Israel drags Indian Army into controversy

By Kesava Menon

MANAMA (Bahrain) JULY 8. Israel has unnecessarily dragged an Indian army unit, which served with the U.N. in Lebanon, into a controversy. The matter concerns a videotape that might have some tenuous connection to the abduction of three Israeli soldiers by Hizbollah guerrillas on October 7, 2000, an event which took place within the visible range of Israeli observation posts and was something that the Indian contingent could have done nothing to prevent. Some of the comments in the Israeli press after the U.N. admitted to the existence of the tape on Friday are extremely patronising, verging on the racist.

On Friday, a U.N. official announced in New York that a videotape did exist that might have some connection to the abduction of the Israelis. This tape is believed to have been recorded by jawans serving in the Indian contingent of the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) at that time. This particular contingent had been rotated home long since following the usual practice of sending half battalion sized units to serve in UNIFIL for six months at a time. The UNIFILs spokesperson in Lebanon, Maj. Timur Goksel, has clarified that the videotape was shot 18 hours after the abduction incident and that it does not contain shots of the actual abduction itself.

The three Israeli soldiers were abducted after their vehicles were fired upon near the Shebaa farms area that are still disputed between Israel and Lebanon. UNIFIL has maintained that the jawans in the closest post had taken cover after the anti- tank missile was fired at the Israeli vehicle. They had therefore not witnessed the incident. Israel says that the jawans had both witnessed the incident and had made a video recording of it. However, according to Maj. Goksel the videotape that has been handed over to the higher U.N. authorities was shot 18 hours after the incident and shows only what occurred when UNIFIL tow trucks came to remove the cars that Hizbollah had used to reach the spot. UNIFIL uniforms, arms, ammunition and license plates were found inside the vehicle. The faces of two Hizbollah men who came to stop UNIFIL from towing the vehicles away are also understood to have been captured by the video camera.

The U.N. has offered to let Israeli and Lebanese officials examine the videotape after the faces of Hizbollah men are blanked out. Israel wants the tape to be handed over to them, unedited. Besides their initial argument that the tape might have a recording of the actual abduction the Israelis also say that they might be able to pick up valuable evidence about the identity of the particular group that carried out the attack and other matters. Lebanon has said that the handing over of the tape would be in breach of the agreement whereby UNIFIL is posted in Lebanon since it would be tantamount to UNIFIL indulging in intelligence co-operation with Israel.

While the U.N. and Israel tussle over the tape what is intolerable is the manner in which unidentified Israeli military men have sought to slyly suggest that the Indian contingent of UNIFIL might have played a role in the abduction. Unidentified military men have told the Israeli press that some jawans might have been involved and that their investigators had been sent to India to question the members of the unit that was posted in south Lebanon at the time. Other unidentified military men have not gone so far but have expressed their view that the jawans were aware of Hizbollahs preparations for the abduction but had turned a blind eye.

This is a blatant misrepresentation of UNIFIL's role. UNIFIL can do nothing to prevent Hizbollah attacks or the periodic violations of Lebanese air space that Israel carries out. The contingents serving with UNIFIL can only observe the situation on the borders and inform the U.N. of any violations that have taken place from either direction.

Moreover, as UNIFIL has pointed out, there was little need for their units to pass on information to Israel when the abduction had taken place within visible range of an Israeli military observation post. It is possible that UNIFIL and the Indian contingent serving with it at the time are being made a scapegoat for lapses on the part of the Israelis.

Reports of the time had suggested that the three Israeli soldiers who were kidnapped were not observing the proper procedures when they were abducted.

If leaks by Israeli military men were not bad enough the editorial comment in Haartez of today can only be described as obnoxious. The editorial suggests that the Indian contingents serving with UNIFIL are somehow beholden to the impoverished population of south Lebanon (they get their salary, food and other requirements from the U.N.) and that therefore they should be replaced in this sensitive area by some other U.N. unit.

Although the words have not be written the obvious implication of the editorial was that the Indian unit should be replaced by some white-faced contingent from the first world.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Next     : Israel keen on buying Lakshya