Siniora’s Defense Strategy: Warning The Enemy

Ibrahim al-Amin - al-Akhbar newspaper

On the eve of Fitr Day, an "Israeli" commandos unit fell into an ambush set by the Islamic Resistance inside the Lebanese territories nearby border Alma Shaab village. "Israel" swallowed the bitter pill, as the Resistance remains silent for special reasons. But the official reaction in Lebanon was just limited to a series of contacts with the United Nations.

The political forces have other concerns. Yet the most striking stance from the Resistance's feuds was that of former Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.
The Head of the Future parliamentary bloc actually said, "The infiltration of Israeli soldiers off Labbouneh region, where they were exposed to the explosion of a landmine, is a flagrant violation of the Lebanese sovereignty and an attack on it as well as a violation of resolution 1701," condemning "this dangerous aggression which may carry along some worrying signification about the true reasons behind this violation."
Siniora added, "The Lebanese cannot accept such a dangerous attack. Competent authorities must notify the Arab League about it," calling the UN for "immediate mobilization to deter and warn Israel, because Israel is the aggressor and it is Israel that bears the responsibility of this attack on Lebanon. Besides, this violation is an attack on the international peacekeepers within the scope of their operations, and the UN must warn and curb Israel by all necessary means."

Perhaps Siniora's statement reflects the essence of March 14 camp's defense strategy, which has not seen the light yet. Siniora condemns the enemy's "violation" of Lebanon sovereignty. He says that the Lebanese "do not accept this attack" which "may carry among worrying signification." But he wants to "notify the Arab League" and wants the UN to "warn and curb Israel by all necessary means."

Siniora's idea on warning and curbing the enemy consists, in a nutshell, of condemning, notifying the AL, and having the UN issue a warning for "Israel."
Of course, Siniora found no need to address the Lebanese army on its role in facing the enemy and curbing "Israel" violation of the Lebanese sovereignty. He did neither find anything to say to the UNIFIL on its role in precluding the violation. He already does not feel the presence of the Resistance to address it in terms of curbing the violation, because if he did, he would have torpedoed the very essence of his defense strategy.

If Siniora mentioned the army and its role, he, alongside his team, would have to acknowledge that the army needed means to face the enemy. But this does not exist for this team ever since they came to power eight years ago. This does not comply with March 14 concern to have the army mission confined to removing the Resistance weapons. Maybe they do not want to buy weapons for the army. They rather seek to take those of the Resistance and then sell them.
If Siniora mentioned the role of the Resistance, he would have sapped his own principles that he had endeavored to clinch in the minds of his supporters since eight years; that is to say, the Resistance does not exist. Accordingly, he has to remain silent at least on the Resistance weapons, since they are efficient in curbing the enemy's violation of the Lebanese sovereignty. This is embarrassing, and Siniora is just not in a position where he would embarrass himself.

Moreover, Siniora seeks to notify the Arab League, yet without explaining what this notification exactly means. Is there anybody at the Arab League today who is ready to receive any notification on the conflict between Lebanon and "Israel?" Besides, what would the Arab League do if it ever received the notification? Would it issue a condemnation and call the UN to warn "Israel?"
Furthermore, Siniora addresses the competent authorities to notify the Arab League, without even bothering to name this authorities. If he did name them, he would have then recognized Adnan Mansour as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, which is something Siniora refuses to do.

Plus, if Siniora asked the UN for a practical move, he would then have to condemn the "false witness" role assumed by the UNIFIL, which proves high spying capacities on the Resistance as well as stupidity when it's about "Israel." Siniora realizes well that such a stance would cost him the disgrace and warning of the USA which of course, would never send such a message to "Israel." Siniora also knows that he will not be able to ask Europe for something and for its opposite at once. His camp was very active when it begged the European Union to blacklist Hizbullah. How would they then call Europe to condemn Hizbullah's enemy?
Besides, doesn't Siniora know that the UN, which he seeks to hold back "Israel," is hosting intensive meetings for the EU representatives who are working on talking the UN General Assembly into designating Hizbullah as a terrorist organization, noting that Siniora already knows that the UNIFIL doesn't even see how to counter the insults lobbed against it by "Israel?"

Wasn't the UNIFIL Commander, General Paolo Serra, disrespected when the date of his reception in Haifa was postponed, because the enemy officers, albeit ranking not as high as him, have no time?

In the end, Siniora only failed to add to its defense strategy his own strategic deterrence weapon: puckering his brow in the face of the enemy and shedding showers of tears...Is this how the sovereignty of states is preserved?!