Elie Aoun: No to Peace and no to War with Israel/ايلي عون: لا للسلام ولا للحرب مع إسرائيل

101

No to Peace and no to War with Israel
Elie Aoun/September 18/2020
ايلي عون: لا للسلام ولا للحرب مع إسرائيل

One reason behind the fall of nations and empires is their confusion between “principles” and “interests.”

Many years ago, I was discussing foreign policy with a U.S. former ambassador to an Arab country. I mentioned that U.S. foreign policy must be based on principles in order to achieve the best outcomes for all parties involved. His response was: “We, as ambassadors, do not have principles.”

The lack of principled-politics is one of the reasons why the United States will eventually lose its status as a superpower and become a country, similar to the United Kingdom, after it had lost most of its empire.

With regard to “peace” with Israel, personally I do not favor a formal peace treaty between Lebanon and Israel primarily because the leadership on the Lebanese, Israeli, and Palestinian sides lack the necessary principles for genuine peace.

In addition, the core of the conflict is between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

As a Lebanese, I cannot declare it acceptable for the Israeli side to take-over Palestinian land. At the same time, I cannot declare whether the Palestinian side should forgive and co-exist or pursue other means. It is not my right to do either.

Based on similar principles, the parties to the conflict are not authorized to undermine Lebanon’s security for matters beyond Lebanon’s control.

No one on Lebanese soil – whether Lebanese or not – should jeopardize Lebanon for the “interests” of the Palestinians or Israelis.

The Lebanese who wish to “liberate Jerusalem” are required to travel to the Palestinian territories and do so from there.

If it is “honorable” for them to fight for Palestine, it is not honorable or principled to destroy Lebanon for it.

Lebanon received Palestinian refugees on its land. In return, Arafat’s PLO pursued Palestinian “interests” and, as a result, undermined Lebanon’s security and prosperity – instead of respecting the land which gave them refuge.

If it was a Palestinian “interest” to arm themselves and use Lebanese soil for their own agenda, all the destruction caused to Lebanon by the PLO did not benefit the Palestinians in any way. They did not liberate one square meter of Palestine as a result of all their military activities in Lebanon and their destructive conduct.

This evident loss and vanity behind the military “struggle” is a perfect justification to the “no war” policy that ought to be followed.

The end-result was clear: destruction to Lebanon and no benefit to Palestine. After all, Arafat returned to Palestine as a participant in some-type of a peace process, and not as a liberating warrior.

If all concerned parties (Lebanese and Palestinians) acted in a principled manner, then they would have saved both the Lebanese and Palestinian people many miserable consequences.

The lack of foresight is evident on all sides. Arafat, and many Palestinian, Lebanese, and some Arab leaders collected billions to themselves (or in reality to foreign banks) while a large percentage of their population live in poverty.

Those whose hearts are not with their people cannot be genuine leaders – and without genuine principled leaders, no genuine and principled peace can be achieved.

Treaties have their importance, but do not alone make peace. The quest for “interests” based on political/business/military deals have taken precedence over substance and viable national solutions.

For Lebanon to sign a peace treaty with Israel would not be beneficial to Lebanon due to lack of principles. Any peace treaty will be treated by Israel (which currently has the upper diplomatic and military influence) as another opportunity for the Israeli side to pursue more of its “interests” at Lebanon’s expense.

If Israel has true intentions for genuine peace, then it can pay compensation for all its wars against Lebanon. This is not intended in “exchange” for a peace treaty, but as a penalty for Israel’s violation of the 1949 Armistice Agreement.

General legal principles and existing agreements are sufficient for peace. If these are not being respected, there is no confidence that future “peace agreements” will be.

Existing problems and border disputes must be resolved, but no formal peace treaty is necessary.

To those who want a war, let them wage it at their expense away from Lebanon. And to those who want peace, let them unilaterally be at peace with Lebanon. They do not need a formal agreement to do so.