POLITICS: Intifada Developing Into A Low-Level-War-of Attrition

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Analysis George Baghdadi

DAMASCUS, May 14 2001 (IPS) - It’s no coincidence that the ongoing Palestinian Intifada is gradually developing into a low-level war- of-attrition modelled on the campaign waged by Hizbullah in south Lebanon. And this could very well have serious consequences for both Syria and Lebanon.

The Al-Aqsa intifada was initially patterned on the first Palestinian uprising, 1987-93, the Uprising of the Stones. It was characterised by mass protests against the Israeli occupation mounted by civilians armed only with stones.

In the current intifada, Israeli troops responded by firing rubber coated steel bullets and live high-velocity ammunition at protesters, rather than employing non-lethal methods of crowd control. As a result the heaviest toll in Palestinian lives and injuries took place during the first three months.

For this “excessive” use of force, Israel has been roundly criticised by international human rights investigators, including the US-constituted Mitchell Commission, which presented its report to the Palestine Authority and Israel ten days ago.

But since such criticism and, at times, condemnation did not curb the Israelis, Palestinian activists responded by shooting at Israeli troops and settlements, and Islamist militants set off bombs both in the Occupied Territories and Israel “proper.”

Thus, the nature of the popular insurrection was transformed into a struggle between the lightly armed Palestinian resistance and the regular Israeli armed forces and security agencies equipped with a wide-range of advanced weaponry.

The current struggle is being waged by a variety of groupings – militants from Palestine President Yasser Arafat’s Fatah Movement and from dissident Islamist and secular groupings – which have come together in independent Popular Resistance Committees which oppose Arafat’s attempts to obtain a cease-fire.

While the Committees attempt to co-ordinate operations against Israel, the Palestinians have not yet established the sort of sophisticated underground command structure that Hizbullah created, enabling the Lebanese movement to operate in a highly effective manner.

But the Palestinians are yet to obtain weapons to adjust this balance of power.

According to Ahmad Jibril of the Damascus-based Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, the Lebanese boat, intercepted by the Israeli navy off International water, was the fourth such shipment of these critical arms to the Palestinians. He also said he planned to use “other means” to continue sending weapons to Gaza.

“This cargo that we sent is not the first and will not be the last,” Jibril said, adding that the aim was to “create a sort of balance of terror between us and the enemy.”

“If the (Israeli) aggression continues, there will be more in the coming days. The battle will spread because the 4.5 million Palestinians of the Diaspora cannot stand by while our people are massacred daily.

“We will support our people by every means in the face of the Zionist crimes,” he warned.

On Sunday, the Israeli Navy said it captured a Lebanese- registered fishing boat, the Santorini, bound for Gaza with 40 tonnes of weapons on board, including Strella anti-aircraft missiles, short-range 107mm Katyusha rockets, and rocket-propelled grenades.

Jibril, who revealed the cargo was no more than four tonnes, said the arms were “defensive weapons like anti-tank mines, which stop the enemy invading Palestinian territory, and short-range missiles.”

He also accused Israel of “piracy in international waters”, adding that the ship was intercepted thanks to co-operation between the US Sixth Fleet and the Israeli Navy.

The Israeli Navy said the 18-metre-long boat was intercepted off the coast of Ras Naqoura, marking the border between Lebanon and Israel.

But a Western source said that the ship was boarded at least 60- 70 kilometres offshore in international waters. The source added that it was unlikely that the boat would have entered Israeli territorial waters, even when off-loading the weapons. The weapons were stashed inside waterproof barrels and would have been dumped overboard at a pre-arranged location, presumably off the coast of Gaza, allowing Palestinians to drag them to shore.

Although Jibril confirmed in his interview with the IPS that neither Lebanon nor Syria were involved in his operations, Israel is certain to blame both Damascus, where the PFLP-General Command is based, and Beirut, since the apprehended boat was Lebanese registered.

However there is, so far, no proof of Jibril’s claim to have delivered three shipments of rockets and missiles.

Palestinian militants have not employed either Katyushas or anti-aircraft missiles in spite of Israel’s recent military escalation against specific Palestinian police and security installations and intensifying campaign of punitive measures against civilians. Nor have the Palestinians used mortars against Israeli targets in the West Bank.

Increasing Israeli provocation could compel the Palestinians to stop exercising restraint. As a result, Palestinian use of Hizbullah’s favourite weapons could draw Lebanon – and Syria – into a widening confrontation with Israel.

This is something hard-liners in the cabinet of right-wing Premier Ariel Sharon would welcome. If Israel was given a pretext to lash out at Lebanon – or its ally, Syria – the focus of international attention would shift from the Palestinian intifada to the new theatre of conflict.