Israel" in May 2000." Berri's concern existed before the little group of Hizbullah and the Amal Movement became doubtful and worried as they pursued the negotiations, in addition to the suggestions of Premier Siniora and his team ("the March-14 Alliance) throughout 33 days of the "Israeli" Aggression in July/ August, 2006.
In fact, the meeting MP Nabih Berri and Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah had on April 28, 2000, was preparatory for the stage of the "Israeli" withdrawal from the occupied borderline as well as for the post-withdrawal stage.
As usual, the senior aides of Sayyed Nasrallah and MP Berri arranged for the meeting. At 8:30, MP Berri's chief of private guards came up to the third floor where MP Berri and I were discussing issues concerning our party, for the Amal Movement's Presidential Board had decided to assign me in charge of the region of the occupied borderline.
Lowering the curtains of the lounge in that sea-overlooking floor was a precautionary procedure introducing the meeting.
In the parking lot of the Second Presidential Palace, the chief of the private guards and I escorted Sayyed Nasrallah after His Eminence, Haj Hussein Khalil, and Sayyed Ibrahim Amine As-Sayyed (Head of Hizbullah's Political Bureau) got off their car. After greetings and hugging with MP Berri at the lounge's entrance, Sayyed Ibrahim Amine As-Sayyed made a joke before going into a long discussion.
The meeting commenced with the evaluation of the stage following the previous meeting as well as the incidents occurring between both meetings. Then, the talk involved the moment of the "Israeli" Military's withdrawal from the occupied lands of the South and the victory of the resistance choice - the outcome of continuous sacrifices throughout the years of the Occupation until its very last days.
Confident, MP Berri said his analysis, in addition to some data, confirmed that ""Israel" can no longer bear its casualties in the South, and it will withdraw before May's end." Berri seemed resolute and convinced, and his prediction was supported by Sayyed Nasrallah, who confirmed that data, saying, ""Israel" is definitely going to withdraw; yet, we have to estimate that this might take some long time, whereby "Israel" might need to make arrangements regarding its agents." Still, MP Berri saw that "Israel" wouldn't care for making arrangements for "its worthless agents", emphasizing the necessity of readiness and preparedness before May's end.
The necessity of protecting civilians after the Liberation, particularly the Christians, took part in the discussion, for both men were adherent to protecting all civilians from any harm. Afterwards, Berri stood up, inviting Sayyed Nasrallah to dinner.
Actually, the repeated dinners Berri and Sayyed Nasrallah had changed a habit Sayyed Nasrallah had had for long years; refusing to eat the southern "Frakeh" (which is prepared by mixing raw, mashed meat with burghul [bulgur wheat grains] and adding salt; also adding marjoram sometimes). Sayyed Nasrallah said his mother would really like him to eat "Frakeh", but he would apologize every time; however, Haj and MP Berri made it seem very appealing to Sayyed Nasrallah as the residents of the bordering villages would mix more burghul with the meat and add marjoram, which would make Sayyed Nasrallah repeat, "ensuring against any effect of the raw meat." ("Frakeh" with the "ensuring" marjoram has become a main course for both men's dining tables, whether in Ain el Tineh [MP Berri's residence] or in Haret Hreik [Sayyed Nasrallah's residence].)
Moving along with the meeting attendees from the lounge to the dining room, MP Berri placed his hand on Sayyed Nasrallah's shoulder and said, "Sayyed, "Israel" is defeated, but we should not get overjoyed upon such defeat and be lost in the ecstasy of victory, for this matter is too great to be tolerated by Arabs, Muslims, and probably some Lebanese people. Personally, I'm not worried, but I feel that the responsibility is going to be much bigger. A quiet, expressive smile was Sayyed Hassan's comment, conveying more than an emphasis and meaning.
Furthermore, MP Berri and Sayyed Nasrallah, who were up to the minute with the dailies of the "Israeli" Aggression on Lebanon until August 14, considered the incidents occurring between the day of this meeting and July 12, 2006, accurately regarding the stage following Premier Rafik Hariri's martyrdom, the National Dialogue held, in addition to the approaches and discussions made during the Dialogue sessions in the Parliament.
Geagea's Prophecy of the Coming War
In the morning of March 14, 2006, the discussion of the Dialogue session involved the issue of the Shebaa Farms and proving their Lebanese identity. The chief of the Lebanese Forces' Executive Board Samir Geagea shook his head, carrying some papers in his hands and speaking as if confidently, "Brothers," (Again he shakes his head, pushing it forward this time.) "It's a form that must be considered; I suggest that we approach the issue from a different perspective and that we move to other standards." He began reading some pieces of the Armistice Agreement with "Israel" (which took place between Lebanon and "Israel" on March 23, 1949, ratifying the international border between occupied Palestine and Lebanon as "the armistice line"), making preservations on some of the context. Then he added, "Stopping violations can only happen through international telecommunications. I don't think we're maintaining a military balance with "Israel"; the solution lies in making a new armistice fortified by intensified, international forces, whereby we deploy 15,000 international soldiers for 25 or 50 years in order to keep Lebanon fortified; otherwise, we will still live the tense situation of an open war with "Israel" and the West.
The presence of international forces shall ensure our safety against such dangers; war is coming." As soon as Geagea finished his suggestion, the chief of the Future Party Saad Hariri said, "I understand this offer."
In the session of June 8, 2006, Geagea replied to Sayyed Hassan's view as respects the Defensive Strategy, "The center of gravity with respect to Sayyed Hassan is that Hizbullah's arms impose a kind of deterrent horror balance, and thus, it's an unrealistic presumption. The talk of a close "Israeli" coup is no longer a secret, and the discussion amid the "Israeli" military media is whether "Israel" should strike coldly or wait for a certain event. I believe that such operation is now within reach even though it is known that "Israel" is going to pay a certain price for this.
The solution lies in asking for international forces, which are influential. For instance, the Serbs cannot return to Kosovo as international forces are assigned to carry out combative missions on both sides, and they are given planes and boats. So let's make use of this chance and this moral alternative for arms so as to avoid such war outcome."
"The Sayyed" Replies to Geagea
In his approach, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah replied to Geagea, "... Saying that the Resistance's arms are ineffective and not deterrent to "Israel" is inaccurate. To clear this, our performance method shows we do not accept to let the enemy specify the battle timing. What's important is how to make the enemy feel that the cost of any military adventure is very high. In fact, "the April Agreement" and "the July Agreement" have confirmed the importance of missiles in protecting villages and infrastructure as these missiles now threaten the enemy's settlements." Sayyed Nasrallah went further, explaining, "Hizbullah doesn't seek an integrated, regional war... And I don't say that only the Resistance protects Lebanon; the Resistance, alongside with the Lebanese Army, does so..." Now MP Berri interfered, "At this point, I'd like to say that I insist on the presence of the Army alongside with the Resistance, for each has its role and space in the battle. Never have they contradicted, and neither will they do. Confrontation needs everybody's powers."
Sayyed Nasrallah proceeded, "The "Israelis" are betting on separating the Army, government, and people from the Resistance; nevertheless, I, as well as MP Berri, say we all must be on one side. As for the international forces' protection, the United Nations has become in charge of Kosovo, but Lebanon isn't going to witness such situation. Besides, is "Israel" going to be bound by the Seventh Chapter (of the UN Charter, which sets out the UN Security Council's powers to maintain peace)? This is impossible."
Again MP Berri interfered, "I remind you that the United Nations Qana Headquarters was bombarded, and 102 people were martyred; then the UN issued a resolution regarding the necessity of covering the costs of the Headquarters' demolition: only a million dollars, but "Israel" paid nothing. Neither is the Sixth Chapter (of the UN Charter, which deals with peaceful settlement of disputes) nor the Seventh a deterrent to "Israel". The problem with the West and the United States is that "Israel" is an exception, whereby it is unbound by resolutions; accordingly, the probable exception for handling this situation is the Resistance. The hole cause is the is the Resistance's arms, which are used for the liberation's continuation and Lebanon's protection. Hence, we must not fear these arms. It is true that the West is interested in them, for the West is interested in whatever aggravates "Israel". Let the UN kindly push "Israel" to withdraw from Shebaa and hand over all captives; then, we'll have another discussion."
Hariri: Syria Was Confused After "Israeli" Withdrawal
Now, Premier Fouad Siniora said, "Let's recall this in the first place: The Lebanese people want a clear agreement regarding the arms; they want to know what the destination will be if the Shebaa Farms are liberated."
The chief of the Future Party Saad Hariri talked, too, "When "Israel" withdrew in 2000, the Syrians were unpleased and confused, inventing (the issue of) the Shebaa Farms. Our responsibilities require that we do not underestimate people so that they do not underestimate us."
MP Berri replied to Hariri, "This is inexact; as if you haven't heard me explaining about the Farms and the properties!" (MP Berri had earlier given a detailed explanation concerning this issue.)
Sayyed Nasrallah: "Frankly, none has an interest in claiming that the Resistance's arms are a problem, and I consider that it is my national responsibility and duty to sustain mu work until liberating the land and (Lebanese) captives perfectly and providing protection for Lebanon."
MP Berri: "Even when it comes to death, you're envied!"
The Political Incidents of July 12, 2006
At 9:00 AM, I was en route to the Parliament, where a session regarding special projects for "the Development and Reconstruction Council" was to be held by the common parliamentary committees and to be attended by former Minister Al-Fadel Shalak. Then, news of the Captivation Operation of the two "Israeli" soldiers arrived, and I received a call from MP Berri, whereby he asked me to head to the Governmental Palace to talk to Premier Fouad Siniora about the Lebanese stance. Earlier, Berri had had a call with Siniora and talked about this issue, bearing words that could not be discussed on the phone, whereby Siniora held Hizbullah for what would happen.
I headed to the big Place... I waited for minutes in the house annexed to Siniora's office, where there was none. It was a chance to make some phone calls and ge3t an idea concerning the situation on earth in the South, more regions of which were being cannonaded. Then Siniora showed up where I'd been waiting for him, whereas Haj Hussein Khalil left Siniora's office without seeing who the latter was going to meet now. Siniora appeared anxious and tense, trying to prevent the unarranged papers in his hands from falling. Then he talked to me, "Lebanon does not endure what's happened. We're not in the atmospheres for this, and thus, I shall not hold responsibility. Let me be clear; we don't know what's happened (the Captivation Operation), so we're not responsible. What has happened is dangerous and offers excuses to "Israel". I'm going to request that both "Israeli" soldiers be handed over to the government; otherwise, the outcome will be dangerous. The country will be ruined; Hizbullah is responsible, and all parts must push (Hizbullah to hand over the captives)."
I answered Siniora, "We're facing a challenge, and all parts are responsible. As for you not being informed of the Operation, this is normal. We, too, weren't informed, and I believe that many Hizbullah commanders weren't informed either because this is typical of the Resistance's work."
Siniora: "The Sayyed (Sayyed Nasrallah) said he had no plans while we were holding the Dialogue session. We've been deceived."
Immediately, I answered him, "As far as I can remember, The Sayyed said he was committed with freeing the (Lebanese) captives... And the Operation is a part of the captives-freeing choices."
Siniora, "Well, I can't ruin the country for their sake (Hizbullah)."
So I said to him, "MP Berri sees you should consider the choices carefully since any conviction upon what's happened will only benefit "Israel", allowing it to exploit our contradictions. Therefore, I hope that you make no such stance. As for the way the captives' issue is handled, leave it getting handled and don't place yourself in an internal confrontation; thus, you won't place yourself in an external confrontation, which we don't want you to have anyway."
Siniora: "I've received some phone calls and made others, and everyone's holding us responsible for this escalation. Major General Alain Pellegrini (former UNIFIL Force Commander) told me the Operation violated "the Blue Line" (which is known as "the armistice line", too). I've just informed Haj Hussein Khalil of this, and I want you to declare this stance." Afterwards, he began talking about the cost of confrontation and the difficulty of enduring it, adding that things couldn't be seen from a single perspective. He said, "I've informed Khalil (Haj Hussein Khalil) that they have to bring me the ("Israeli") captives so that I can immediately initiate resolving this problem through diplomatic and political communications."
Michel Suleiman Seemed Very Firm
I went back to Ain el Tineh, and a ministerial assembly had been held in the Palace, where the discussion involved the same context that Siniora and I had discussed. The assembly stressed that Hizbullah must hold its responsibilities and make a stance, forsaking the Captivation Operation. More and more news arrived in Ain el Tineh; the atmospheres of war were becoming clearer, and so was the readiness on earth. MP Berri instructed the (commanders of) the South Region so that everyone would be alert and steady... He was asking about the readiness for rescue operations, considering the bombardment of Al-Qassemieh Bridge.
Then, MPs Muhammad Jawad Khalifeh and Talal Al-Sahli informed him of a meeting the Ministerial Council was to hold at 5:00 PM in the temporary headquarters near Al-Omari Mosque downtown. Thus, he gave directions regarding adherence to two issues: avoiding a division that would deactivate the government, in addition to concentrating on the "Israeli" aggressions and not making any conviction or stance against the Resistance's Operation. Also, MP Berri called the Army Commander (now the President) General Michel Suleiman, who seemed very firm. Berri emphasized the necessity of making the Lebanese Army handle its responsibilities.
Furthermore, MP Berri got a call from China, where MP Hariri was visiting. Hariri tried to reflect an impression concerning his affection by what was occurring; yet, his spirituality sounded more like that of Siniora: denouncing the Operation timing.
MP Berri then had a meeting with the UN Secretary General's Personal Representative for Lebanon Geir Pedersen, who made a very negative stance, implying that MP Berri should keep himself away from this confrontation. He said, "We denounce the Captivation Operation as it is an unprecedented act that places the country (Lebanon) in very difficult situations. Hizbullah has to hand over its arms at once." He added that what'd occurred had violated "the Blue Line", and if both "Israeli" captives weren't going to be set free without any restrictions, then "Israel" would be set loose and behave like it wanted. He said, too, that he had called the Lebanese leaderships including General Michel Aoun, warning them from standing by Hizbullah.
MP Berri: "Yes, dangers exist; I don't deny we're facing a challenge, but let's approach the reality of the subject: The Resistance is legitimate, and a part of its work is freeing the (Lebanese) captives. I'm not speaking about the timing but about the principle. As long as the Occupation exists and the captives aren't freed, the Resistance shall exist. I've asked all of you (the sides convicting the Resistance), and I've asked you (Geir Pedersen) in person for the mine maps tens of times since 2000; yet, they haven't been handed over so far. "Israel" respects none, so how are we going to free the Lebanese captives? Show me one way, and I'll support you. I advise all of you not to rush. I'll talk to Hizbullah, and I believe we can reach an understanding. At least I can say responsibly that Hizbullah is ready to cease fire, so are the "Israelis" ready to do so?" Now, Geir Pederson made a quick reply, whereby he seemed prepared for such suggestion, "The solution lies in handing over the captives, deploying the Army, and making the government solely in charge of the South." Pedersen then left without reaching an agreement except for staying in touch with Berri.
Berri to Both "Amal" Ministers: Our Stance Is Limited by Not Blowing Government
During the ministerial session that was held at night, things between Premier Siniora and his (March-14) team (on a side) and the ministers of Hizbullah and the Amal Movement (on another side) reached a harsh extent, whereby Siniora insisted on enlisting a text stating that the government had no knowledge of what was going on and held no responsibility for that.
Several calls were made, and MP Berri informed the ministers that the limits which could be reached in such stance were to make preservations on a certain paragraph without stirring the problem of government blowing, for the priority - as he said - was the unity of stance at such time in spite of the bitterness of what was being said. Besides, MP Berri informed both "Amal" ministers of the necessity of suggesting the issue of the ministerial statement which discusses the legitimacy of the Resistance, as well as the necessity of dealing quietly with the issues, iterating - at the same time - that if this limit was crossed, both ministers' vision would be clear: having the same stance as Hizbullah and President Emile Lahoud. Berri then informed Haj Hussein Khalil, who had already reached Ain el Tineh, that this was direction and the interest.
However, the Premier seemed convinced with the ambassador's stances, saying that he heard clear talk from Geir Pedersen, Bernard Emie (the French ambassador to Lebanon), and Jeffery Feltman (the American ambassador to Lebanon), whereby they said things had become greater than the government thought they were, and thus, a clear stance had to be made. Indeed, the statement of the government was issued, stating that the government had no knowledge of the Captivation Operation and that it held no responsibility for what had happened and was happening on the international borders...
Haj Hussein Khalil: Operation Timing was Left for Brothers Acting on Earth
Along with the group in Ain el Tineh Divan, Berri had listened to Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's press conference and commented positively on his clarity, firmness, openness, and positive signs he gave to the other sides. Haj Hussein Khalil was among the group in the Divan, and he informed MP Berri of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah's message, "We've received Siniora's Message and listened to him, and we tell you that we don't seek war; yet, we're ready for it. What we want is to exchange captives, and there exist open channels for this.
Still, under no circumstances are we to hand over the ("Israeli") captives to the Lebanese government, for we don't want to embarrass the government that can do nothing in case "Israel" doesn't stick to a certain agreement. We're ready for indirect negotiations, and we don't seek any escalation; yet, neither do are we going to say this, nor are we going to ask for a truce."
MP Berri: "I emphasize that the political speech be made ultimately carefully so that we do not affect the national unity in such circumstance." (The leaderships of the March-14 Alliance were starting to issue stances, posing questions on the Operation timing, purposes, and who it served. The most significant stances have been those of (former) President Amine Al-Gemayel, MP Boutros Harb, Samir Geagea, and Fares Saaid.
As a matter of fact, MP Berri's major concern was to tolerate any dislodgement that might happen; whereas Haj Hussein Khalil exposed the Operation details and incidents, "The Operation timing was left for the brothers (fighters) acting on earth; even Hizbullah's command had no knowledge of the timing, whereby the fighters had been instructed to monitor weak points of the enemy along the occupied region, and the group that performed the captivation had been positioning and monitoring for days, in accordance with the usual way. The fighters of this group had their own (performance) style, and they, in particular, were camouflaging in the way (........). Once they informed their command, they received quick directions regarding dealing with the target." Haj Hussein Khalil continued, "As the "Israelis" reacted in the region, the fighters were in a safe location, and now I tell you that the captives are in a place which the "Israelis" can't reach.
The "Israelis'" reaction in the region has made them pay an extra price." He repeated, "The Sayyed tells you we don't seek any escalation. If there's talk of fire cease, then we have no problem. Neither do we have a problem with direct negotiations."
Source: As-Safir newspaper, Translated and edited by moqawama.org
