cnjournal

On 11 Aug 2006, with echoes of the unimplemented Security Council (SC) Resolution 1559 still ringing in their ears the diplomats at the UN agreed to the following wording for SC 1701:

Let’s look at the relevant portions of the pap that passes for action at the UN.

Paragraph 8 of the resolution, “Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution based on the following principles and elements:

-- security arrangements to prevent the resumption of hostilities, including the establishment between the Blue Line and the Litani river of an area free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the Government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL as authorized in paragraph 11,” and further,

-- full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of 27 July 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese State;

Why am I not convinced that a single AK 47 or rocket launcher will ever be taken from the Hezbollah terrorists?

Here’s why.

First the French who brokered the ceasefire with the USA made a big to-do about the 7,000 troops it would commit to the UN effort alongside the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF). But wait, next Chirac through his Foreign Minister postures that without “minimum guarantees” (Chirac – Times article) they will only muster up an additional 200 troops to augment the French UNIFIL contingent.

Could the memories of the murder of the 58 French paratroopers at the hands of Hezbollah while in their barracks in Beruit have been on Jacques mind? That’s right this attack was done at the same time as Hezbollah hit the US Marine barracks killing some 250 US soldiers.

Nevertheless, and no matter how valid the concern of repetition, scorn, derision and other kinds of abuse from all sides was heaped on the heads of the French.

Yet, even then I maintained some hope that the real intent was as stated – that this was a French attempt to get tough ROE for the force, up to and including agreement to add the ‘robust’ Chapter 7 – meaning UNIFIL is authorized to apply deadly force to implement the resolution.

Although the evident need for such capability must have been in the minds of the French leadership, the possibility that it would come into force was dashed from the first days following the resolution: first the Lebanese Defence Minister Mur said he would never even dream of disarming Hezbollah and Nazrallah flatly proclaimed it would never be considered as long as the IDF was still in South Lebanon.

Spin forward to when the Italians step up to the plate and pledge 3000 troops to the force as well as offering to take the leadership of the force should the UN so wish. At the time of the Italian pledge there was no word one way or another as to the detail of the ROE.

Feeling the international heat over its decision the French scrambled. In a brief comment that could not have passed unnoticed by President Chirac, President Bush in effect quite simply said - that’s the French for you. 

As befitted their self-image as the keepers of “La Gloire” and in the name of France, Chirac, in a display of Grand Arrogance then called on the other Europeans to belly up to the bar. A meeting was held in Brussels with Kofi Anan and the Foreign Ministers to arm twist for more troops.

Fast forward again to the article in The Times Online, 26 Aug and these current developments:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2329025,00.html

“We can now begin to put together a credible force,” Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, said after a meeting with European Union foreign ministers in Brussels.

However, he ruled out demands for the UN force to disarm Hezbollah, which sparked the 34-day conflict with Israel when it seized two Israeli soldiers last month. “It is generally accepted that the disarmament of Hezbollah cannot be done by force,” he said. “The troops are not going there to disarm Hezbollah, let’s be clear on that.”

 

Oh, OK, but Dear Mr. Sec-Gen, what about the resolution just passed? If the troops are not going to do the job, pray tell, who will? Or, have I missed it again and what Sec State Rice said is really true – Hezbollah will do it voluntarily? Wonder what the IDF thinks of that…

Still there is some good news too out of Brussels:

“The French President was rebuffed in his attempt to maintain his country’s leadership of the UN operation. General Alain Pellegrini, the French commander, will see out his term in charge of the existing Unifil, a force seen as toothless, but Mr. Annan asked Italy to take control of the expanded mission in February after Rome pledged up to 3,000 troops.”

“European ministers said that they had agreed to send troops only after winning a guarantee from Mr. Annan on clear rules of engagement to avoid the indecision that hampered UN peacekeeping in the Balkans. But Hezbollah’s disarmament appeared to remain unresolved, with European military planners suggesting that their role was to help the Lebanese Army to undertake the task, even though it may be ill-equipped and unwilling to do so.”

As incredible as it seems from this Times story, we learn that “European ministers said that they had agreed to send troops only after winning a guarantee (emphasis added) from Mr. Annan on clear rules of engagement…”

Well, well, well. A kiss and a promise from Kofi on the ROE issue and “voila”, the French are convinced enough to commit two battalions (up to 2,000) to the force!

One begins to wonder just when the propitious moment will come when Kofi will actually honour this guarantee and finally commit to the force ROE. For an objective observer, wasn’t the Brussels meeting the obvious moment to at a minimum put in place the required authority as seen from the European perspective? Evidently not.

Once again, the yawning gap between diplomatic realities and facts on the ground leads me to these conclusions:

- the UN never intended to implement the disarmament portion of SC 1559;

- the UN never intended to implement the disarmament portion of SC 1701.

Worse, the Blue Line (the IDF pulled back south of this line when it unilaterally withdrew from the buffer area of Southern Lebanon that it had occupied ever since chasing the PLO out of Beruit in 1982) a UN agreed and sanctioned demarcation line for the Lebanese/Israeli border is again open for ‘consideration’.

Specifically, the Shaaba Farms area at the intersection of the Syrian/Lebanese/Israeli border is to be looked at as per the ludicrous demand from Lebanese PM Siniora (the seven point plan).

Even by the dismal UN standards this is a low point and it again begs the question, when will the UN be put out of business?

Perhaps widespread knowledge of the next part of this obscene ballet will do the trick.

At this link, http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/622bqwjn.asp

If true - it is all taken from public records and so is likely accurate – not only is the UN stale dated, but the very entity trusted by the world community to be scrupulously impartial and fair, the same UNIFIL that is currently bulking-up to perhaps 15,000 is aiding and abetting Hezbollah against Israel by the provision of intelligence information about IDF movements, equipment and strength.

In war time those who provide such help to the enemy are called traitors and the penalty for those caught is death.

It makes me sick.

 

cn