Syrian President Bashar Assad has announced full withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon, to be carried out in stages in accordance with the Taif agreement and UN Resolution 1559. His announcement came in the wake of sustained pressure from the Lebanese opposition and international community after the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Thus President Bashar has once again shown his keenness on having good Syrian-Lebanese relations and the unity of Lebanon.

Syrian troops are stationed on Lebanese soil in accordance with the Taif agreement. They have remained there all these years under the very eyes of successive governments in Lebanon, including that of Omar Karami, which recently submitted its resignation.

Lebanese governments knew that Syrian troops have a specific mission and that they would leave Lebanon once the mission — removal of the causes of their presence in Lebanon — has been accomplished.

The pressures now being mounted on Syria to pull its troops out of Lebanon stem from Resolution 1559 adopted last year by the UN Security Council. Contrary to what Israel and some of its Western allies claim, such pressure tactics have no relation with the assassination of Hariri. These vested interests have been waiting for an opportunity to foment trouble, and they did get one in the assassination of Hariri to inflame the Lebanese streets and incite people against Syrian presence in Lebanon, in a bid to implement a UN resolution that serves Israeli interests more than the sovereignty and security of Lebanon.

In fact, the United Nations, which is urging Syria to pull troops out of Lebanon, should have put pressure on Israel to withdraw from south Lebanon. Israel’s presence there is a form of occupation as it entered Lebanon by force and usurped part of Lebanese land. On the other hand, Syrian troops are there with the approval of the Lebanese government and the Arab League.

As an international organization, the United Nations should exercise the principle of neutrality in implementing international laws. The issues of foreign occupation and Syrian presence in Lebanese territories should not be mixed up.

The world body should not blindly follow the views of the US, which, in any case, defends Israel without any rhyme or reason. Whoever is hell-bent on Israel’s security at the expense of regional security would never be keen on the sovereignty and security of countries around Israel.

The departure of Syrian troops from Lebanon is a natural and expected matter, because they are part of a temporary, and not permanent, mission. It does not require international intervention; nor is there any need for UN resolutions or unjust pressures.

It is, in fact, part of the Taif agreement, which all Lebanese parties adhere to and the Syrian leadership respects — a fact that was reiterated by President Bashar during his short visit to Riyadh.

But who would put pressure on Israel to end its occupation of south Lebanon? The US, the biggest and sole supporter of Israel, or the UN, which has been adopting double standards?

— Essa bin Mohammed Al-Zedjali is editor in chief of The Times of Oman.