Besieged and under fire, the civilian population of South Lebanon has had to pay the price of war and is still paying the price of peace. This article looks at the plight of this community and the total failure of all forms of international protection.
Since the early 1970s, the people of South Lebanon have suffered air raids, attacks and counter attacks, death, injury and mass displacement, and have experienced marginalisation and impoverishment over the years.
UNIFIL mandate
In 1978, following the first Israeli invasion of South Lebanon, the first UNIFIL contingent was deployed in the South to occupy what was to become a UN 'buffer zone' between the Israeli occupied parts of South Lebanon, known as 'the security zone', and the rest of the South. The UNIFIL mandate involved, inter alia, protecting the civilian population, ensuring that all parties abide by agreed ceasefires, overseeing the implementation of UN resolution 425 stipulating the total withdrawal of Israel from occupied areas in South Lebanon, and providing humanitarian assistance to the afflicted population. Since 1978, the UNIFIL mandate has been systematically renewed.
UNIFIL was, however, unable to prevent or block the Israeli invasion of 1982. Its presence then was totally ineffectual. Its internationally recognised territory and its mandate to act as an interposition force were violated and it was unable to prevent the detention and execution of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians.
After that date, and following the Israeli retreat to the 1978 'security zone', UNIFIL focused on trying to prevent the two warring parties, Israel and Hezbollah, from using the UN territory for military purposes, and on protecting the civilian population.
This also failed to a large extent as Hezbollah consistently infiltrated UN territory and conducted military operations targeting the security zone and northern Israel. These operations resulted in prompt retaliation by the Israeli army. Initially, Israeli retaliation concentrated on attacking Palestinian targets, whether military or civilian. The Lebanese population suffered numerous casualties and saw its livelihood gradually being destroyed by the Israelis and by the Palestinian military. After 1982, Hezbollah became better organised and better armed; it intensified its military operations and became yet more effective in hitting Israeli military targets and civilians.
Both parties totally disregarded the UN mandate and the agreed UN buffer zone. Hezbollah argued that resistance was internationally recognised as a legitimate act while Israel claimed the right of selfdefence and pursuit of aggressor.
Civilians and refugees caught in the crossfire
Caught in the middle of the crossfire were the Palestinian and Lebanese civilians. However, more recently, the Lebanese civilian population became the main victims of Israeli retaliation attacks. Indeed, it became the declared policy of the Israeli government to target Lebanese civilians and infrastructure in order to force the Lebanese government to put an end to Hezbollah attacks.
During the summer of 1993, Israel conducted a large scale military operation, the largest since the invasion of 1982, which resulted in the rapid displacement of tens of thousands of Lebanese families. Losses in human lives and in means of livelihood were innumerable; houses, agricultural fields and cattle were destroyed and thousands of people found themselves unable to support their families, with little prospect of any form of compensation.
UNIFIL could do little to prevent this. Similarly, three years later, it again could do little to prevent a major new offensive, nicknamed 'Grapes of Wrath'.
'Grapes of Wrath'
In April 1996, a couple of months before the Israeli elections and when the peace process was at a stalemate, Israel decided to put an end to Hezbollah attacks on northern Israel. 'Grapes of Wrath' deliberately targeted the Lebanese civilian population. The operation was rapidly extended to reach major infrastructure targets in the heart of the country where a vital power plant was shelled and severely damaged. Although thousands fled the areas under fire in South Lebanon, many decided to stay. Most of these, mainly women, children and the elderly, sought refuge within the UNIFIL compound in the village of Qana. On 26 April, that same compound known, as a subsequent UN investigation was to reveal, to house civilian refugees was directly shelled by the Israeli army. More than a hundred died; even more were injured. Explanations such as the alleged presence of a Hezbollah position behind the compound were given by the Israeli authorities to justify the attack.
Although a ceasefire agreement was subsequently reached and is now monitored by a five nations committee, attacks and counter attacks have not ceased to claim still more lives of innocent civilians. There are no guarantees that what happened in Qana will never be repeated.
The findings of the UN investigation caused considerable international outrage and diplomatic embarrassment for Israel. This provided little compensation, however, for the families of the dead who by now had lost faith in any international interventions designed to protect them against such aggression.
Failure of the UNIFIL mandate
Although others may disagree, the failure to implement the UNIFIL mandate is largely due to Israel's refusal, under different pretexts, to comply with it. Had the international community been stricter in putting pressure on Israel (such as, for example, in the case of Iraq), UNIFIL might have been more successful in fulfilling its protection mandate.
The case of the Lebanese in South Lebanon is not unique and is not the only instance where civilians have been used as human shields by one party and as scapegoats by the other. Refugee safe havens have become burial grounds in other situations, with internationally recognised UN forces virtually unable to protect the victims.
In this setting, it is difficult to state categorically whether or not interposition forces can be of use. In the case of South Lebanon, despite major obstacles, UNIFIL has significantly boosted the economy of what was an economically inert region and has provided some form of livelihood for thousands of families. At present, UNIFIL is providing welcome health and other social services to the population. On the other hand, it was far less successful in fulfilling the other aspects of its mandate, especially the protection of civilians. The military from both sides have demonstrated many times that they can violate UN territory and attack civilians whenever they please.
Who then is ultimately responsible for protecting civilian refugees? If the UN cannot provide a safe sanctuary, then who can? Is it an immutable fact that, at times of war, there is nobody who can protect civilians?
Lina Abu Habib is a programme officer with Oxfam UK and Ireland in Lebanon.
1. UNIFIL: United Nations Interposition Forces In Lebanon
2. The Israelis retreated after the 1978 occupation but maintained a hold on a strip of border land in South Lebanon which came to be know as the 'security zone'.
October 1996