/ 18 July 2006

West flounders as old divisions resurface

A joint statement issued on Monday by European foreign ministers, agreed after hours of tortuous negotiation, exposed what has become increasingly clear in recent days: the West is paralysed over how to deal with the Israeli-Lebanese conflict.

The British government lined up with Germany, Israel’s closest ally in the European Union, to remove from the draft statement criticism of Israel. The divisions in Brussels reflected similar disagreements at the G8 summit in St Petersburg at the weekend.

Faced with a conflict that has resulted in a high civilian death toll and poses a threat to the entire region, the United States, Britain, Russia, France and other major countries that engage with the Middle East have been left floundering. The missiles and rockets have exposed divisions in the international community over the causes of the conflict and how to end it.

In an echo of the build-up to the Iraq war, the US and Britain have again joined forces against France, Russia and others. And British Prime Minister Tony Blair has again opened himself up to criticism in the United Kingdom, accused by Labour MPs of being too soft on Israel and too close to Washington.

The British government lined up with Germany at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, to water down criticism of Israel. Officials from the two countries made major changes to the first draft presented by Finland, which holds the EU presidency. Finland initially wanted to condemn the Israeli and Hezbollah attacks on civilians. This was changed to say that the EU deplored the loss of civilian lives on all sides.

Finland had proposed saying of Israel: ”Unjustified measures and continued escalation will only aggravate the vicious circle of violence and retribution.” But Britain and Germany had this removed.

Finland initially failed to mention Hezbollah’s rocket attack on Haifa. This was mentioned and the word condemn was used. The statement said: ”The European Union condemns the attacks by Hezbollah on Israel and the abduction of two Israeli soldiers.”

The Brussels statement reflected the same divisions apparent at the G8 summit when Russia blamed Israel for over-reacting. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, said that while it was unacceptable to take hostages and fire missiles as Hezbollah had done, it was also unacceptable to kill civilians and destroy infrastructure as Israel had done.

Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, was determined that, in the summit communique, Syria and Iran should not be attacked by name, arguing that it would be counter-productive. But Bush disagreed, saying ”the root cause of the instability was Hezbollah and its relationship with Syria and Iran”.

Blair, like Bush, had no hesitation on Monday in naming both countries: ”The truth is, there is an arc of extremism right across that region, that wants to disrupt the process towards democracy and freedom, whether it’s in Iraq or in Lebanon or down in the Palestinian territory, that arc of extremism is being supported by countries like Iran and Syria.”

France, like Russia, sees the capture of the Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah as unacceptable but regards the Israeli response as disproportionate. The French see the British reluctance, along with the US, to criticise Israel as giving a green, or at least amber, light for Israel to keep up its attacks on Hezbollah.

Adding to the sense of the international community floundering, leaders disagreed over interpretations of the communique. The US and Britain insisted it did not include a call for a ceasefire. But Jacques Chirac, the French President who in the run-up to war in Iraq challenged US and British interpretations of negotiations at the UN, disputed the US and British version of St Petersburg, said: ”It is evident that the G8 is calling for a ceasefire. We have all said it. The entire G8 has called for a ceasefire in Lebanon and Gaza.”

In spite of his public image as Bush’s uncritical partner, Blair does not unreservedly take the Washington line on Israel. On Monday he joined Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary General, in calling for a, 2 000-strong UN observation force on the Israeli-Lebanese border to be expanded and given a bigger role. The US described the plan as premature, while the Israeli government rejected it outright.

In private, Bush and Blair pressed Israel to hold back from a direct attack on Syria in retaliation for funding Hezbollah, or supposedly providing the missiles with which they had attacked Israeli positions. They also sought assurances that Israel would not seek to reoccupy Lebanon.

This won Blair little sympathy at home. Labour MPs criticised the government for its failure to condemn violence on the part of the Israelis, although they were broadly supportive of the proposal for an international stability force.

Eric Illsley, who serves on the Commons foreign affairs committee, said: ”The Israelis should be told by the US and Britain to stand down and implement a ceasefire. We always support Israel regardless of the circumstances. There is provocation with the kidnaps, but the response of the Israelis is always disproportionate — and always supported by the actions of Britain and America.”

Jon Trickett, a member of the all-party parliamentary group on Lebanon, said: ”It does look as if the Israelis have effectively launched collective punishment: the whole of Lebanon is being held guilty for what is clearly the action of a handful of people. And if that’s right, then it’s clearly against international law.” – Guardian Unlimited Â