|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
Will the Stalemate Ever End?
| Article
# : |
11894 |
|
|
Section : |
CURRENT ISSUES
|
| Issue
Date : |
8 / 1987 |
3,234 Words |
| Author
: |
Joseph J. Sisco
Joseph J. Sisco is a former deputy undersecretary of state for
political affairs (1974-76) and partner in Sisco Associates,
an international management consulting firm. |
For months, stalemate has been the mark of the Middle East and the Gulf - in Lebanon, in the peace process, in the Iran-Iraq War. While the situation in the region is fluid, the changes have been more tactical than fundamentally strategic. At best, the outlook for the short term is for a continuation of the impasse rather than a significant breakthrough.
Let us look first at Lebanon. The ill-fated Israeli invasion of Lebanon was a catalytic agent that brought changes in Lebanon and in the region, and not for the better. The United States has lost ground in Lebanon, but the criticism leveled at Washington for its involvement should be seen in perspective. U.S. diplomacy in large measure was responsible for getting the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which had long become in effect a state within a state, out of the country. It was unsuccessful, however, in getting all Israeli and Syrian forces to withdraw. But it was not the concept of a peacekeeping force, made up of units of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Italy, that was basically flawed. Peacekeeping was only intended to buy time for diplomacy.
What was needed was an in-depth political initiative and bringing U.S. and Western influence to bear on the Lebanese to restructure their government, whose composition was based on the narrow confessional frame of the Compact of 1943. Given the factional strife, such diplomacy might not have worked. But the United States would at least have been seen as trying to bring about a new Lebanon based on the realities of the internal forces within the country, in which the Maronite supremacy could no longer be maintained. When the United States was forced out of Lebanon, U.S. primacy gave way to Syrian primacy.
Today the cycle of violence and counterviolence continues. Various factions battle to protect or expand their turf. Shiite radical fundamentalism has been on the upswing, and PLO elements have reestablished themselves. In these circumstances, Syria remains a key, but it is neither in full control nor has it been able to bring about a settled realignment of political forces within Lebanon. We are no closer to a "Lebanese solution" now than we were years back.
Under the Labor government headed by Shimon Peres, Israel's principal focus now is on the more limited objective of protecting its northern border. In recent months, however, Syria brought additional armed forces into Lebanon out of concern that reestablished PLO forces could once again get out of hand and that extremist Shiite fundamentalists
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
