UN Sec. Council: Shaba Farms are Syrian

Jerusalem Post ^ | 1/29/5

[SmithL]

The UN Security Council has ruled that the controversial Shaba Farms district in northern Israel belongs to Syria, not to Lebanon, Israel radio reported Saturday morning.

All 15 Security Council members adopted the draft, which was drafted by the US, France, Britain, Denmark and Greece.

The draft concluded that Israel has fully complied with UN Security Council Resolution 425, which obligated Israel to withdraw to the UN-delineated Blue Line.

Russia, Algeria and Lebanon criticized the decision.

In addition, the Security Council extended the mandate for the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) to remain in Lebanon for an additional six months, and also advised Secretary-General Kofi Anan to consider a restructuring of the UNIFIL mandate in southern Lebanon.

Hizbullah claims the Shaba Farms area should have been returned to Lebanon when Israel withdrew from the southern buffer zone in that country in May 2000.

Since the Israeli pullout the past three years have been the quietest for residents of the confrontation-line communities for several decades.

The present situation though poses a problem for Hizbullah, which needs to justify its continued existence as a 'resistance movement'.

The organization has compiled a list of issues, the most prominent being its claim that the Shaba Farms district in the Mount Dov area is Lebanese land, even though it forms part of the region captured by Israel from Syria in the Six Day War.

Hizbullah launched a propaganda campaign to win backing for its claim, first and foremost from its Shi'ite constituency and the Lebanese population generally, as well as from the government and, of course, Syria, the controlling power in Lebanon.

It easily succeeded in getting the necessary support, enabling it to continue to function as a military force, thus setting the stage for limited operations to 'liberate' the disputed territory.

Hizbullah, naturally, has fallback positions, including claiming Lebanese ownership to land along the northern border and inside Israel proper, such as around Metulla, in case the Shaba farms issue fell through, as it apparently has.

[claudiustg]

Looks to me like that land belongs to Israel. The "security council" of course is free to come take it back for Syria if they'd care to.

[SunkenCiv]

The UN Security Council has ruled that the controversial Shaba Farms district in northern Israel belongs to Syria, not to Lebanon, Israel radio reported Saturday morning. All 15 Security Council members adopted the draft, which was drafted by the US, France, Britain, Denmark and Greece. The draft concluded that Israel has fully complied with UN Security Council Resolution 425, which obligated Israel to withdraw to the UN-delineated Blue Line. Russia, Algeria and Lebanon criticized the decision.

"All 15 Security Council members" includes Russia.

Hizbullah claims the Shaba Farms area should have been returned to Lebanon when Israel withdrew from the southern buffer zone in that country in May 2000... The present situation though poses a problem for Hizbullah, which needs to justify its continued existence as a 'resistance movement'. The organization has compiled a list of issues, the most prominent being its claim that the Shaba Farms district in the Mount Dov area is Lebanese land, even though it forms part of the region captured by Israel from Syria in the Six Day War.

Lebanon, Syria, what's the difference? ;')

[SmithL]

Why do they call it the UNsecurity council?

[FairOpinion]

All 15 Security Council members also includes the US.

I wonder why on earth did we agree with this?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

The draft concluded that Israel has fully complied with UN Security Council Resolution 425, which obligated Israel to withdraw to the UN-delineated Blue Line.

That would seem to be good.

[xm177e2]

Israel should return Shabaa farms to the Syrians.

And when they use it to fire rockets, Israel should re-take it, permanently.

[SmithL]

I'm open to be corrected, but here's my take:

If the land was Lebanese, Israel would not have a legitimate claim to it, since they abandoned their incursion into Lebanon.

However, if it's Syrian, Israel's claim goes back to the 67 war, when Israel won it fair and square. Of course, the terrorists and their supporters still call it "occupied" land.

Hizzbullah claimed the land was Lebanese, and used that as the basis for their attacks on Israel. Since it's now declared as Syrian land, they have no legitimate standing in the conflict. Except for the part about liking killing Jews.

[FairOpinion]

I think your take is correct. I went back and read the article ( which I didn't do earlier -- shame on me) and that seems to confirm your take. This makes more sense, for the US to agree with it.

Though the journalist could have made it clearer, but I guess since it appeared in a Jerusalem paper,they figured that everyone is fully familiar with the details and history.

[Fiddlstix]

[SunkenCiv]

Yeah, that's the deal. And the UN bothered to clarify this because Hizbollah murdered some UN observers / peacekeepers a few weeks back. Big mistake by Hizbollah.

2004 a year of successes for Hizbullah, despite pressures
Daily Star (Beirut Lebanon) ^ | Tuesday, January 04, 2005 | Nayla Assaf
Posted on 01/13/2005 6:06:41 PM PST by SunkenCiv
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320417/posts

[recalcitrant]

I too, believe that yours is the correct take.