Israel, Lebanon and the United States will enter another round of negotiations at Netanya tomorrow against a background of deadlock over the future role of south Lebanese militia leader Maj. Saad Haddad.
Negotiating sources in all three delegations say this is the last major obstacle, but it could thwart the entire agreement unless it is resolved. These sources concur in noting a tough and inflexible stand on the part of both Israel and Lebanon regarding Haddad.
The deadlock was highlighted at a lengthy meeting in Jerusalem last night between U.S. special envoy Philip Habib, Israeli Foreign Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Defense Minister Moshe Arens. Israeli officials present at the session said no progress was achieved on the matter of Haddad.
Habib transmitted the firm Lebanese refusal to have the Major continue at the head of security units in the south. Shamir communicated Israel’s adamant insistence that Haddad remain in the area in command of his men, who would be integrated into the Lebanese army as the nucleus of a “territorial brigade” to police the southern security zone.
U.S. SUPPORTS BEIRUT GOVERNMENT
Habib made it clear, according to several sources involved in the negotiations, that the U.S. supports the Beirut government in its refusal to be prevailed upon by Israel to retain Haddad in a key role in the south. Beirut wants to appoint Haddad military attache at its legation in Australia.
These sources said the American proposals presented to Shamir during his talks in Washington early last week are designed to meet Israel’s security requirements in the border area without the need for Haddad to stay on in command of forces there. The sources said Shamir and Secretary of State George Shultz disagreed over Haddad during their talks in Washington.
ISRAEL EXPECTED A TRADE-OFF
On the Israeli side it was plain that the expectation was for a trade-off involving Israel’s demands that Haddad should remain in exchange for Israel’s waiver of its demand that the IDF maintain manned military posts in south Lebanon for a considerable period of time following the IDF’s withdrawal. Shamir indicated in Washington that Israel is prepared to forego the second demand. Israel hoped that in return for this concession, the Lebanese would waive their objections to Haddad.
This did not happen and Habib told the Israelis yesterday that the U.S. does not expect a softening of Beirut’s attitude regarding Haddad. Habib is understood to have pointed to other Lebanese concessions, especially their readiness now to agree to joint IDF-Lebanese army cooperation and patrols. Lebanon refers to this as “joint supervision” rather than joint patrols.
Negotiating sources cited three reasons to explain Beirut’s negative position on Haddad: he is regarded in some Beirut circles as a deserter from the Lebanese army; he is considered to be too close to Israel and something of an IDF stooge; Beirut wants to chose its own man to command security forces in the south as an exercise of its sovereign power, without being dictated to by Israel.
THE ISRAELI POSITION
The Israeli position is that only the indigenous militia force, built up by Haddad with massive IDF support over the years, can be relied on as an adequate and effective buffer against the return of the Palestine Liberation Organization to the area.
Israeli experts argue that the local militia men would have much higher motivation to keep the area free of terrorists than other Lebanese soldiers brought in from outside.
They argue that Haddad is vital to run and command the militia, which they want to see integrated into the Lebanese army’s framework as the nucleus of a “territorial brigade” in the south.
Negotiation sources say the Lebanese would be willing to accept Haddad’s men and integrate them into the army. But they are firm in their refusal to accept Haddad himself. The Israel view is that without Haddad, the speciality and drive of his force would soon be dissipated.
The sources say that if this deadlock can be resolved, other outstanding issues in the talks could be concluded with relative ease. As long as it is not resolved, however, most of the other aspects of security arrangements in the south necessarily remain unresolved. Israel sees the entire limited-forces-regime in the security zone as contingent upon Haddad’s continued pivotal position in the area.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
