Dialogues of Naguib Mahfouz:

Beyond reason

By Mohamed Salmawy

---

Salmawy: Are you following events in Lebanon?

Mahfouz: Terrible news. What is this? What is this destruction and hatred unleashed against an Arab nation that still has part of its land occupied? What do they want exactly? The assault on Lebanon's infrastructure is not meant for Hizbullah but for the Lebanese people. The aim is to bring Lebanon back 50 years, to make it an example. Is this the same Israeli government that claims that it wants peace?

I don't get it anymore. We used to think that Israeli generals were the ones to want war, but the current prime minister and interior minister are civilians. Does everyone in Israel wish to bomb the Arabs?

What is happening in Lebanon cannot be a reaction to the capture of one or two Israeli soldiers. One would expect an action to produce a similar reaction. But Israel's reaction is out of proportion to what Hizbullah did. This suggests that Israel had earlier plans to pounce upon Lebanon in this manner. This is why it paid no attention to Hizbullah's offer to exchange the soldiers with prisoners held in Israel.

Salmawy: Israel said it wouldn't negotiate with so-called terrorists.

Mahfouz: Lebanon still has a part of its land, the Shebaa Farms, under occupation. This means that Lebanon is in a state of resistance and war with Israel, and the exchange of prisoners is a common procedure in all wars. Had the Israeli government been interested in peace, it would've negotiated to free its soldiers, for this is what happens amongst combatants. But Israel gives us the impression that it was waiting for a chance to destroy Lebanon, a country that has recently rebuilt itself and whose economy was just picking up.

Salmawy: What do you think is the solution?

Mahfouz: First of all, the international community must take immediate action to bring about an unconditional ceasefire. Then we should start negotiations concerning a prisoner exchange, either directly or through a third party. There's no other way. Israel has over 10,000 prisoners -- people it abducted either in Palestine or Lebanon. Most of the prisoners are civilians, not military combatants as the ones Hizbullah is holding, and some of them are women and children. Does this make sense? Does it make sense that people who capture prisoners in the course of a war of liberation are called terrorists, and yet we have nothing to say about those who capture civilians, including women and children?

Olmert's government has proven that it is no different from earlier military governments. Had the Israeli government been serious about reaching an agreement, as it claimed in the platform that brought it to power, it would have dealt with this crisis in a different manner, not in the manner of previous governments that had no commitment to peace. Olmert's government came to power saying that it wants a peace settlement. Now, given the wars it started in Lebanon and Gaza, that government has weakened the genuine proponents of peace on both sides. Peace is now further away than ever.