Olmert 'planned Lebanon war before soldiers' kidnap'

Whilst trying to defend himself from the charge of taking Israel to war whilst not sufficiently prepared, Ehud Olmert has let the cat out of the bag and admitted that Israel had planned to go to war in Lebanon long before the abduction of two Israeli soldiers.

Indeed, Israel had formulated such a plan three months before the abductions.

The report is proof of what many of us had long suspected, that Israel and the US had decided on a military confrontation long before the abductions gave them the excuse to carry out an action that was long planned for.

But this is not all that Olmert has admitted to. During the last three days of that conflict, when the UN were already debating a resolution, Olmert launched a ground offensive against the Lebanese during which the Israelis dropped leaflets on Lebanon threatening that, "each expansion of Hizbollah terrorist operations will lead to a harsh and powerful response and its painful response will not be confined to Hassan's gang of criminals".

This clear threat to harm the civilian population was overlooked by many commentators. However, by that time Olmert was desperate, he was losing the war and anxious to find a way to influence the forthcoming UN resolution so that it would hide the scale of his military defeat.

As I said at the time:

It appears that the USraelis are becoming desperate, going to any length in order to write their loss out of the history books, even threatening to target civilians as away of forcing the Security Council to give them the exit they require.

And yesterday Olmert openly admitted this:

He also defended the much criticised expansion of the ground invasion in the last 48 hours of the war after the UN had agreed on a ceasefire-an operation, which cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers. He said the objective had been to influence the draft UN resolution, which he regarded as too unfavourable to Israel.

Lets be clear what he is admitting. He is acknowledging that there was no military reason for the actions that he took in the last few days of the Lebanon war. Actions that have long been condemned by international groups.

When the count of unexploded cluster bomblets passed 100,000, the United Nation's undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs, Jan Egeland, expressed his disbelief at the scale of the problem.

"What's shocking and, I would say to me, completely immoral," he said, "is that 90% of the cluster-bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution, when we really knew there would be an end of this."

Olmert dropped cluster bombs on to the civilian population of Lebanon - on a scale that stunned international observers - and he is now admitting that he did so to influence the UN resolution, not to fulfil any military need. When one considers that he had already threatened that his response would "not be confined to Hassan's gang of criminals" then it is difficult not to conclude that he made good on his threat.

Targeting civilians is a war crime. This is a charge that Human Rights Watch made at the time:

“The pattern of attacks shows the Israeli military’s disturbing disregard for the lives of Lebanese civilians,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Our research shows that Israel’s claim that Hezbollah fighters are hiding among civilians does not explain, let alone justify, Israel’s indiscriminate warfare.”

Of course, Olmert is able to admit to such war crimes with impunity, safe in the knowledge that he will never be punished for having taking part in so disgraceful an action. How many people have since been maimed by those cluster bombs? How many killed? And for what? For what? They were maimed and killed because Olmert wanted to hide the fact that his military campaign against Hizbullah had failed. Because he wanted the UN resolution to hide the scale of his loss. And in order to ensure this, he threatened to harm civilians and then set about doing so by dropping some of the most indiscriminate weaponry possible upon a civilian population.

He should be in jail for what he is admitting to. But no, he will continue to be welcomed into Downing Street and the White House and he will be spoken of as a man who is searching for a "partner in peace". And Israel's supporters will tell us how it's not possible to deal with terrorist groups whilst Israel is being led by a man who openly admits to committing war crimes.

But it's okay, because he's our war criminal. It is this lack of consistency that reveals Bush and Blair's rhetoric as meaningless hypocrisy. Actions that we condemn if carried out by Saddam are ignored when carried out by an ally.

"The world seeks America's leadership, looks for leadership for a country whose values are freedom and justice and equality." Texas Governor George W. Bush in 2000.

Was rhetoric ever so empty?

Click title for full article.

Tags: Olmert, Lebanon war, cluster bombs, war crimes, UN, US