Two senior Lebanese editorialists have opposing takes on what a “Lebanese Winograd Report” would conclude.
The first editorialist, Walid Shokeir, writes in the pan-Arab daily Al-Hayat that a “scientific” report on what happened in the war would end up consolidating the strong resistance that the Lebanese undertook during the war, then it will end up blaming Syria and Iran.
The Lebanese resistance, according to Shokeir, has three components: The first is Hezbollah’s resistance, the second is the failure of Israel and its leadership, and the third, which he sees as very important, is the unity of the Lebanese people and its government, which thanks to its links to the Arab world and the international community, managed to considerably limit the scope and targets of the Israeli aggression.
Mr. Shokeir stresses that this third component could be the most important finding of a would-be Lebanese Winograd investigation, which would naturally end up revealing the divisive role that the Syrians and Iranians have played to erase that element from the collective memory of the current anti-government forces.
In “Aren’t The Lebanese Ashamed of Winogard?” in Annahar (an otherwise pro-government newspaper), Edmond Saab sees things differently.
Saab, a Aoun sympathizer, suggested that a revision of the “government’s behavior in the war” would have led to the resignation of the government and mended fences in the country.
Mr. Saab wants the Lebanese Winograd to inquire into the wildly-held belief among the Lebanese Shi’as that the Lebanese government and some March 14 leaders have encouraged the Israeli attacks and asked them not to stop until Hezbollah was eliminated.
Had that inquiry taken place as Sayyed Nassrallah had suggested, laments Saab, Lebanon would be a much more unified country today.
From what I can see, It seems the Lebanese are even divided on what an “independent” commission would achieve. Perhaps the word “independent” just doesn’t belong to this country.
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I've been blogging about Lebanese society, business and politics since February 2005.
Mr. Saab wants the Lebanese Winograd to inquire into the wildly-held belief among the Lebanese Shi’as that the Lebanese government and some March 14 leaders have encouraged the Israeli attacks and asked them not to stop until Hezbollah was eliminated.
Given that the Israeli invasions of 1978 and 1982 to oust the PLO were popular among Shi’a and Christian alike, this seems a reasonable assumption for the Shi’a to have. Perhaps an investigation on this issue alone is merited, if it could definitely confirm or deny suspicion.
However, I don’t see why such an investigation should be limited to the March 14 leaders only, rather than all of Lebanon’s leadership, including Hezbollah, which clearly sought a trial of strength in the first place.
The Arabs called it the 6th war with Israel, while Israel called it the First War with the Arabs.
Independent means Nasrallah gets to decide … easy!
Somehow they think that an investigation into a war has nothing to do with those who started and fought the war? Only with the politicians who tried to stop the war. Only in Lebanon
The fact that Lebanese pundits started talking about an “independent” investigation only after Winograd report may oust Israeli leaders speaks volumes. Nobody wants an investigation, both sides just want to point fingers and oust the leaders of the other side.And what would the “Lebanese Winograd” investigate? Hezbollah’s doings are sacrosant because there’s no authority in the country that could force HA to comply to any investigation, while the government didn’t really do anything of significance during the war so there’s nothing to investigate on that side.