Crescent Magazine

MD -Toronto- Crescent–online
February 4, 2010 – 10:00am EST

The hurried retreat of Israeli occupation forces from the Lebanese village of Ghajar that was reported by the US neo-con think tank on February 2 reflects the growing fear in the zionist state about its illegal activities.

The Washington Institute for the Near East Policy (WINEP) reflected on technical issues relating to Israeli withdrawal from Ghajar village adjacent to Shebaa Farms on the tip of the Golan Heights. Israel usurped the Golan Heights from Syria in 1967. While its occupation forces have been driven out of much of Lebanon following Hizbullah's valiant resistance, the zionists have refused to vacate Shebaa Farms offering the spurious excuse that the village belongs to Syria. Damascus has repeatedly announced that it has no claims to Shebaa Farms but the zionists continue to cling to the fiction because they refuse to vacate territories illegally occupied from others, including the Golan Heights as well as al-Quds (Jerusalem) and the rest of Palestine.  

Apart from trying to justify the zionists' illegal occupation of Ghajar and attempting to fuel sectarianism, the WINEP article touched on the issue which exposes Israel's stubborn refusal to resolve any crisis through non-partisan intermediaries. The WINEP article states: “the Israelis also have reason to feel queasy about the precedent set by their withdrawal. Although placing the disputed territory in UNIFIL trusteeship seems pragmatic, it has serious implications: For the first time, Israeli citizens will be placed under UN administration -- a precedent that could be applied in the West Bank and Golan Heights.”

What WINEP conveniently skips is the fact that these Israeli citizens do not belong either in the West Bank or Golan Heights. If they are so concerned about not living under a UN administration, then they must vacate the illegally occupied lands. But WINEP is little more than an Israeli lobby based in Washington and supported by donations from American taxpayers' dollars. It only projects Israel's interests regardless of how illegitimate or abhorent they may be.

WINEP's commentary reflects zionist fears that Israel's illegal occupation is losing international support and that it may not be sustainable for too long. Israel has consistently refused to enter into serious negotiations because it will then be forced to surrender territories it has illegally occupied and its illegitimate existence would cease.

The zionists are master blackmailers; they have successfully undermined even UN-based solutions that are clearly in their favour because they refuse to vacate any land acquired through aggression. Their brazenness, however, has started to irk even their traditional friends. Zionist unilateralism is no longer accepted as easily as it was in the past. Perhaps the zionists have pushed their luck too far and may soon find themselves abandoned even by their allies.

END