Lebanon

MIFTAH

A Quarter of a Century Later, Sabra and Shatilla Massacre Still Alive

September 16 marks the 25th anniversary of the massacre in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps in Lebanon. During the course of the two-day attack, a reported 2,000 Palestinians - mainly women, children and elderly - were slaughtered in their homes at the hands of the pro-Israeli Lebanese Maronite Phalangist militia under the direct eye of the occupying Israeli army. While Israel puts the death toll at 700, some Palestinian and Lebanese estimates put it as high as 3,500. The massacre took (...) read

date of on-line publication : 18 September 2007

International Crisis Group

Lebanon at a tripwire

> Middle East Briefing n°20, Beirut-Brussels, 21 December 2006

Lebanon has badly lost its balance and is at risk of new collapse, moving ever closer to explosive Sunni-Shiite polarisation with a divided, debilitated Christian community in between. The fragile political and sectarian equilibrium established since the end of its bloody civil war in 1990 was never a panacea and came at heavy cost. It depended on Western and Israeli acquiescence in Syria’s tutelage and a domestic system that hindered urgently needed internal reforms, and change was long (...) read

date of on-line publication : 8 January 2007

WARSCHAWSKI Michel

The future of Israel at stake

http://www.alternativenews.org/index (...)

The following article was written 30 July at 6.00 a.m., an hour before the announcement of the tragic news of the Qana massacre on Israeli radio. Unfortunately, the massacre was already visible in the content of my writing even before hearing the terrible news:
“In these wars, lives of civilians are not only of very limited value, like in any other war, but considered as a legitimate target, guilty of supporting terrorism, actively or passively, a terrorism which is, in fact, part of their very culture. In ten years, we witnessed a gradual evolution of the dominant discourse: from terrorist groups, to terrorist states, to terrorist peoples...”
Nothing is missing from the original text except a deep feeling of failure, an immense rage and a renewed commitment to take to the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem to denounce Israeli barbarism, from within the belly of the beast.  read

date of on-line publication : 1 August 2006

Questions and Answers on Hostilities Between Israel and Hezbollah

> Human Rights Watch

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006 (...)

On July 12, Hezbollah launched an attack on Israeli positions on the Israeli side of the Lebanese border, killing three Israeli soldiers and capturing two. In response, Israel launched air and artillery attacks against targets throughout Lebanon, including Beirut’s international airport, bridges and highways, and Hezbollah offices. It also instituted an air, sea, and land blockade. According to media reports at the time of writing, Israeli attacks have killed at least 110 civilians and wounded more than 235 in Lebanon. Hezbollah forces have launched more than 800 rockets across the border into northern Israel, as far south as Tiberias (35km/22 miles south of the border), killing 12 civilians and injuring more than 100. The following questions and answers set out some of the legal rules governing the various actions taken by Israel and Hezbollah to date in this recent conflict. Human Rights Watch sets out these rules before it has been able to conduct extensive on-the-ground investigation. The purpose is to provide analytic guidance for those who are examining the fighting as well as for the parties to the conflict and those with the capacity to influence them.
This Q & A addresses only the rules of international humanitarian law, known as jus in bello, which govern the way each party to the armed conflict must conduct itself in the course of the hostilities. It does not address whether Hezbollah was justified in attacking Israel, whether Israel was justified in attacking Lebanon for the conduct of Hezbollah, or other matters concerning the legitimacy of resorting to war. In accordance with its institutional mandate, Human Rights Watch maintains a position of strict neutrality on these issues of jus ad bellum because we find it the best way to promote our primary goal of encouraging both sides in the course of the conflict to respect international humanitarian law.  read

date of on-line publication : 17 July 2006