The project for a new Middle East was based upon three myths and lies. All were intertwined and originate from the discriminatory assertion at the heart of Occidental imperialism that Arabs are naturally backward. According to the first lie, Arabs are unable to develop democratic movements and naturally support dictatorial, extremist regimes (the definition of which always lies in the mind of Western powers). The "free" world should therefore, like charity, bring democracy to the region. The second lie follows that due to their backwardness, the Arabs cannot defeat Israel and must accept the dispossession its inception forced upon them as a fait accompli. Following successive humiliating Arab defeats (1948, 1967, 1973) while trying to bring an end to the alien Zionist occupation of Palestinian land, the US and its local client regimes tried to force upon the Arab people the belief that Israel is invincible, underlining the logic of normalisation and the second class status of Arabs. The third virulent lie is that nothing unites the Arabs, their backwardness and tribalism leads them to sectarian and feudal forms of organisation.

American empire is exceptional in that contrary to all previous empires it does not herald the promise of universalist values but instead brazenly declares its goal as the propagation of its own interests. The implementation of its strategy serves only the welfare of local, feudal, corrupted warlords, denying even the right to life to local populations. In the space of three years, US occupation and its stooges have attempted - and still attempt - to destroy Iraq both as a state and a nation. In the long tradition of divide to rule, they tried to deprive the Iraqi people of their unifying Arabo-Muslim identity by promoting sectarian forces. It resulted in the rape of the Iraqi nation, the plunder and theft of its resources, and the cold-blooded killing of its citizens. Meanwhile, democratically elected Palestinian representatives are abducted by Israel; the population starved as stated policy, continually subject to military attack. The latest criminal assault on Lebanon exposed the faultlines once and for all. US refusals to call for a ceasefire - to stop the criminal slaughter of Lebanese civilians and the destruction of their infrastructure which lasted four weeks - outraged all Arab people and millions worldwide. We knew it, but now no one can doubt it: US-Israeli plans for the region are the enemy of our people.

The myth of Israel's invincibility also collapsed along with the justifications of servile Arab regimes for the continued repression of their own people. While entire Arab armies have in the past been defeated within days, Hizbullah proved not only its endurance but also its swift ability to change military tactics in tune with events while retaining its composure and humility in defending Arabs everywhere. The dignity alone that Hizbullah's triumph has afforded to Arabs is a signal of, and is essential to, the defeat of Zionism. For 30 years Arabs have been assigned to second-class status. In just over 30 days they have thrown off this worthless mantle as though it were nothing. The blow is not just to Zionism. Hizbullah's military maturity and communications prowess has exposed the cowardliness and impotence of all Arab regimes who pretend to be nationalist but who advocate for, and repress in the name of, normalisation with Zionism. Hizbullah, within days, did more for democracy in the Arab world than Arab regimes achieved in years, the latter forced to retract their recriminations against the former in the face of popular pressure.

In Lebanon the third enduring myth about Arabs being unable to think except along sectarian lines collapsed magnificently. Perhaps the US-Israeli strategists thought it would be easier, following 15 years of civil war for Lebanon to rapidly fall into civil strife. They don't learn, but struggling people do. Lebanese unity behind Hizbullah - as much as 87 per cent according to polls - destroyed the myth that Arabs can never unite. Likewise after three years of relentless attempts to create civil strife in Iraq by any means, the US occupation has not managed to pitch Iraqis against each other. Never in 4000 years have Iraqis been sectarian. That occupation-linked sectarian militias are fighting each other and killing thousands of civilians is not a sign of sectarianism in Iraq. It is a US-imposed tactic of bringing chaos to decimate the inherent unity of Iraqi and Arabo-Muslim identity. Along with Zionism's ill-fated misadventure in Lebanon, it failed before the invasion. Rather, there is a growing movement across the region that believes in the skills, maturity, will and ability of the united Arabs to liberate themselves from post-colonial agendas. Never will this movement accept the existence of a state created on their land to serve foreign capitalist interests.

Across generations and regardless of the ideology embraced or the leader embodying the movement, rising Arab struggles adopted the same slogans: independence, unity, Arab Palestine - with people of different faiths living as equal citizens and in peace - and an efficient state. Today, the youth of the nation is eager for real justice and democracy and adopts the same slogans. The servile Arab regimes, already deeply isolated from and fearful of their own people, failed to understand this growing movement of resistance and further alienated themselves - as proven by ignominious statements absolving Zionist aggression. Their fate, along with the US-Israeli project, is cast. Israel's systematic destruction of Lebanese national infrastructure, which passed without comment from Washington, exposed unequivocally that the US-Zionist project cares nothing for Arab advancement. The War on terror is a war on all forms of resistance to US-styled globalisation and its imposition by military power.

Since the very day the occupation forces came to Iraq and the Iraqi state collapsed, there has been an uprising by all Iraqi movements and organisations; including those defending women, or unemployed youth, human rights organisations, trade unions, professional syndicates, agencies defending environmental issues and the rights of prisoners, and all other cultural and political organisations, side-by-side with provincial and tribal communities and peaceful and armed resistance groups. They have all risen following an unwritten political agenda that symbolises the whole society and derives its legitimacy from the deep sense of belonging to Arab and Islamic tenets. Likewise, the Lebanese civil resistance swift organisation to defend their land and sovereignty, as proven by the south Lebanese's refugees' insistence to return despite the presence of unexploded cluster bombs, and the Lebanese peoples' unequivocal support for Hizbullah regardless of their respective political background, proves the same tendency. The interest of the lower and middle class have merged and will result in a never ending social and if necessary armed struggle to achieve independence, justice and democracy. The youth of the nation, which believes and trusts in the richness of its culture and civilisation will not accept selling short the rights of the country and the nation. It is confident of carrying the technical and intellectual skills to administer its own resources for the benefit of all, without foreign interference in their internal affairs.

Attempts to choke Arab development cannot but fail. The three main currents developed by Arab societies - nationalists, Islamists and leftists - are intrinsically anti-imperialist and therefore opposed to US-Israeli regional designs. For nationalists, retaining control of national resources to serve the general interest is sacrosanct. For leftists, opposing the international chains of imperialism and globalisation is a baseline. For Islamists, resistance to foreign occupation - as written in the Quran - is a duty. Their interest lays currently in achieving unity in the struggle. They are united by their Arabo-Muslim identity. They share common principles and values as follows: the natural resources, material heritage, and the riches of culture and civilisation are the property of the totality of the people. The totality of citizens constitutes the people. The people are the sole source of sovereignty and of constitutional, political and judicial legitimacy. Government is responsible and accountable to all the citizens. Solidarity between citizens - between generations, the able and ill, the elderly and young, the orphan and every human being who finds himself in a state of weakness - should form the basis of any government's social policy. The general interest is the justification and basis for the operation of the state, with every citizen, free of all forms of discrimination, sharing in the fruits of national wealth and social development. In struggling against military-imperial powers, the Arabs fight in defence of values around which a majority in the world gathers in consensus.

What US-Israeli neo-imperialists have to offer is not only contrary to the interests of the Arab people, it is immoral. Never in history has a single political agenda - US-Zionist imperial dominion - been opposed by so many, in all countries, and across all continents. The Arab liberation struggle stands at the forefront of this global rejection and is the centre of an historic battle not between civilisations but for civilisation. Thus it is Israel, not the Arab nation, which stands in violation of rafts of UN resolutions, daily committing new atrocities in Gaza or the West Bank at the same time as it bombs residential areas in Beirut in violation of international humanitarian law - the baseline of civil protection against state terrorism. It is the United States that presides over a situation in Baghdad whereby government-supported death squads sweep and terrorise whole neighbourhoods and in the month of July alone more than 1800 corpses appeared strewn around the city, hundreds marked with signs of sadistic torture. To prevail in this context marks not only a victory for all Arabs, but all peoples in the human struggle towards freedom and justice. When in the centre of the storm Arabs fight with their lives for a better world they challenge the same neoliberal and neoconservative elite classes that waves of anti-globalisation activists, civil society movements, and democracy and human rights advocates worldwide oppose.

Resistance is a matter of situation. Not all should or can carry arms. Tel Aviv and Washington are desperate. The edifice of their military superiority and moral authority is shattered. Not even chemical weapons, which Israel uses freely in Gaza and Lebanon as the US used in Tel Afar, Ramadi and Fallujah, can bring the Arab people and its ever-widening culture of resistance to its knees. Empire is already buried. Short of annihilating every Arab to the last woman, child and man, US-Israeli plans are already defeated. But there is no room for complacency. Now is the time for the people of this world to endorse and support the Arab struggle globally.

Every advocate of an alternative world should play a part in supporting the transformation that the renaissance of Arab struggles heralds. Whereas brute force has too often decided history, in the new world there will be no peace without justice, and no justice without the right of return for every displaced Palestinian; the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the occupation from Iraq, along with the cancellation of all laws, treaties and agreements passed since the illegal invasion of the country; respect of Lebanese sovereignty and the condemnation and prosecution of Israel for the numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity it has perpetrated in Lebanon and in Gaza; that all Arab states and people which have been aggressed should receive fair reparations and compensations for the human and material loses they've endured; that all political prisoners should be set free immediately. Until these requirements are met, global civil disobedience is not only justified, it is a moral duty.

The writer is a member of the Executive Committee of The BRussells Tribunal (www.brusselstribunal.org). 20 August 2006.

It is no accident that this item was drowned in the deluge of TV blabber, like a stone thrown into a well. After broadcasting the item itself, no meaningful debate about it took place. It was erased from the public mind.

But not only the balloon of the redeeming Lebanese army has been punctured. The same has happened to the multi-colored second balloon that was to serve as an Israeli achievement: the deployment of the international force that would protect Israel from Hizbullah and prevent its re-armament. As the days pass, it becomes increasingly clear that this force will be, at best, a mishmash of small national units, without a clear mandate and "robust" capabilities. The commando raid carried out by our army today, in blatant violation of the cease-fire, will certainly not attract more international volunteers for the job.

So what remains of all the "achievements" of this war? A good question.

AFTER EVERY failed war, the cry for an official investigation goes up in Israel. Now there is a "trauma", much bitterness, a feeling of defeat and of a missed opportunity. Hence the demand for a strong Commission of Inquiry that will cut off the heads of those responsible.

That's what happened after the first Lebanon war, which reached its climax in the Sabra and Shatila massacre. The government refused any serious inquiry. The masses that gathered in what is now called "Rabin Square" (the mythical 400 thousand) demanded a judicial inquiry. The public mood reached boiling point and in the end the Prime Minister, Menachem Begin, gave in.

The Kahan Commission that investigated the event condemned a number of politicians and army officers for "indirect" responsibility for the massacre, even though its own factual conclusions would have justified a much stronger condemnation. But Ariel Sharon was, at least, removed from the Defense Ministry.

Before that, after the trauma of the Yom Kippur war, the government also refused to appoint a Commission of Inquiry, but public pressure forced its hand. The fate of the Agranat Committee, which included a former Chief-of-Staff and two other senior officers, was rather odd: it conducted a serious investigation, put all the blame on the military, removed from office the Chief-of-Staff, "Dado" Elazar - and acquitted the political leadership of any blame. This caused a spontaneous public uproar. In its wake, Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan - predecessors of Olmert and Peretz as Prime Minister and Minister of Defense - were forced to resign.

This time, too, the political and military leadership is trying to block any serious investigation. Amir Peretz even appointed a whitewash-committee, packed with his cronies. But public pressure is building up, and chances seem good that in the end there will be no way out but to appoint a judicial inquiry committee.

Generally, the one who appoints a commission of inquiry and sets its terms of reference predetermines its conclusions. Under Israeli law, it is the government which decides to appoint such a commission and determines its terms of reference. (As a Member of the Knesset, I voted against these paragraphs.) But the composition of the commission is determined by the President of the Supreme Court. If a commission is set up, I assume the present President of the Court, Aharon Barak, a highly respected chief justice, will appoint himself for the job.

IF INDEED such a commission is set up, what will it investigate?

The politicians and generals will try to restrict the inquiry to the technical aspects of the conduct of the war: - Why was the army not prepared for a war against guerillas? - Why were the land forces not sent into the field in the two first weeks? - Did the military command believe that the war could be won by the Air Force alone? - What was the quality of the intelligence? - Why was nothing done to protect the rear, when the rocket threat was known? - Why were the poor in the North left to their fate, after the well-to-do had left the area? - Why were the reserve units not ready for the war? - Why were the emergency arsenals empty? - Why did the supply system not function? - Why did the Chief-of-Staff practically depose the Chief of the Northern Command in the middle of the war? - Why was it decided at the last moment to start a campaign that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers?

The government will probably attempt to widen the investigation and to put part of the blame on its predecessors: - Why did the Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon governments just look on when Hizbullah was growing? - Why was nothing done as Hizbullah built up its huge stockpile of rockets?

All these are serious questions, and it is certainly necessary to clear them up. But it is more important to investigate the roots of the war: - What made the trio Olmert-Peretz-Halutz decide to start a war only a few hours after the capture of the two soldiers? - Was it agreed with the Americans in advance to go to war the moment a credible pretext presented itself? - Did the Americans push Israel into the war, and, later on, demand that it go on and on as far as possible? - Was it Condoleezza Rice who decided in fact when to start and when to stop? - Did the US want to get us entangled with Syria? - Did the US use us for its campaign against Iran?

This, too, is not enough. There are more profound and important questions.

THIS WAR has no name. Even after 33 days of fighting and six days of cease-fire, no natural name has been found. The media use a chronological name: Lebanon War II.

This way, the war in Lebanon is separated from the war in the Gaza Strip, which has been conducted simultaneously, and which is going on unabated after the cease-fire in the North. Do these two wars have a common denominator? Are they, perhaps, one and the same war?

The answer is: certainly, yes. And the proper name is: the War for the Settlements.

The war against the Palestinian people is being waged in order to keep the "settlement blocs" and annex large parts of the West Bank. The war in the North was waged, in fact, to keep the settlements on the Golan Heights.

Hizbullah grew up with the support of Syria, which controlled Lebanon at the time. Hafez al-Assad saw the return of the Golan to Syria as the aim of his life - after all, it was he who lost them in the June 1967 war, and who did not succeed in getting them back in the October 1973 war. He did not want to risk another war on the Israel-Syria border, which is so close to Damascus. Therefore, he patronized Hizbullah, so as to convince Israel that it would have no quiet as long as it refused to give the Golan back. Assad jr. is continuing with his fathers legacy.

Without the cooperation of Syria, Iran has no direct way of supplying Hizbullah with arms.

The solution is on hand: we have to remove the settlers from there, whatever the cost in wines and mineral water, and give the Golan back to its rightful owners. Ehud Barak almost did so, but, as is his wont, lost his nerve at the last moment.

It has to be said aloud: every one of the 154 Israeli dead of Lebanon War II (until the cease-fire) died for the settlers on the Golan Heights.

THE 155TH Israeli victim of this war is the "Covergence Plan" - the plan for a unilateral withdrawal from parts of the West Bank.

Ehud Olmert was elected four months ago (hard to believe! only four months!) on the platform of Convergence, much as Amir Peretz was elected on the platform of reducing the army and carrying out far-reaching social reforms.

In the course of the war, Olmert still announced that he would implement the "Convergence". But the day before yesterday he conceded that we could forget about it.

The Convergence was to remove 60 thousand settlers from where they are, but to leave the almost 400 thousand settlers in the West Bank (including the Jerusalem area). Now this plan has also been buried.

What remains? No peace, no negotiations, no solution at all for the historic conflict. Just a complete deadlock for years, at least until we get rid of the duo Olmert & Peretz.

All over Israel, they are already talking about the "Next Round", the war that will at long last eliminate Hizbullah and punish it for besmirching our honor. That has become, so it seems, a self-evident matter. Even Haaretz treats it as such in its editorials.

In the South, they don't speak about the "Next Round" because the present round is endless.

To have any value whatsoever, the investigation must expose the real roots of the war and present the public with the historic choice that has become clear in this war, too: Either the settlements and an endless war, or the return of the occupied territories and peace.

Otherwise, the investigation will only provide more backing for the outlook of the Right, to wit: we only have to expose the mistakes that have been made and correct them, then we can start the next war and win.

Having helped transform Hizbullah from a band of terrorists into the rock stars of the Muslim world, Israel persists with being stupid. Ehud Olmert either never learned or forgot the first rule of crisis management--i.e., when you're in a hole, stop digging. With the reputation of the Isreali Defense Force in tattters after the debacle in Lebanon, Israeli leaders apparently decided to go all out to secure their reputation as the supreme rogue state in the Middle East. How else to explain the following?

Israel kidnaps elected official: The Palestinian's Deputy Prime Minister, Nasser Al Shaer was kidnapped by the Israeli army on Saturday, after hiding since the start of Israel's Palestine offensive in June. He was seized in a raid at his home in the West Bank town on Ramallah.

Israel breaches ceasefire: UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called Israel's latest attack on Lebanon a violation of the UN backed truce that ended the 34-day war. "The secretary-general is deeply concerned about a violation by the Israeli side of the cessation of hostilities as laid out in Security Council resolution 1701," a spokesman for Annan said in a statement posted on the United Nations Web site.

I realize Israeli officials will justify the kidnapping as the capture of a wanted terrorist and the attack in Lebanon as an effort to prevent Hizbullah from rearming. Unfortunately for Jerusalem's sake, these acts feed the image of Israel as a renegade state that operates outside the normal boundaries of international law.

If you had a friend you cared deeply about engaging in self-destructive behavior you would do an intervention--sit them down and try to talk some sense into them. Apparently that is not an option with Israel. Witness what happens when a reporter tells the public that Israel was trying to manipulate public perceptions during the recent invasion of Lebanon:

Kurtz: One other note. On Reliable Sources two weeks ago, "Washington Post" Pentagon reporter Tom Ricks said he'd been told by U.S. military analysts that Israel was leaving some Hezbollah rocket launchers intact because the killing of Israeli civilians provided an image of moral equivalency in the war. "Post" editor Len Downie, responding to a letter from former New York mayor, Ed Koch, says he told Ricks he should not have made those statements.

Ricks told the New York Sun that he accurately reported the comments from analysts but that, quote, "I wish I hadn't said them, and I intend from now on to keep my mouth shut about it."

The last thing Israel needs now are a bunch of sycophants and fawning relatives telling it how great and good it is. They need to stop acting like adolescent fools and find the moral high ground they once occuppied. One key to Israel's longterm security is to solidify its reputation as a nation committed to law and the protection of human rights. When Israeli civilians were being blown up on buses and in market places during the Intifada, international public pressure forced Hamas and Hizbullah to shift away from suicide bombings.

When Israel acts with honor and restraint it has little difficulty portraying its enemies as crazy terrorists. But, when Israel lowers itself to the level of the terrorists, it is Israel, not the terrorists, who suffer. And let there be no doubt, Israel is suffering.

The time has come to look to the past for some answers. When Israel kidnapped Adolf Eichmann, the mastermind of the Final Solution, in the 1960s, the Israelis gave the Nazi a defense counsel, a public trial, and a chance to confront his accusers. That was a moment of greatness for Israel because it provided a graphic demonstration of the difference between a terrorist state and a civilized nation. Israel gave a mass murderer due process and, in the course of events, provided the ultimate condemnation of the Nazi regime.

Now we have the spectacle of Hizbullah acting with statesmanship and restraint while the Israelis destroy their credibility among the international community. That is a truth Israel's true friends need to communicate to Tel Aviv and Jerusalem in the strongest terms possible. And they need to do it soon.

Liberal MP Boris Wrzesnewskyj, New Democrat MP Peggy Nash and Bloc Québécois MP Maria Mourani are on a fact-finding mission to southern Lebanon as Israeli troops continue to withdraw from the region following 34 days of conflict.

The area was heavily bombed during Israel's air assault, which was sparked by a cross-border raid by Lebanon-based Hezbollah militants on July 12. Most attacks by Israel and Hezbollah ended with a UN-brokered ceasefire on Aug. 14.

On Monday, the MPs met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, who criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper's initial assertion that Israel's actions during the conflict were justified and a "measured" response.

"I disagree, because the whole world, even those who are ... supporting Israel ... they said this is a disproportionate action," said Siniora. "So this is not a measured response at all."

Wrzesnewskyj, who represents a Toronto riding, said the visit has shown him how integrated Hezbollah is into Lebanese society. In the interest of peace, he said Canada should reconsider how it deals with groups on its list of banned organizations, which includes Hezbollah.

In a phone interview with CBC News on Sunday night, Wrzesnewskyj stressed that he considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization, but said he is concerned that Ottawa's list of terror groups doesn't differentiate between the militant and political wings of the party.

"Hezbollah has a political wing, they have members of parliament, two [cabinet] ministers," said Wrzesnewskyj.

"You want to encourage the politicians of this military organization, you want to encourage the political wing, so that the centre of gravity shifts to them."

Wrzesnewskyj compared the situation in Lebanon to the decades of sectarian violence by the Irish Republican Army.

"If there wasn't a possibility for London to negotiate with Sinn Fein [the IRA's political party], we'd still have bombings in Northern Ireland," he said.

Canada's legislation should be amended to allow contact with the political arms of banned organizations, he said.

Banning Hezbollah 'not helpful,' Nash says

Wrzesnewskyj's comments were echoed by Nash, who is also from Toronto. She said many Lebanese regard Hezbollah as resistance fighters.

"It's just not helpful to label them a terrorist organization," said Nash.

"If the political parties can figure out a way to work with Hezbollah and try to get along internally, then we should perhaps take a cue from that."

On Monday, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day was critical of their comments, and said the government had no plans to change its position.

"I can't think of a suggestion that would be more harmful to a possible peace and to the hopes of peace than to encourage Hezbollah," said Day.

Mourani, of the Bloc Québécois, wouldn't say whether she favours taking Hezbollah off the list or not.

Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro withdrew from the fact-finding mission at the last minute, citing security concerns.

The tour was arranged by the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations, which criticized Harper for failing to demand an immediate ceasefire to end the conflict.

The council's executive director, Mazen Chouaib, said the trip was intended to give the MPs another view on what happened in Lebanon.

"Our politicians are getting the talking points from the Israel lobby," he said.

Illegal to work with Hezbollah

In 2002, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's government placed Hezbollah on its list of banned terrorist entities following weeks of intense lobbying by the Canadian Alliance party and Jewish groups. The ban included Hezbollah's military and social wings.

Under that designation, it is illegal for people in Canada to work with or donate money to Hezbollah. Canadian authorities can seize any assets linked to the organization.

Interim Liberal leader Bill Graham was foreign affairs minister when Hezbollah was added to the Canadian list. He initially argued that Hezbollah's social arm was a legitimate charity and functioned independently of the military wing.

Graham later reversed his position, citing media reports that quoted Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah urging Palestinians to expand suicide bombings worldwide.

Hezbollah protested Ottawa's move, claiming it was the victim of a propaganda campaign. A subsequent investigation by CBC-TV couldn't confirm Nasrallah made the remarks.

Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj, New Democrat Peggy Nash and Bloc Québécois member Maria Mourani visited the war-ravaged towns of Qana, Bint Jbeil and Aytaroun yesterday on a fact-finding mission that will result in a report to Parliament on the 33-day war. The trip, organized by the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations, was supposed to have been an all-party affair until Conservative MP Dean del Mastro pulled out at the last moment, apparently on orders from the Prime Minister's Office.

The parliamentarians said they were shocked by the scale of the destruction in the front-line villages. Qana was the scene of the deadliest single incident of the war, a July 30 Israeli missile attack that destroyed a building where civilians had been sheltering, killing 28 people.

Aytaroun was where eight Canadians, all members of one extended family, were killed at the beginning of the conflict when their house was hit in an Israeli air strike.

All three MPs said it would have been difficult for a Conservative to have defended the government's position when surrounded by the reality of what had happened.

"As we drove, kilometre after kilometre, house after house, apartment after apartment, village after village was destroyed," a visibly upset Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said afterward. The delegation met with Human Rights Watch representatives, who presented evidence that Israeli forces used cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said Mr. Harper's statement early in the war that Israel's attack was a "measured response" to the kidnapping by Hezbollah of two Israeli soldiers was "the moral equivalent of condoning human massacres."

Ms. Mourani, who is of Lebanese descent, said she found herself repeatedly having to apologize for the government's position. Many people she spoke to, she said, were surprised Canada had deserted its historical neutral stand and backed the Israeli assault.

"I had to keep saying, 'It's not Canada, it's just a Conservative government, just a minority government,' " she said.

Both she and Mr. Wrzesnewskyj used the term "crimes against humanity" to describe what they saw.

The MPs visited Damascus and Beirut before travelling to southern Lebanon. They met with political leaders from nearly every Lebanese faction, with the exception of Hezbollah.

Ms. Mourani said the delegation decided not to request a meeting with Hezbollah because it is officially called a terrorist organization by the Canadian government. However, she said isolating the Shia militia forever is not an option.

"To resolve this problem, we need to speak to all the parties," she said.

The area was heavily bombed during Israel's air assault, which was sparked by a cross-border raid by Lebanon-based Hezbollah militants on July 12. Most attacks by Israel and Hezbollah ended with a UN-brokered ceasefire on Aug. 14.

On Monday, the MPs met with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, who criticized Prime Minister Stephen Harper's initial assertion that Israel's actions during the conflict were justified and a "measured" response.

"I disagree, because the whole world, even those who are ... supporting Israel ... they said this is a disproportionate action," said Siniora. "So this is not a measured response at all."

Wrzesnewskyj, who represents a Toronto riding, said the visit has shown him how integrated Hezbollah is into Lebanese society. In the interest of peace, he said Canada should reconsider how it deals with groups on its list of banned organizations, which includes Hezbollah.

In a phone interview with CBC News on Sunday night, Wrzesnewskyj stressed that he considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization, but said he is concerned that Ottawa's list of terror groups doesn't differentiate between the militant and political wings of the party.

"Hezbollah has a political wing, they have members of parliament, two [cabinet] ministers," said Wrzesnewskyj.

"You want to encourage the politicians of this military organization, you want to encourage the political wing, so that the centre of gravity shifts to them."

Wrzesnewskyj compared the situation in Lebanon to the decades of sectarian violence by the Irish Republican Army.

"If there wasn't a possibility for London to negotiate with Sinn Fein [the IRA's political party], we'd still have bombings in Northern Ireland," he said.

Canada's legislation should be amended to allow contact with the political arms of banned organizations, he said.

Banning Hezbollah 'not helpful,' Nash says

Wrzesnewskyj's comments were echoed by Nash, who is also from Toronto. She said many Lebanese regard Hezbollah as resistance fighters.

"It's just not helpful to label them a terrorist organization," said Nash.

"If the political parties can figure out a way to work with Hezbollah and try to get along internally, then we should perhaps take a cue from that."

On Monday, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day was critical of their comments, and said the government had no plans to change its position.

"I can't think of a suggestion that would be more harmful to a possible peace and to the hopes of peace than to encourage Hezbollah," said Day.

Mourani, of the Bloc Québécois, wouldn't say whether she favours taking Hezbollah off the list or not.

Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro withdrew from the fact-finding mission at the last minute, citing security concerns.

The tour was arranged by the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations, which criticized Harper for failing to demand an immediate ceasefire to end the conflict.

The council's executive director, Mazen Chouaib, said the trip was intended to give the MPs another view on what happened in Lebanon.

"Our politicians are getting the talking points from the Israel lobby," he said.

Illegal to work with Hezbollah

In 2002, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's government placed Hezbollah on its list of banned terrorist entities following weeks of intense lobbying by the Canadian Alliance party and Jewish groups. The ban included Hezbollah's military and social wings.

Under that designation, it is illegal for people in Canada to work with or donate money to Hezbollah. Canadian authorities can seize any assets linked to the organization.

Interim Liberal leader Bill Graham was foreign affairs minister when Hezbollah was added to the Canadian list. He initially argued that Hezbollah's social arm was a legitimate charity and functioned independently of the military wing.

Graham later reversed his position, citing media reports that quoted Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah urging Palestinians to expand suicide bombings worldwide.

Hezbollah protested Ottawa's move, claiming it was the victim of a propaganda campaign. A subsequent investigation by CBC-TV couldn't confirm Nasrallah made the remarks.

Amani Rahami, 36, said her husband had been avoiding home for fear the Israelis would arrest him, but did not realise he was important enough to warrant surveillance.

"They came to arrest him many times but he was not here. This time they arrived minutes after he did. He is a father, an educated man and they take him away like a criminal. It is the Israelis who are criminals in this," she said.

Mr Ramahi is an anaesthetist at a Jerusalem hospital and is considered a Hamas moderate who opposes violence. When he arrived at his home in Ramallah yesterday, a squad of Israeli soldiers in jeeps were waiting nearby. They surrounded the house and summoned him by loudspeaker before tying him up and taking him away.

Mr Ramahi is the second Hamas representative to be taken into custody in Ramallah in as many days. On Saturday, Israeli soldiers detained Nasser Shaer, the deputy prime minister of the Palestinian Authority. Earlier this month, they arrested the PLC speaker, Aziz Dweik, a prominent political leader of Hamas in the West Bank.

After the capture of Corporal Gilad Shalit on June 12, Israel launched a series of military operations which left almost 200 Gaza residents dead and the territory besieged. Despite the damage, the militants holding Corporal Shalit continue to insist they would only release him in return for the liberation of Palestinian prisoners.

Since June, Israel has arrested 49 senior Hamas officials, including the 33 parliamentarians, as an extra bargaining chip in the prisoner exchange negotiations, which are being conducted by Egyptian mediators.

The officials are all from the West Bank and most have been a strong moderating force within Hamas, urging leaders in Gaza to recognise Israel and ensure the party is acceptable to the international community.

The Israeli government has arrested the men because it claims that technically they are members of "a terrorist organisation" although they may not be involved in terrorist acts themselves.

Mark Regev, a spokesman for the Israeli foreign ministry said: "The men who have been arrested are self-confessed senior members of Hamas which, in Europe, in Britain, in Japan, in Australia and in Israel is regarded as a terrorist organisation. They have been picked up and will be placed before a judge who will decide if there is sufficient evidence to try them."

Mr Regev would not confirm that their arrest was directly related to the detention of Corporal Shalit but added: "You cannot act like a terrorist and expect to be treated like a statesman. If Palestinian leaders act like statesmen and in accordance with conventional practices, they will earn the respect their position gives them."

Hamas has accused Israel of trying to destroy the Palestinian Authority, but members of the parliament said it is still managing to operate. PLC member Qais Abu Leila said that the arrest of PLC members was a show of force designed to demonstrate that Palestinians only have rights that Israel is prepared to give them.

"They have arrested as many as they can but still the PLC is working. It has more that 67 members out 132 which is a quorum and the deputy-speaker is presiding over the sessions. The PLC is not working at the same tempo as previously but it is moving on although there is an agreement that controversial subjects will not be voted on," he said.

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006

Until now, the reservists' protest hadn't come to a situation of declarations that they don't intend to serve. Yet, according to the soldiers in the Orev company, who are about to be released from reserve duty Tuesday, the difficult decision was made in the face of great frustration and bitterness from their last reserve service in Lebanon. They signed the petition with "shaking hands."

One of the soldiers told Ynet, "We have been active since the end of July in the western zone. We carried out operations deep in the field, we destroyed launcher and damaged terror infrastructure. We received degrading treatment, the equipment was unsound, and there were supply problems on top of it all. But we kept quiet and drove on."

The soldiers are complaining about the fact that they received fewer days to prepare for service than other soldiers who received an emergency call-up. "Until now, soldiers from our company were stationed in Lebanon. Leading up to our release, we checked if we receive similar conditions as other reserve soldiers, in other words, five to seven days to recover. At first, they didn't answer our questions. Afterwards, they told us that we will receive only two days because we weren't operating deep in Lebanon," said the same soldier.

'It's hard for us to sign on such a thing'

Company soldiers say that they feel hurt. "We are running after the company commander and the deputy company commander in order to talk to them, but no one is listening. They're at the end of their rope," the soldier explained.

Tuesday evening the company soldiers and their friends formulated a petition declaring that in light of the lack of consideration and the sense of inequality between them and other reserve soldiers who received more recovery days, they don't intend to report for reserve duty.

"We gave our all - and this is what we get? We can't do it anymore," the soldiers say. The petition has been signed by 40 company soldiers. The officers, it was agreed, won't sign, but expressed that they support the petition in principle. "The officers preferred not to sign, but we sense that they are no less hurt than we are," said one of the soldiers.

According to the reservists, they would have been happy not to get to such a situation. "We are part of the IDF and want to continue being a part of it. If only we could prevent this, but one must also think about the soldiers. There are soldiers here that have never missed reserve duty, that report every time they are called. In this year alone we served 24 days in operational activity and another four days in brigade exercises. The feeling is so terrible that we can't keep quiet anymore," they said.

Soldiers of the reconnaissance company in the brigade have not signed the petition at this point. "We feel the same, as if we have been used. But on the other hand, it's hard for us to sign on such a thing - that we will never do reserve duty again. In any case, we won't let this treatment become part of the agenda and we are thinking how to act. If they don't listen to us, we also will sign on this document," said one of the reconnaissance soldiers.

IDF sources noted that they are looking into the reservists' claims outlined in the petition.