Threats to Lebanon; threats to peace

In his latest article in Slate, Christopher Hitchens makes the important observation that Syria does not recognise Lebanon as an independent state. This obduracy is a standing threat to the territorial integrity of Lebanon:

Is it really too much to demand that Syria acknowledge the self-determination, or "right to exist," of a fellow member of the Arab League? Without this line of demarcation, for one thing, the "withdrawal" of Syrian soldiers and police is a merely tactical thing; a retreat over the horizon while the Assad dynasty waits for better days. These "better" days may well not be long in coming.

But more than that, Syria's designs on Lebanon make impossible a comprehensive territorial peace agreement in the region, for reasons explained a few months ago by the Israeli political philosopher Shlomo Avineri. (Avineri is a man of great talent and intellect. He is well known as an interpreter of Marx, and is the author of a famous book called The Social and Political Thought of Karl Marx. His public service has included being Director-General of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the first government of Yitzhak Rabin, from 1975 to 1977.)

Avineri points out that Syria's refusal to recognise Lebanon also prevents Syria from formally designating the disputed Shaba farms as Lebanese. Consequently:

DIPLOMATS who are now concerned with a cessation of violence in South Lebanon and northern Israel should be aware of this conundrum, which is no mere formality. If the Shaba Farms appears in any form as part of the deal, this should be accompanied by an unequivocal statement from Syria recognizing that the area belongs to the Republic of Lebanon. It is my guess that the chances of such a statement are minimal. Without it, the international legitimacy of the agreement - and its subsequent implementation - may be extremely problematic.

To put it more directly, accomplishing a pacific territorial settlement in the Middle East as envisaged in UN Security Council Resolutions is not going to be achieved by leaning on Israel. Israel has responsibilities, but she is not the block on political progress that her critics (or are they enemies?) among British politicians believe her to be.