Outstanding issues
Haaretz, 5.4.00

The decision to unilaterally withdraw from Lebanon has raised two issues for which Israel has yet to find a solution: the precise demarcation of the border with Lebanon and the future of the soldiers of the South Lebanon Army. These two issues are not a result of the decision to withdraw unilaterally, for they would have arisen in the context of an agreement with Lebanon and Syria. But the unilateral withdrawal adds urgency to their resolution, which is critical for quiet on the northern border.

Israel wants to avoid a situation in which Hezbollah will have an excuse to continue its attacks on the IDF. Therefore, Israel is planning a full redeployment of its troops on the Israeli side of the international border. But Israel is also concerned that the very definition of that border could create a dispute with Lebanon and then Syria, so it has undertaken to seek from international bodies such as the United Nations, and from the leading countries in that organization, help in demarcating the borders precisely.

The origins of the border are in the Sykes-Picot Agreement, but its precise contour was only finally authorized in 1923. The cease-fire lines from the end of the War of Independence follow that line except for a few places where the IDF moved the security fence, and according to Lebanese claims, annexed Lebanese territory. There is concern that it would only take a few of these points of disagreement to provide Hezbollah with the excuse that the withdrawal was not complete and the occupation continues, so their armed struggle against the IDF remains a legitimate resistance. Israel has to get rid of the potential for such an eventuality by winning international certification of the border between Israel and Lebanon. Therefore, Foreign Minister David Levy's efforts to win international support for a demarcation of the border is welcome and should be wished all success.

However, there's no certainty that even if a special international commission is established to mark the border it will finish its work by July, the deadline for the withdrawal. Delineating borders can raise disputes between friendly countries, let alone enemies where two of them, Syria and Lebanon, will be looking for any opportunity to delay a resolution of the issue. But such a delay need not halt the withdrawal. Since Israel is proving its serious intentions through its withdrawal, and is inviting international bodies to arbitrate on the question of the final border, Lebanon and Syria will have no legitimate claim that Israel has not fully withdrawn.

The question of the future of the SLA touches on the moral commitment Israel has toward the organization and the possibility that the SLA, if it insists on remaining a Lebanese militia, could drag Israel back in9to the Lebanese morass. Israel is committed to taking care of those officers and liaison personnel whose lives might be in danger when Israel withdraws. Their names and positions are known and the solution, if they ask for it from Israel, is not complicated. But at the same time, Israel must make clear that the SLA's raison d'etre as a supporting force for the IDF in Lebanon, is over with the withdrawal and after that withdrawal, Israel can not regard itself as responsible for the organization inside Lebanon.