Lebanon War Distortions

Study shows NGOs issued baseless, fabricated accusations against Israel.

BY: Abraham Bell, Gerald M. Steinberg

This summer marks the five-year anniversary of the Lebanon war between Israel and the Lebanese-Iranian terrorist organization Hezbollah. The Second Lebanon War traumatized Israel politically as well as militarily. Militarily, Israel failed to dislodge the terrorist organization from its southern Lebanese foothold; politically, Israeli leaders found themselves overwhelmed by a flood of false accusations of “war crimes,” “indiscriminate and disproportionate” force, and “violations of international law.”

International non-governmental organizations played a critical role in the political warfare against Israel. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International – ostensibly neutral watchdogs – led the campaign. In 35 days, they issued over 40 press releases, statements and pseudo fact-finding reports, comprising hundreds of pages, largely ignoring the war crimes committed by the terrorist organization and instead focusing overwhelmingly and negatively on alleged Israeli crimes.

The HRW and Amnesty allegations were immediately accepted, at face value, by the world’s media. Politicians and diplomats then echoed the war crimes accusations, without any fact-checking.

We are now completing a multi-year study of all the HRW and Amnesty allegations regarding the 2006 Lebanon war, and the results so far are shocking. In our systematic and detailed research, supported by the Israel Science Foundation, we found major contradictions as well as numerous unsupported charges, double standards and false or invented “evidence.”

In some reports, such as on incidents in the Shiite towns of Srifa and Qana - Hezbollah strongholds from which numerous rocket attacks were launched - the NGOs published wildly inconsistent civilian casualty claims within a few days of each other. Errors were overwhelmingly in one direction; almost without fail, errors consisted of exaggerated Lebanese casualties or unfounded accusations against Israel.

In many incidents, HRW and Amnesty reports initially relied both on Lebanese witnesses and the personal observations of its own “researchers” to deny any Hezbollah military presence in the area of an Israeli strike, while later publications acknowledged that Hezbollah had been present, meaning the witnesses had lied and the NGO researchers were incompetent. Regarding Srifa, even after reducing the number of reported Lebanese casualties from “at least 42” to 26 to 19 before finally settling on 22, HRW found itself forced by critics and the evidence to eventually acknowledge that most of the “civilian” casualties it had “documented” were, in fact, Hezbollah combatants.

Hold NGOs accountable

Indeed, in all of the incidents, the lack of reliable sources of information for the HRW and Amnesty accusations against Israel stands out. In each case, it is clear that when HRW and Amnesty issued their initial condemnations of Israel, usually within a few hours of the incident, the organizations had little or no information about the central issues of military necessity and the nature of casualties. And later reports with altered condemnations were based more on conjecture than substantive research.

The most blatant example was the incident in Qana, where Israel responded to heavy Hezbollah rocket attacks with an air raid. One of the buildings was hit and collapsed, causing a number of deaths and injuries. Within hours, HRW blasted a press release in which Executive Director Ken Roth claimed that the "Israeli military is treating southern Lebanon as a free-fire zone, relating to the strike on Qana, killing at least 54 civilians, more than half of them children." HRW then launched a campaign charging Israel with war crimes, with nine separate “reports” and op-eds, as well as press conferences.

HRW’s campaign was echoed in media headlines, creating intense international pressure, and leading Prime Minister Olmert to declare a “48-hour suspension of aerial activity pending an investigation...” A unilateral halt in military action due to unverified NGO allegations was unprecedented, allowed Hezbollah forces to regroup, prolonging the war, and probably costing many lives.

Yet, as our research reveals, HRW had no credible evidence for its claims. Roth, HRW researcher Lucy Mair (who had written propaganda for Electronic Intifada before joining HRW) and others far from the battleground, had inflated civilian casualty claims and erased the Hezbollah attacks that constituted the real war crimes as well as legal justification for Israeli actions. To create the façade of “fact finding”, the initial HRW statement referred to “researchers” in Lebanon, but they provided no names or means to verify HRW’s claims. Later reports either provided no sources or attributed allegations to “witnesses” who could well have been Hezbollah allies or operatives. The allegations that Israel had criminally and deliberately bombed Lebanese civilians were unsourced and false.

As the contradictions emerged, HRW’s Mair admitted that the Lebanese Red Cross had reported 28 dead, including Hezbollah “martyrs,” but HRW chose to continue its false accusations against Israel.

The catch-22 in which the NGOs placed Israel is illustrated by their “proof” that Israel knew that civilians were in the building, near the Hezbollah targets. On August 3, 2006, Amnesty International “proved” that an Israeli investigation showing that the Israeli military had not known of the civilians was a “whitewash” because “survivors of the attack … stated that they had been in the building for some two weeks and that their presence must have been known to Israeli forces.” On the same day, August 3, 2006, Human Rights Watch “proved” that the Israeli claim that the “civilians were not seen because they had been hiding in the building for some days” could not be believed because a “survivor” of the attack stated that the civilians only entered the building “around 6 pm on July 29,” i.e., only seven hours before the bombing.

Two opposite and contradictory accounts of the facts, but the same result: the NGOs pronounced that the facts prove Israeli guilt.

Sadly, observers - even Israeli officials - have tended to give the NGOs a free pass for their fabrications. And the model of making up the facts to “prove” an Israel guilt presumed from the start has been repeated in subsequent conflicts, most prominently by the Goldstone Mission’s now discredited 2009 report on the Gaza conflict.

Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch claim to be promoting universal values by prosecuting their political war against the State of Israel. But justice will only truly be served when the NGOs are held accountable for their distortions.

Abraham Bell is professor of law at Bar Ilan University. Gerald Steinberg is professor of political studies at Bar Ilan University



Ynet News

No Such Thing as Persian Civilization

Nasrallah Provokes Iran: No Such Thing as Persian Civilization

In video posted on YouTube, Hezbollah leader says Ayatollah Khomeini was an 'Arab and son of an Arab, descendant of Muhammad'; praises Khamenei's handling of post-election unrest.

VIDEO - "Today there is no such thing as Persian civilization in Iran. There is an Islamic civilization in Iran. There is (prophet) Muhammad's religion in Iran," Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah said in a YouTube video which angered many in the Islamic Republic.




The head of the Lebanese Shiite group went as far as saying that the leader of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, as well as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are of Arab descent.

"Khomeini is an Arab and the son of an Arab who is a descendant of Muhammad. Khamenei is a descendant of the Arab dynasty of Muhammad's descendants," he said.

In the video, Nasrallah also addressed the civil unrest that followed the disputed presidential elections of June 12, 2009 and praised Khamenei's handling of the crisis. "Iran – the regime, government and people were blessed with a wise, courageous and merciful leader in the imam Khamenei," said the Hezbollah chief.

The comments were made in two separate speeches delivered by Nasrallah. It is not known who posted the video on YouTube, but some estimate it may be elements trying to drive a wedge between Iran and Hezbollah in the aftermath of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's recent visit to Lebanon.

The remarks elicited numerous responses, particularly from Iranian bloggers and internet surfers abroad. A group of Iranian exiles even set up a Facebook page titled, "We, Iranian, hate Nasrallah." More than 6,000 people have already joined the online protest against Nasrallah.

The "Green Embassy Campaign," which was set up by Iranian diplomats who defected to the West, called Nasrallah's comments "worrying" and "baseless." They said the remarks are indicative of the price the regime in Tehran is willing to pay in order to be considered the leader of the Islamic world, even at the expense of Persian history.

The majority of Iranians are Shiite Muslims, while most Arabs are Sunni Muslims




Ynet News

Message to the World

by Ron Ben Yishay

News report about Hezbollah arms smuggling prepares world for possible war.

One should carefully read the report published by reputable French daily Le Figaro Tuesday about the Hezbollah arms smuggling operation. The report includes credible information, at an unprecedented scope and detail, regarding Iran’s effort to arm and fortify the Lebanese Shiite group with active Syrian assistance.

However, the main reason why this report deserves special attention has to do with the messages inherent in it and the timing of its publication. We can assume, with great degree of certainty, that whoever provided the reputable French newspaper with sensitive intelligence information wanted to achieve several aims.

The first aim is to slam the facts in the face of international public opinion, so that the UN, the West, Arab states and the global media won’t pretend to be surprised if and when Israel undertakes powerful, destructive strikes. Such actions would target the immense rocket and missile arsenal in Lebanon, as well as the states that contributed to establishing it, that is, Lebanon and Syria.

The French report is not the first one aiming to achieve this objective. In recent months, Israeli and global media outlets published a significant number of stories accompanied by detailed aerial photographs showing Hezbollah men training in Syria on using various types of missiles. The reports also revealed that Hezbollah places these arms in the midst of civilian populations and far away from Israel’s border, to make it difficult for the IDF to target the weapons (and so that Israel would be accused of war crimes against civilians should it act.)

In order to expose the plots of Hezbollah and its patrons, IDF Northern Command Chief Gadi Eisenkott presented journalists (about three months ago) with detailed information and photos about Hezbollah’s deployment and arms depots at the southern Lebanon town of al-Khiyam. The efforts to prepare global public opinion in advance already proved themselves in the second Intifada and ahead of Operation Cast Lead as a critical component that grants Israel justification and relative freedom to act.

We can therefore assume that Israel, apparently in cooperation with France, is also behind the latest French report. France views itself as holding responsibility and special ties with Lebanon, and the information leaked by the French Defense Ministry (according to Le Figaro) constitutes a message to Lebanon and Syria in and of itself.

Syria targets fair game
The leak’s timing, right after Ahmadinejad’s visit to Lebanon, was meant to prove that France, just like Israel, treats the Iranian president’s threats seriously and is concerned by them. The report meant to prove, using facts and figures, that as opposed to Western commentary that viewed the Iranian president’s impassioned zeal as Mideastern arrogance that is empty of substance, we are dealing with a plan of action and available means to carry it out by Hezbollah, once it receives the green light from Tehran.

Another inherent message in the report is directed at Damascus. President Bashar Assad, who constantly declares his desire for peace with Israel, would have trouble explaining how such statements are commensurate with the flames he’s been fanning by helping Hezbollah (which operates in the heart of Damascus, several kilometers away from the Syrian presidential palace and under the watchful eye of Assad’s security services.)

The message was not only meant to embarrass the Syrian president, but also to indicate to him that Hezbollah’s headquarters and training camps in Syria are, in Israel’s view, legitimate targets and that he and his regime will be responsible for any damage sustained by Syria.

Another message directed at Syria, as well as at the Lebanese government and Hezbollah, is that their acts are transparent and that Israeli and Western intelligence agencies are aware of them. This also means that Israel’s flights above Lebanon are necessary, despite the UN condemnations. These spy missions are mostly needed in order to ascertain whether the Iranians, via the Syrians, are transferring what Israel refers to as “balance-breaking weapons” into Lebanon.

Such weapons include anti-aircraft missile batteries that would limit the Israel Air Force’s maneuvers, as well as long-term Scud missiles. Should such weapons be transferred nonetheless, Israel may respond with great force.

While the above messages will not bring about the termination of Hezbollah’s rocket and missile arsenal, they serve Israel’s deterrent power and are supposed to grant it legitimacy for “disproportional” acts should such strikes be required in Lebanon, and possibly in Syria as well.





Ynet News

Fire on Beirut's Streets: Hezbollah, Sunnis Clash

Violence erupts between Hezbollah, Sunni militia; at least three fatalities reported, including senior Hezbollah man. Lebanese army restores calm to capital; groups issue joint statement saying clash was an 'isolated event'

Clashes broke out in Beirut Tuesday evening between the Shiite organizations Hezbollah and the Sunni militia al-Ahbash. Lebanese media reported that at least three people were killed, one of them a senior Hezbollah official. It was later reported that order was restored in the city.

Hezbollah and al-Ahbash issued a joint statement late Tuesday night, saying that "the unfortunate event which took place tonight at Burj Abu Haidar, was an isolated event with no political or religious motive. The Lebanese army will conduct in investigation and will unveil those trying to hurt stability and security."

Fighting started Tuesday night in the Burj Abu Haidar neighborhood in downtown Beirut, and included RPGs and automatic weapons. According to the report, a Chevrolet containing four Hezbollah operatives entered the mixed Sunni-Shiite neighborhood in the Lebanese capital, and the passengers opened fire. The situation quickly escalated, and the Sunnis fired back at the vehicle.

The senior Hezbollah man killed in the fighting was Muhammad Fawaz, the organization's leading man in the neighborhood where the clashes took place. His assistant, Ali Jawaz, was also killed in the incident.

Lebanese authorities said Ahmad Omeirat, of the radical Sunni al-Ahbash group was also killed.

According to initial reports, the bodies of the two Hezbollah men were being held by the Sunni operatives. Hezbollah gave their Sunni rivals an ultimate of three hours to hand the bodies over.

Mosque torched, carrying weapons banned
Lebanese media reported that a mosque affiliated with the Sunni al-Ahbash movement was torched hours after the clashes broke. The Lebanese military was deployed to the neighborhood, and Lebanese Defense Minister Elias al-Murr issued a decree against carrying weapons in the streets.

Following the clashes, Lebanese President Michel Suleiman and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who also heads the Shiite Amal movement, discussed the situation and agreed the fighting must end immediately. Mosques in the area also urged the gunmen to hold their fire.

Hours after fighting broke, al-Jazeera reported that order was restored in Beirut. Hezbollah's al-Manar television station belittled the incident, and called it "security disorder".

According to reports Hezbollah and al-Ahbash representatives met in the Lebanese military's headquarters in an attempt to quell the violence. It remained unclear what Hezbollah's Wafiq Safa and al-Ahbash's Badr at-Tabash decided on, but reports said one possibility was that the person behind the shooting at Hezbollah be handed over to the organization.

Contrary to earlier reports, operatives of the Shiite Amal organization were not involved in the fighting.

Hezbollah Spokesman Ibrahim Mousawi denied that his organization have al-Ahbash an ultimatum of three hours to return the bodies. Al-Manar was slow in reporting on the incident, and did not give full details of events.

Lebanon has a history of deadly sectarian strife, which has even escalated to civil war. The most recent clash in the city's northern neighborhood broke after Hezbollah was implicated in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

The international tribunal probing the assassination said Hezbollah has yet to submit the evidence it says it has tying Israel to the act.

Last week Hezbollah handed Lebanese authorities its "evidence" implicating Israel in the killing, but according to the UN prosecutor, Daniel Bellemare, Hezbollah only gave his office six DVDs that have already been made public, but did not hand over any of the additional evidence the organization said it had.

Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah said in a speech two weeks ago that Israel was behind the assassination, and presented aerial photographs showing that Israel was tracking Hariri days prior to his death.


Ynet News

Iran's Plan Biochemical Attack On Israel

Will the summer of 2010 bring an attack from Iran and Hezbollah on Israel?

Major General Paul E. Vallely (Ret.) has told PJTV that "Iran is planning a preemptive attack against
Israel through its military proxy Hezbollah. He adds that recently, a submarine in Beirut unloaded suspicious cargo that signaled the potential presence of chemical weapons," reports Uncoverage.net.

The people who were working on the submarine had on hazmat gear and gas masks; General Vallely notes that "some sort of chemical weapons were being offloaded from the submarine to the control of Hezbollah."

Could war be imminent? If so what will the United States do to try to quell the unrest and to control Iran?

SCUD Missiles
There have also been many reports that Iran has shipped Russian-created SCUD missiles to Lebanon in recent months. These missiles may have a longer range, of up to 450 km, than missiles used previously; they may have the capability to hit Tel Aviv and Israel.

Hezbollah is also believed to have a supply of M-600 rockets to attack Israel. These rockets are "Iranian-designed and Syrian built," notes the Christian Science Monitor. These rockets are smaller and more accurate than the Scud and easier to use.

Israel is in the process of giving the people of the country gas masks to wear in case of SCUD chemical missile attacks.

Israel Warns Syria: "We'll Return Syria to Stone Age"

The London Times reports that Israel has given a private warning to Syrian President Bashar Assad that Israel will start an attack against Syria if Hezbollah attacks Israel. "Israel made it clear that it now regards Hezbollah as a division of the Syrian Army and that reprisals against Syria will be fast and devastating." Israel warns that they will bomb Syria back to the "Stone Age" if the country is attacked by Syria.

Israel does have quite the way with the angry rhetoric. Lately Iran has been using a lot of it too. Israel always seems a bit more logical than the leader of Iran, whose rants have become ever more incoherent in recent years.