Print Page - Draft resolution presented at the U.N.

The draft resolution presented at the U.N.
Friday, August 11, 2006; Posted: 6:06 p.m. EDT (22:06 GMT)

The Security Council;

PP1. Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, in particular resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978), 520 (1982), 1559 (2004), 1655 (2006) 1680 (2006) and 1697 (2006), as well as the statements of its President on the situation in Lebanon, in particular the statements of 18 June 2000 (S/PRST/2000/21), of 19 October 2004 (S/PRST/2004/36), of 4 May 2005 (S/PRST/2005/17) of 23 January 2006 (S/PRST/2006/3) and of 30 July 2006 (S/PRST/2006/35),

PP2. Expressing its utmost concern at the continuing escalation of hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel since Hizbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July 2006, which has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons,

PP3. Emphasizing the need for an end of violence, but at the same time emphasizing the need to address urgently the causes that have given rise to the current crisis, including by the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers,

PP4: Mindful of the sensitivity of the issue of prisoners and encouraging the efforts aimed at urgently settling the issue of the Lebanese prisoners detained in Israel,

PP5. Welcoming the efforts of the Lebanese Prime Minister and the commitment of the government of Lebanon, in its seven-point plan, to extend its authority over its territory, through its own legitimate armed forces, such that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon, welcoming also its commitment to a UN force that is supplemented and enhanced in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operation, and bearing in mind its request in this plan for an immediate withdrawal of the Israeli forces from Southern Lebanon,

PP6. Determined to act for this withdrawal to happen at the earliest,

PP7. Taking due note of the proposals made in the seven-point plan regarding the Shebaa farms area,

PP8. Welcoming the unanimous decision by the government of Lebanon on 7 August 2006 to deploy a Lebanese armed force of 15,000 troops in South Lebanon as the Israeli army withdraws behind the Blue Line and to request the assistance of additional forces from UNIFIL as needed, to facilitate the entry of the Lebanese armed forces into the region and to restate its intention to strengthen the Lebanese armed forces with material as needed to enable it to perform its duties,

PP9. Aware of its responsibilities to help secure a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution to the conflict,

PP10. Determining that the situation in Lebanon constitutes a threat to international peace and security,

OP1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

OP2. Upon full cessation of hostilities, calls upon the government of Lebanon and UNIFIL as authorized by paragraph 11 to deploy their forces together throughout the South and calls upon the government of Israel, as that deployment begins, to withdraw all of its forces from Southern Lebanon in parallel;

OP3. Emphasizes the importance of the extension of the control of the government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory in accordance with the provisions of resolution 1559 (2004) and resolution 1680 (2006), and of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, for it to exercise its full sovereignty, so that there will be no weapons without the consent of the government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the government of Lebanon;

OP4. Reiterates its strong support for full respect for the Blue Line;

OP5. Also reiterates its strong support, as recalled in all its previous relevant resolutions, for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders, as contemplated by the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement of 23 March 1949;

OP6. Calls on the international community to take immediate steps to extend its financial and humanitarian assistance to the Lebanese people, including through facilitating the safe return of displaced persons and, under the authority of the Government of Lebanon, reopening airports and harbours, consistent with paragraphs 14 and 15, and calls on it also to consider further assistance in the future to contribute to the reconstruction and development of Lebanon;

OP7. Affirms that all parties are responsible for ensuring that no action is taken contrary to paragraph 1 that might adversely affect the search for a long-term solution, humanitarian access to civilian populations, including safe passage for humanitarian convoys, or the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons, and calls on all parties to comply with this responsibility and to cooperate with the Security Council;

OP8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution based on the following principles and elements:

- full respect for the Blue Line by both parties,

- 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, deployed in this area,

- 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 July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state,

- no foreign forces in Lebanon without the consent of its government,

- no sales or supply of arms and related materiel to Lebanon except as authorized by its government,

- provision to the United Nations of all remaining maps of land mines in Lebanon in Israel's possession;

(cont'd next post)

OP9. Invites the Secretary-General to support efforts to secure as soon as possible agreements in principle from the Government of Lebanon and the Government of Israel to the principles and elements for a long-term solution as set forth in paragraph 8, and expresses its intention to be actively involved;

OP10. Requests the Secretary-General to develop, in liaison with relevant international actors and the concerned parties, proposals to implement the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), including disarmament, and for delineation of the international borders of Lebanon, especially in those areas where the border is disputed or uncertain, including by dealing with the Shebaa farms area, and to present to the Security Council those proposals within thirty days;

OP11. Decides, in order to supplement and enhance the force in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operations, to authorize an increase in the force strength of UNIFIL to a maximum of 15,000 troops, and that the force shall, in addition to carrying out its mandate under resolutions 425 and 426 (1978):

a. Monitor the cessation of hostilities;

b. Accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the South, including along the Blue Line, as Israel withdraws its armed forces from Lebanon as provided in paragraph 2;

c. Coordinate its activities related to paragraph 11 (b) with the Government of Lebanon and the Government of Israel;

d. Extend its assistance to help ensure humanitarian access to civilian populations and the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons;

e. Assist the Lebanese armed forces in taking steps towards the establishment of the area as referred to in paragraph 8;

f. Assist the government of Lebanon, at its request, to implement paragraph 14;

OP12. Acting in support of a request from the government of Lebanon to deploy an international force to assist it to exercise its authority throughout the territory, authorizes UNIFIL to take all necessary action in areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind, to resist attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the mandate of the Security Council, and to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers, and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the government of Lebanon, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence;

OP13. Requests the Secretary-General urgently to put in place measures to ensure UNIFIL is able to carry out the functions envisaged in this resolution, urges Member States to consider making appropriate contributions to UNIFIL and to respond positively to requests for assistance from the Force, and expresses its strong appreciation to those who have contributed to UNIFIL in the past;

OP14. Calls upon the Government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel and requests UNIFIL as authorized in paragraph 11 to assist the Government of Lebanon at its request;

OP15. Decides further that all states shall take the necessary measures to prevent, by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag vessels or aircraft,

(a) the sale or supply to any entity or individual in Lebanon of arms and related materiel of all types, including weapons and ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment, and spare parts for the aforementioned, whether or not originating in their territories, and

(b) the provision to any entity or individual in Lebanon of any technical training or assistance related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance or use of the items listed in subparagraph (a) above, except that these prohibitions shall not apply to arms, related material, training or assistance authorized by the Government of Lebanon or by UNIFIL as authorized in paragraph 11;

OP16. Decides to extend the mandate of UNIFIL until 31 August 2007, and expresses its intention to consider in a later resolution further enhancements to the mandate and other steps to contribute to the implementation of a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution;

OP17. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council within one week on the implementation of this resolution and subsequently on a regular basis;

OP18. Stresses the importance of, and the need to achieve, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, based on all its relevant resolutions including its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973;

OP19. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter.

The draft resolution presented at the U.N. (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/11/un.draft/index.html)

Hezbollah sets conditions for agreement

13 minutes ago

BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said Saturday that the Islamic militant group will abide by a U.N. cease-fire resolution but will continue fighting as long as Israeli troops remained in south Lebanon.

Nasrallah grudgingly accepted the cease-fire plan in a televised address as the Lebanese Cabinet was in session to vote on whether to agree to the U.N. resolution. Hezbollah has two ministers in the government.

"We will not be an obstacle to any (government) decision ... but our ministers will express reservations about articles that we consider unjust and unfair," he said.

The U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution seeking a "full cessation" of violence between Israel and Hezbollah on Friday, offering the region its best chance yet for peace after a month of fighting that has killed nearly 900 people and inflamed Mideast tensions.

The resolution, adopted unanimously, authorizes 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help Lebanese troops take control of south Lebanon as Israeli forces that have occupied the area withdraw.

The Shiite cleric said Hezbollah rocket strikes on northern Israel would end when Israel stopped airstrikes and other attacks on Lebanese civilians.

Some of the heaviest fighting of the war raged Saturday as Israel sent an avalanche of military power into Lebanon, dispatching thousands of troops and columns of armor into the rocky hills just north of its border.

Nasrallah called continued resistance to the Israel offensive "our natural right" and predicted more hard fighting to come.

"We must not make a mistake, not in the resistance, the government or the people, and believe that the war has ended. The war has not ended. There have been continued strikes and continued casualties," he said.

"Today nothing has changed and it appears tomorrow nothing will change," he said.

Hezbollah sets conditions for agreement (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel;_ylt=AhAKfXxlikLyGUwAayECfvYUvioA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)

Both sides in Mideast war agree to plan

By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press Writer 5 minutes ago

BEIRUT, Lebanon - Israeli helicopters flew hundreds of commandos into the Hezbollah heartland and warplanes staged wide-ranging airstrikes Saturday as both sides indicated they would accept a U.N. cease-fire plan to stop heavy fighting still raging in southern Lebanon.

Airstrikes killed at least 19 people in Lebanon, including 15 in one village, and Hezbollah rockets wounded at least five people in Israel. Long columns of Israeli tanks, soldiers and armored personnel carriers streamed over the border.

More than 50 helicopters ferried Israeli commandos into southern Lebanon in what was called the biggest such operation in Israel's history. It was part of an all-put push to drive Hezbollah fighters behind the Litani River, about 18 miles from the border, before the truce.

But Hezbollah fought back hard. Israel said dozen of its soldiers were wounded in the expanded offensive, which has tripled the Israeli troop strength in southern Lebanon.

The Islamic militant group said its fighters killed seven Israeli soldiers and destroyed 21 tanks. Israel said its troops had killed 40 Hezbollah guerrillas over the previous 24 hours.

Hezbollah's leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, said his militia would abide by the cease-fire blueprint, but said the guerrillas would keep battling Israeli troops while they remained in Lebanon, calling that our natural right."

His address was televised as Lebanon's Cabinet met to vote on the U.N. plan. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora signaled the Cabinet would accept, saying it serves the interests of his country and "shows that the whole world stood by Lebanon."

The Israeli Cabinet was expected to approve the cease-fire Sunday, but Israel appeared ready to keep up its full-scale military campaign until the U.N. plan worked its way through the region's political leadership over the weekend.

The resolution approved Friday night by the U.N. Security Council would create a peacekeeping force by combining a beefed-up version of ineffective U.N. units already in the war zone and 15,000 soldiers from the Lebanese army. The force, which could number around 30,000, would stand between Israel and Hezbollah's militia.

France, New Zealand, Italy and Ireland said Saturday they were ready to provide troops and Turkey said it was inclined to do so.

President Bush issued a statement urging the world's leaders to implement the U.N. plan and help bring real peace to the Middle East.

"The loss of innocent life in both Lebanon and Israel has been a great tragedy," Bush said. "Hezbollah and its Iranian and Syrian sponsors have brought an unwanted war to the people of Lebanon and Israel, and millions have suffered as a result. I now urge the international community to turn words into action and make every effort to bring lasting peace to the region."

Israel's army chief, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, said Israel expected to fight for another week despite the cease-fire deal. He said Israeli forces — apparently about 30,000 soldiers now — would stay in Lebanon until an international force arrived.

Israel has demanded an airtight buffer zone and wonders if U.N. and Lebanese forces are up for the task. A small U.N. military presence — now about 2,000 observers — has been in Hezbollah-controlled southern Lebanon since 1978 and has been overwhelmed by the Islamic militant group's rising power, aided by Iran and Syria.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice specifically cited Hezbollah's two sponsors in a statement Friday for all parties to "respect the sovereignty of the Lebanese government and the will of the international community."

But the resolution, approved 15-0 in the U.N. Security Council, did nothing to immediately halt the fighting that erupted exactly a month ago and has claimed nearly 900 lives — including at least 761 in Lebanon and 123 Israelis.

Israeli missiles slammed into the southern Lebanon village of Rachaf, about 10 miles from the Israeli border, killing at least 15 civilians, security officials said. Israeli ground forces also fanned out across southern Lebanon hunting for Hezbollah rocket batteries that have fired unending salvos across the border.

Three people also were killed in strikes on Kharayeb, and a Lebanese soldier was killed in an air raid near an army base in the Bekaa Valley, officials said.

In Sidon, a coastal city between Beirut and the Israeli border, Israeli bombs destroyed a power plant. Farther south, another power facility was hit near Tyre, knocking out electricity to the port, police said.

On Lebanon's northern frontier, Israeli airstrikes hit the highway leading to the Arida border crossing about a mile from the Mediterranean coast. It was the last official border post open for humanitarian convoys and civilians fleeing the country. The highway was impassable, but drivers tried to maneuver through ruts and ditches.

The only other exits from Lebanon are rugged pathways and back roads through deserts or mountains.

Israel seeks to block supply routes for Hezbollah and disrupt their mobility and has warned it would target any vehicles on the roads in southern Lebanon and along other main highways.

On Friday, an Israeli aircraft fired on a convoy of more than 600 civilian vehicles and others carrying 350 Lebanese police and soldiers who left the Israeli-occupied town on Marjayoun in southeast Lebanon. Police said three civilians and an army recruit were killed and 28 people were injured. The mayor of Marjayoun, Fuad Hamra, put the death toll at six.

Israel said the U.N. troops asked permission to lead the convoy, but it was denied. Previous groups were given permission and traveled unharmed, the Israeli military said.

Fighting continued in Hezbollah-held areas around Marjayoun, a strategic hub overlooking valleys used as Hezbollah rocket bases.

Israeli commando units and guerrillas engaged in close combat in a valley near El-Ghandourieh, about 10 miles southwest of Marjayoun, according to Lebanese security officials.

Other Israeli ground forces, backed by aircraft and drones, met stiff resistance as they tried to reach the Litani River.

Israel said its troops destroyed several rocket batteries and killed more than 40 Hezbollah fighters in the last 24 hours. The guerrilla group announced four deaths Friday and three Saturday.

After a morning free of Hezbollah rocket strikes in northern Israel, a barrage of 20 missiles at midafternoon injured two people in Amirim and three in Kiryat Shemona. Hezbollah had been averaging nearly 200 hits each day in the monthlong conflict.

The Litani is seen by Israel as a crucial boundary in its attempt to push back Hezbollah. Israel repeatedly has insisted that the proposed peacekeeping force cannot allow Hezbollah weapons south of the river.

But it will be nearly impossible to rid south Lebanon of the Islamic guerrillas, who are now in the Lebanese Cabinet and run clinics and other charities that are considered essential in rebuilding the region. Their ability to withstand the Israeli military assault has also made Hezbollah heroes across the Arab and Islamic worlds.

Both sides in Mideast war agree to plan (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel;_ylt=AnTvN7UmJMwNzl2_.ZYnU1xn.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b3JuZGZhBHNlYwM3MjE-)

Nations offer to send troops to Mideast

By MERAIAH FOLEY, Associated Press Writer Sat Aug 12, 8:00 AM ET

SYDNEY, Australia - France, New Zealand and Italy said Saturday they are ready to send peacekeeping troops to help Lebanon regain control of its south, as governments around the world welcomed a U.N. resolution calling for an end to hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah.

France, which already has some troops in southern Lebanon, will "play a role in putting the new resolution into place, particularly in regards to the new" expanded U.N. force, said President Jacques Chirac.

Italian Premier Romano Prodi also said his country would be willing to contribute troops and wanted to participate in talks to determine the composition and mandate of the force.

China, Russia, Germany, Japan and Australia all praised the resolution, but a majority of Australians said they would not support sending forces to the region, where a month of fighting has left more than 800 people dead, destroyed large amounts of infrastructure, and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.

Drafted by France and the U.S., the resolution calls for an immediate cessation of hostilities and authorizes 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help Lebanese troops take control of south Lebanon as Israel withdraws.

New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark said her country is "ready to consider what role we might play in an expanded U.N. presence in southern Lebanon."

"The onus now lies on the governments of Lebanon and Israel to accept the resolution as the basis for moving forward," she said.

Turkey also said it was inclined to send peacekeepers.

"If the conditions are met, we will look at the issue very favorably," Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul was quoted as saying by the government-owned Anatolia news agency.

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer welcomed the resolution, but said it would not mean an end to the crisis in the Middle East. "This will not occur until the underlying causes of the conflict are resolved," Downer said.

He later said the government would look at sending a small contingent of specialized troops to bolster U.N. forces, but said Australia "certainly couldn't provide large numbers of troops."

Thousands of demonstrators gathered in Australia's largest city, Sydney, on Saturday calling for an immediate withdrawal of Israeli troops from Lebanon.

In Beijing, the Chinese government said the U.N. resolution was a good foundation for future peace.

"China hopes concerned sides will implement the Security Council resolution in a tangible manner, resume peace and stability in the Middle East region at an early date," the official Xinhua News Agency said, citing the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Russia, another permanent council member, praised the resolution but emphasized the need to revive the Middle East peace process to prevent further conflict

"One of the urgent tasks in that context is the normalization of (the) situation on the Palestinian territories and the resumption of dialogue between the Palestinian National Authority and Israel," the Russian Foreign Ministry said.

Japan said it would continue to call on all parties involved in the conflict to realize the cease-fire and agree on a political framework, as stated in the resolution.

The Foreign Ministry said Japan will also contribute to restoring peace and stability in the region, but did not give details.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier welcomed the resolution and urged Israel and Lebanon to implement it "without delay," but he did not say if Germany would contribute troops.

Nations offer to send troops to Mideast (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060812/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_fighting_world_view_3;_ylt=AvyBdyHGiApzoz1L3.EL3tkUvioA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You notice one nation missing? I don't see America being a part of this peacekeeping mission.

Cease-fire expected to begin on Monday
Associated Press, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 10, 2006

The United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1701 Friday evening, calling for a cessation of hostilities between Hizbullah and Israel.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will recommend to the cabinet that it accept the UNSC resolution at its weekly meeting Sunday.

The agreement was expected to go into effect by Monday morning.

However, Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations Dan Gillerman told the UNSC that unless the means to enforce the resolution were to be defined, "We will be back [in the UNSC], if not in a week, then in a month or a year."

He warned that Hizbullah would be embolded by the United Nations' lack of decisiveness and would undoubtedly be resupplied with even more deadly weapons.

The resolution authorizes the deployment of 15,000 UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon in support of Lebanese army forces, which are to move into the region and replace Hizbullah in parallel with a withdrawal of Israeli forces.

Israel is not required to withdraw until the deployment of UN and Lebanese forces begins.

The new UN peacekeeping force, still under the auspices of UNIFIL, will, according to the resolution, be enhanced "in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operations." The 15,000-strong force will be charged with helping the Lebanese government to implement its sovereignty "over all Lebanese territory," including that previously been under the de facto authority of Hizbullah.

It explicitly requires Hizbullah to be disarmed south of the Litani River, and imposes an arms embargo on the organization, to be enforced by the strengthened UNIFIL force.

It also calls for the "unconditional release" of the two IDF soldiers captured July 12, but does not make a direct demand for their freedom.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed disappointment that the council had not taken action on the month-long fighting sooner.

More than 800 people have died in the month-long conflict, hundreds of Lebanese civilians and dozens of Israelis.

Cease-fire expected to begin on Monday (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525849052&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)

Former Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom Objections to Ceasefire Proposal
13:00 Aug 11, '06 / 17 Av 5766
by Hillel Fendel and Hana Levi Julian

Former Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom of the Likud has stinging criticism of the ceasefire plan being formulated in the United Nations. He calls it a "disgrace" and a "historic tragedy."

Shalom, who served as Foreign Minister under former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for nearly three years until early this year, said that the proposal under consideration by the Security Council "mortgages the country's future" and would be a "weeping for generations."

Lebanon, too, has objections, which may cause another delay in the Council vote. Lebanon feels that the Shab'a Farms area, which it still demands from Israel, is not significantly mentioned, nor does it like the fact that the international peacekeeping force would be empowered to open fire. Lebanon also insists that Israel withdraw entirely from south Lebanese territory before any ceasefire is carried out.

Israel initially objected to the ceasefire proposal for its lack of a clause requiring Hizbullah to disarm prior to a ceasefire. Nonetheless, Jerusalem appears willing to accept the proposal.

Israel has rejected a Russian proposal to hold a 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire. Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Dan Gillerman, says it would only give Hizbullah ”time to regroup and recover. We think this is a bad idea."

Speaking with Voice of Israel Radio on Friday morning, Minister Shalom said if the UN proposal is accepted, "Israel's position would be worse than it was at the beginning of the war: It does not call for a large multi-national force in southern Lebanon, Hizbullah would not be disarmed, and a parallel is made between our abducted soldiers and murderous Lebanese terrorists held by Israel such as Samir Kuntar."

"It could even be," Shalom said, "that Syria might conclude that it can get the Golan Heights back by sending over some missiles to Israel."

Shalom's party colleague, former Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman MK Yuval Shteinitz, took an even stronger stance. If Israel accepts this "shameful" ceasefire, Shteinitz said Friday morning, "the government must resign and new elections must be held."

Shteinitz took issue with the fact that the new proposal would replace Resolution 1559 of two years ago, which calls for the Lebanese Army to take over southern Lebanon from Hizbullah:
"The fact that Israel is willing to significantly erode 1559, and even give Hizbullah a territorial achievement in the form of half of Israel's Mt. Hermon (Shab'a) will be understood as a clear victory for Hizbullah. This will invite a difficult war of rockets and commandos from Syria in the near future."

"If this is an existential war, as [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert said, then the results of it are dangerous to Israel's existence," Shteinitz concluded.

On the other hand, the left-wing peace forces are pleading with the government to accept the ceasefire proposal. Meretz MK Zahava Gal'on said, "It is in Israel's interest to accept this plan and to thus end the warfare. Israel must take advantage of the agreement being formed to call for the inclusion of Syria in the negotiations, and to thus turn it into an entity with which we can reach a diplomatic agreement."

A diplomatic agreement with Syria, almost by definition, would entail ceding the Golan Heights to that country.

Former Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom Objections to Ceasefire Proposal (http://israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=109802)

Iran: UN resolution serves Zionist regime

Foreign Minister Mottaki says resolution aimed at ending warfare between Israel, Hizbullah group is biased, serves only interests of Jewish state
AFP

Iran said Saturday that the UN resolution aimed at ending the warfare between Israel and Lebanon’s Shiite Muslim Hizbullah group was biased and served only the interests of the Jewish state.

“UN resolution 1701 is completely one-sided and it serves the Zionist regime’s interests,” Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was quoted as saying by state television.

“Some amendments need to be incorporated into the resolution. The Lebanese people and government views needs to be taken into consideration for the resolution to be accepted by them,” he added during a visit to Yemen.

The UN Security Council on Friday unanimously called for an end to the bloodshed between Israel and Hizbullah and for the deployment of a 15,000-strong international peacekeeping force.

Resolution 1701, drawn up by the United States and France after protracted haggling, also calls for Israeli troops to be withdrawn from southern Lebanon after an end to the fighting.

Iran does not recognize the existence of the Jewish state.

Egypt calls for immediate Israeli ceasefire

Iran helped to create and arm Hizbullah in 1982 in response to Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, and Teheran stands accused by the United States and Israel of fomenting chaos in the region by channeling weapons to the guerrillas.

Iran denies the allegation, saying it provides only moral support to the movement.

Egypt on Saturday said Israel should immediately observe a ceasefire following the adoption of UN Security Council resolution calling for a halt to hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah.

“Israel must observe an immediate and complete ceasefire in order to allow the political agreement—achieved after significant efforts—to be applied,” Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit said in a statement.

“The first condition of this political accord is the Israeli army’s total withdrawal from all Lebanese areas it entered since the start of the crisis, in order to allow the Lebanese army to take control of the situation in the south of the country," he added.

Iran: UN resolution serves Zionist regime (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3290091,00.html)

Palestinians Divided Over Dismantling National Authority
Opponents: Israel Could Tell the World It Has No Palestinian Partner
12/08/2006

The Israeli war on Gaza Strip since June 25, the international economic,
financial and diplomatic siege imposed on the Occupied Palestinian Territory
(OPT) since January 25, the kidnapping of Palestinian cabinet ministers and
lawmakers and the ongoing Israeli destruction of Palestinian infrastructure,
all overshadowed by Israel's war on Lebanon, have raised the prospect of
dissolving the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).

Dismantling the PNA, which was established in 1994, would effectively mean
returning to the pre-Oslo Accords era, when the Israeli Occupying Power was
assuming the civil administration according to international law.

The donors froze aid to the PNA since Hamas won January 25 elections, which
left the PNA virtually penniless.

Following Israel's kidnapping of the Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative
Council (PLC), Dr. Abdel Aziz al-Dweik, last week Palestinian Prime Minister
Ismail Haniyeh said:

"We need to debate the future of the Palestinian Authority following the
kidnapping of its second highest-ranking figure and an attempt to
assassinate its prime minister," Haniyya told the PLC on Wednesday.

"The question we have to ask ourselves is the following: Can the Palestinian
Authority continue to operate and function in these circumstances," Haniyeh
asked.

Haniyeh was referring to Dweik's kidnapping. The PLC Speaker assumes the
post of PNA presidency in case the post becomes vacant by death, resignation
or for other reasons, according to the Palestinian basic Law.

He also was referring to the hospitalization of seven employees of the
Palestinian Cabinet after opening an envelope postmarked in Tel Aviv,
destined for Haniyeh and contained a suspicious powder.

"We do not rule out the involvement of Israeli intelligence in the dangerous
and criminal act," Haniyeh said.

Haniyeh blamed "the Israeli and US policy of continuing to reject the
results of the elections," which saw his Hamas movement come to power in
March.

The premier added that this policy "was aimed at undermining the structure
of the Palestinian Authority."

The Foreign Minister of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and
leader of the former ruling Fatah movement, Farouk Kaddoumi, a staunch
opponent of the Oslo Accords who is based in Tunis, had reportedly also
urged President Mahmoud Abbas this week to seriously contemplate the
possibility of dismantling the PNA.

Ghassan al-Masri, a spokesman for Kaddoumi, said the PNA should consider the
move unless Israel accepted three conditions: The withdrawal of the Israeli
Occupation Forces (IOF) to the positions it held before September 2000
positions, the release of frozen PNA tax and tariff revenues and the release
of all Hamas cabinet ministers and legislators who have been kidnapped since
the capture of Israeli Cpl. Gilad Shalit on June 25.

"It's inconceivable that the Palestinians should pay the cost of their
occupation by Israel," Masri said, adding: "Why shouldn't Israel, in its
capacity as an occupation force, bear the expenses of our education, health
and social welfare systems? Why should it be an inexpensive occupation for
Israel?"

Former PNA finance minister Salaam Fayad has also joined calls for
dismantling the PNA. "I think we have the right to question the
effectiveness of the continued existence of the Palestinian Authority as we
lose hope and as our cause is being marginalized by the international
community," he said.

"The Palestinian Authority has almost no role in the political process. The
existence of the Palestinian Authority frees Israel from its
responsibilities as an occupation force," Fayad added.

However opponents of the move argue that dismantling the PNA would only
serve Israel's interest in destroying the Palestinian regime and foiling
efforts to create an independent Palestinian state.

"Instead of talking about dissolving the Palestinian Authority, we should be
discussing ways of reactivating our institutions," said Palestinian chief
negotiator Saeb Erakat.

"The Palestinian public is fully aware of the fact that Israel's main goal
is to destroy the Palestinian Authority. We must act in line with the
interests of our people, not Israel," he said.

Similarly Qais Abdel Karim, a legislator and representative of the
Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), said he was
surprised to hear that some Palestinians were calling to dismantle the PNA:
"Israel is trying to destroy the Palestinian Authority so that it could tell
the world afterward that there is no partner for peace on the Palestinian
side," he said.

"This is the first step toward imposing unilateral solutions on the
Palestinians. The question, therefore, is not whether we should dissolve the
authority or not, but how to strengthen it so that it could continue to
assume its responsibilities," he said.

If the PNA disappears, Israel has the responsibility under international law
as the occupying power to administer and support the Palestinian people
under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

"What logically follows from this is the concept of a single binational
state" which is, according to a Wall Street Journal report on Friday,
"gaining traction among Palestinians of many shades" -- including Hamas. As
the Journal notes, "the idea of dismantling the PA was once a marginal idea,
championed in the 1990s by left-wing intellectuals such as Edward Said, who
advocated civil disobedience against Israeli occupation and a campaign for
'one person, one vote'." The model was the antiapartheid protests in South
Africa that paved the way for black-majority rule there.

Palestinians Divided Over Dismantling National Authority (http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=30595)

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 An unmitigated disaster

Caroline Glick, THE JERUSALEM POST
Aug. 13, 2006

There is a good reason that Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah has accepted UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which sets the terms for a cease-fire between his jihad army and the State of Israel.

The resolution represents a near-total victory for Hizbullah and its state sponsors Iran and Syria, and an unprecedented defeat for Israel and its ally the United States. This fact is evident both in the text of the resolution and in the very fact that the US decided to sponsor a cease-fire resolution before Israel had dismantled or seriously degraded Hizbullah's military capabilities.

While the resolution was not passed under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter and so does not have the authority of law, in practice it makes it all but impossible for Israel to defend itself against Hizbullah aggression without being exposed to international condemnation on an unprecedented scale.

This is the case first of all because the resolution places responsibility for determining compliance in the hands of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Annan has distinguished himself as a man capable only of condemning Israel for its acts of self-defense while ignoring the fact that in attacking Israel, its enemies are guilty of war crimes. By empowering Annan to evaluate compliance, the resolution all but ensures that Hizbullah will not be forced to disarm and that Israel will be forced to give up the right to defend itself.

The resolution makes absolutely no mention of either Syria or Iran, without whose support Hizbullah could neither exist nor wage an illegal war against Israel. In so ignoring Hizbullah's sponsors, it ignores the regional aspect of the current war and sends the message to these two states that they may continue to equip terrorist armies in Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority and Iraq with the latest weaponry without paying a price for their aggression.

The resolution presents Hizbullah with a clear diplomatic victory by placing their erroneous claim of Lebanese sovereignty over the Shaba Farms, or Mount Dov - a vast area on the Golan Heights that separates the Syrian Golan from the Upper Galilee and is disputed between Israel and Syria - on the negotiating table. In doing so, the resolution rewards Hizbullah's aggression by giving international legitimacy to its demand for territorial aggrandizement via acts of aggression, in contravention of the laws of nations.

Moreover, by allowing Lebanon to make territorial claims on Israel despite the fact that in 2000 the UN determined that Israel had withdrawn to the international border, the resolution sets a catastrophic precedent for the future. Because Lebanon is receiving international support for legally unsupportable territorial demands on Israel, in the future, the Palestinians, Syrians and indeed the Jordanians and Egyptians will feel empowered to employ aggression to gain territorial concessions from the Jewish state even if they previously signed treaties of peace with Israel. The message of the resolution's stand on Shaba Farms is that Israel can never expect for the world to recognize any of its borders as final.

By calling in the same paragraph for the "immediate cessation by Hizbullah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations," the resolution treats as equivalent Hizbullah's illegal aggression against Israel and Israel's legitimate military actions taken in defense of its sovereign territory.

Operational Paragraph 7, which "affirms that all parties are responsible for ensuring that no action is taken contrary to paragraph 1 [which calls for a cessation of hostilities] that might adversely affect the search for a long-term solution, humanitarian access to civilian populations, including safe passage for humanitarian convoys, or the voluntary and safe return of displaced persons," all but bars Israel from taking military action to defend itself in the future. Any steps Israel takes will open it to accusations - by Annan - of breaching this paragraph.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni had let it be known that Israel's conditions for a cease-fire included the institution of an arms embargo against Hizbullah. The government also insisted that the international force it wished to have deployed along the border would work to dismantle Hizbullah.

However, paragraph 8 puts both the question of an arms embargo and Hizbullah's dismantlement off to some future date when Israel and Lebanon agree to the terms of a "permanent cease-fire." In addition, it places the power to oversee an arms embargo against Hizbullah in the hands of the Lebanese government, of which Hizbullah is a member.

While the resolution bars Israel from taking measures necessary to defend its territory and citizens, by keeping UNIFIL in Lebanon it ensures that no other force will be empowered to take these necessary actions. Furthermore, paragraph 2 "calls upon the government of Israel, as that deployment [of the Lebanese military and UNIFIL] begins, to withdraw all of its forces from southern Lebanon in parallel. This means that Israel is expected to withdraw before a full deployment of Lebanese and UNIFIL forces is carried out. As a result, a vacuum will be created that will allow Hizbullah to reinforce its positions in south Lebanon.

Finally, the resolution makes no operative call for the release of IDF soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev now being held hostage by Hizbullah. By relegating their fate to a paragraph in the preamble, which then immediately turns to Hizbullah's demand for the release of Lebanese terrorists held in Israeli jails, the resolution all but eliminates any possibility of their returning home.

cont'd next post

Aside from the resolution's egregious language, the very fact that the US has sponsored a resolution that leaves Hizbullah intact as a fighting force constitutes a devastating blow to the national security of both Israel and the US, for the following reasons:

# It grants the Lebanese government and military unwarranted legitimacy. The resolution treats the Lebanese government and military as credible bodies. However, the Lebanese government is currently under the de facto control of Hizbullah and Syria.
Moreover, the Lebanese army is paying pensions to the families of Hizbullah fighters killed in battle, and its forces have actively assisted Hizbullah in attacking Israel and Israeli military targets.

Indeed, the seven-point declaration issued by the Lebanese government, which the UN resolution applauds, was dictated by Hizbullah, as admitted by Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and Nasrallah last week.

# It incites Shi'ite violence in Iraq. From a US perspective, the resolution drastically increases the threat of a radical Shi'ite revolt in Iraq. Hizbullah is intimately tied to Iraqi Shi'ite terrorist Muqtada al-Sadr.

In April 2003, Hizbullah opened offices in southern Iraq and was instrumental in training the Mahdi Army, which Sadr leads. During a demonstration in Baghdad last week, Sadr's followers demanded that he consider them an extension of Hizbullah, and expressed a genuine desire to participate in Hizbullah's war against the US and Israel.

It should be assumed that Hizbullah's presumptive victory in its war against Israel will act as a catalyst for violence by Sadr and his followers against the Iraqi government and coalition forces in the weeks to come. Indeed, the Hizbullah victory will severely weaken moderate Shi'ites in the Maliki government and among the followers of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.

# It empowers Iran. Iran emerges as the main victor in the current war. Not only was it not condemned for its sponsorship of Hizbullah, it is being rewarded for that sponsorship because it is clear to all parties that Iran was the engine behind this war, and that its side has won.

The UN resolution does not strengthen the US hand in future Security Council deliberations regarding Iran's illicit nuclear weapons program because the states that object to any action against Iran - Russia and China - will continue with their refusal to sign on to any substantive action.

Indeed, Russia's behavior regarding the situation in Lebanon, including the fact that a large percentage of Hizbullah's arsenal of advanced anti-tank missiles was sold by Russia to Syria and Iran, exposes that Moscow's role in the current conflict has been similar to the position taken by the Soviet Union in earlier Middle East wars.

Furthermore, because the resolution strengthens the UN as the arbiter of peace and security in the region, the diplomatic price the US will be forced to pay if it decides to go outside the UN to contend with the Iranian threat has been vastly increased.

Many sources in Washington told this writer over the weekend that the US decision to seek a cease-fire was the result of Israel's amateurish bungling of the first three weeks of the war. The Bush administration, they argued, was being blamed for the Olmert government's incompetence and so preferred to cut its losses and sue for a cease-fire.

There is no doubt much truth to this assertion. The government's prosecution of this war has been unforgivably inept. At the same time it should be noted that the short-term political gain accrued by the US by forging the cease-fire agreement will come back to haunt the US, Israel and all forces fighting the forces of global jihad in the coming weeks and months.

By handing a victory to Hizbullah, the resolution strengthens the belief of millions of supporters of jihad throughout the world that their side is winning and that they should redouble efforts to achieve their objectives of destroying Israel and running the US out of the Middle East.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 An unmitigated disaster (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525859901&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)

Analysis: U.N. Resolution 1701
August, 2006

Many of you have written wishing an explanation of the recent U.N. cease-fire resolution 1701 to the Israel-Hezbollah war. The following are points from various sources in Israel, including The Jerusalem Post, commentator Naomi Ragen, and the Israeli conservative periodical, IsraelInsider. My thoughts are added to the points below:

* The resolution represents a near-total victory for Hezbollah and its sponsors, Syria and Iran, and a defeat for both Israel and America, though America pushed the cease-fire through late last week.

* It makes it impossible for Israel to defend itself against aggression without being exposed to international condemnation on a scale never seen before.

* The responsibility for determining compliance is placed in the hands of Kofi Annan who has distinguished himself as a man capable only of condemning Israel for its acts of self-defense. By empowering Annan to evaluate compliance, the resolution all but ensures that Hezbollah will not be forced to disarm and that Israel will be forced to give up the right to defend itself.

* A catastrophic precedent has been set for the future. Because Lebanon is receiving international support for legally unsupportable territorial demands on Israel (Shaba Farms on the Golan Heights), in the future, the Palestinians, Syrians, Egyptians, and even Jordanians will feel empowered to employ aggression to gain territorial concessions.

* It places the power to oversee an arms embargo against Hezbollah in the hands of the Lebanese government, of which Hezbollah is a member.

* Israel is expected to withdraw before a full deployment of Lebanese and UNIFIL forces is carried out. Thus, Hezbollah will reinforce its positions in south Lebanon.

* The resolution treats the Lebanese government and military as credible, though it is under the de facto control of Hezbollah and Syria.

* The situation empowers Iran--the main victor. It was not condemned in the U.N. action although it is clear that Iran was the engine behind this war.

* No Israeli leader before Ehud Olmert has caused so much damage to Israel. He destroyed more than 24 thriving Jewish communities and plans to destroy dozens more unless his government collapses. He has displaced more Jews than any Arab enemy in Israel's history. And he squandered much of Israel's military image and deterrence. He surrounded himself with second rate politicians for political reasons.

* The morale among soldiers is at an all-time low and the nation is torn apart.

* At this point, the return of captured Israeli soldiers is undetermined.

* Israeli soldiers will be replaced by notoriously anti-Israel U.N. forces and European forces who will allow Hezbollah to rearm.

* Those promoting this resolution and those accepting it including Olmert and Peretz, have squandered the lives of Israeli soldiers and civilians and the opportunity to free Israel from a deadly enemy. They have set the stage for the next war which will be sooner rather than later.

* The resolution treats as equivalent Hezbollah's illegal aggression against Israel's legitimate military actions taken in defense of its sovereign territory.

Will this cease-fire last a day, week, month, or year? That is the unknown question as this is written.

Christian commentator and author in Jerusalem, David Dolan, says, "The atmosphere in Israel is surreal." He says the heavy death toll after this "agreement" was accepted has left the country reeling.

On a more positive note, the door has opened for the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu and General Ya'alon who was kicked out because he refused to go along with the disengagement.

God has an end-time role for Israel that cannot be altered by resolutions and corrupt leaders. How the details above play out only time will tell; however, God's plan for His land will be fulfilled exactly as the Bible outlines. No, she will not be destroyed again and then be re-gathered once again as many have asked.

"The Lord your God . . . will gather you again from all the peoples where your God has scattered you. If the outcasts are at the ends of the earth, from there the Lord will gather you and bring you back. The Lord your God will bring you into the land which your fathers possessed, and you shall possess it; and He will prosper you and multiply you more than your fathers" (Deut. 30:1-5). "I will plant Israel in their own land, never again to be uprooted from the land I have given them. . ." (Amos 9:14).

While it is true some of the greatest promises will be fulfilled in the Millennium, still God's promise to Israel is as certain as the existence and fixed order of the universe (Jer. 31:35-37).

God is not just a covenant maker, He is a covenant keeper! (AMEN!!!....DW)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I can't post the link because of advertisment. If you know of Jan Markell you know where this came from.

Peretz to Solana: Secure abductees' release

Defense minister tells EU envoy Israel insists on implementation of all ceasefire clauses, including disarming of Hizbullah, return of kidnapped IDF troops
Neta Sela

Defense Minister Amir Peretz made it clear Sunday morning during his meeting with European envoy Javier Solana that the ceasefire resolutions passed by the United Nations Security Council be implemented in full, including the disarmament of Hizbullah .

Before the meeting, Peretz said he also intends to ask the EU's foreign policy coordinator to intervene in order to secure the release of the abducted IDF soldiers.

The two figures met at Jerusalem's King David Hotel. At the opening of the meeting, Perez stressed that the Israeli government is about
to embark on a session that would see the approval of the ceasefire.

Solana, meanwhile, stressed the importance of the day and promised to look into ways to advance the process and solution proposed by the UN. On Saturday, Solana praised the truce resolution but criticized the Security Council for taking too long to reach the decision. He also expressed his hope that both sides act as quickly as possible to implement the resolution.

The government is expected to approve Resolution 1701 during its session Sunday, but the withdrawal of IDF troops from Lebanon will only start in one or two weeks, as the first international and Lebanese army forces arrive in the area, according to a senior source at the Prime Minister's Office who spoke to Ynet.

Meanwhile, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan officially confirmed that the ceasefire will go into effect Monday morning.

During Sunday's government meeting, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will present the truce agreement. The ministers already received copies of the resolution in both Hebrew and English. Olmert's office is not expecting to encounter any substantial objection to the ceasefire agreement.

On Saturday, the Lebanese government unanimously approved the UN resolution.

Peretz to Solana: Secure abductees' release (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3290472,00.html)

Here is an audio to listen to regarding the resolution issue. It is long but good... (http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/files/BoltonCeasefireAtlasInterview810.wav)
It also mentions Aug 22 in there for those who are interested in that date. After you download it go to 21:50 and start there to listen if you want to skip ahead and hear about August 22.

Lebanese minister Marwan Hamadi accused Hassan Nasrallah Sunday night of reneging on his pledge to abide by the UN ceasefire

August 13, 2006, 10:03 PM (GMT+02:00)

Hamadi information minister, a Druze, said Sunday night that Nasrallah had broken his word to order Hizballah fighters south of the Litani to hand in their weapons to allow Lebanese army troops to be deployed there. Amid heavy fighting across the entire Lebanese front, Israeli field commanders await directives for Monday 0800 hours when the ceasefire deadline goes into force.

Lebanon front commander Maj-Gen Benny Gantz said Sunday night the IDF will honor the ceasefire but also defend its troops and Israeli civilians. Have they been told to hold their fire in line with Israel’s acceptance of the UN resolution 1701 now that the Lebanese government and Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah have backtracked?

Tehran has meanwhile ordered Nasrallah to keep Israel engaged in combat for another 3 to 4. As a result of which he suddenly backed away from his pledges to France and the Siniora government Saturday to accept a ceasefire and a UNIFIL force in south Lebanon.

Nasrallah said he would wait a month to see how Israel’s retreat from the disputed Shabaa Farms was progressing.

At five minutes notice, the thunderstruck Lebanese ministers called off their meeting to discuss the deployment of their forces in the south and the disarming of Hizballah

Prime minister Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni spent the day explaining that the resolution is good for Israel and praising its unanimous endorsement by the Israeli cabinet Sunday. The PM plans a speech to Knesset Monday lauding the resolution as an Israeli achievement.

This is the situation the night before the ceasefire: Israel says its troops will not be recalled from Lebanon until a beefed up UNIFIL force is in place. However no international peacekeepers will deploy without a Lebanese military presence. That has now been checked by Nasrallah because the Lebanese army chiefs refuse to deploy south of the Litani if Hizballah fighters are armed.

Sunday, Hizballah deployed dozens of its combatants in furious anti-tank missile assaults on IDF tanks and field units along the S. Lebanese front. Fierce clashes raged just north of the Israeli town of Metula and other parts of the former “security strip” on the border. At least 16 Israeli soldiers were injured before noon Sunday.

Sunday, an unprecedented number of rockets – 250 - were also fired into northern Israel by midday. Hizballah is demonstrating that its ability to subject northern Israel to rocket barrages from S. Lebanon is unimpaired after a month of combat.

Sunday, Israel lost two officers and 3 soldiers in action in South Lebanon. Saturday, 24 men died in battle, including 5 crew aboard a Yasur helicopter that Hizballah shot down.

IDF to uphold 'fragile' cease-fire
Yaakov Katz, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 13, 2006

While the ceasefire agreement with the Hizbullah was "fragile," the IDF planned to uphold its side to the agreement and to suspend all offensives against the guerrilla group Monday morning, a high-ranking officer in the Northern Command told The Jerusalem Post Sunday night.

On Sunday, the IDF completed taking up positions along the Litani River in preparation for a UN-brokered ceasefire scheduled to go into effect Monday morning at 7 a.m. IDF troops operating in Lebanon, the officer said, would halt their attacks on Hizbullah strongholds in nearby villages but would maintain their positions and would be ready to "jump into any village or city, including Tyre, if necessary."

If Hizbullah fired Katyusha rockets into Israel after the ceasefire went into effect, the IDF, the high-ranking officer said, would see itself allowed to bomb targets throughout Lebanon, including in Beirut. "If Hizbullah breaks the ceasefire, we will see ourselves allowed to respond," the officer said.

Meanwhile late Sunday night, IAF fighter jets shot down an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) packed with explosives and flown into Israel by the Hizbullah, not far from Nahariya. Senior officers said that the UAV was most probably on its way to an attack on a strategic location and was meant to demonstrate Hizbullah's remaining abilities hours before the ceasefire went into effect. Hizbullah fired over 250 Katyusha rockets at northern Israel on Sunday.

But assuming that the ceasefire held, the IDF will hold fire Monday morning and allow the Lebanese government - for the first time since Operation Change of Direction was launched last month - to take control of southern Lebanon.
Late Sunday night, officials indicated that the navy and air force would not lift the siege on Lebanon until its government took action to control access into the country, as required by the UN's cease-fire resolution.

But the question of will Israel do if Syria sends weapon convoys into Lebanon to help rehabilitate Hizbullah remains unanswered. "This is a serious question that requires a decision by the diplomatic echelon," the officer said. "We need to prevent the Hizbullah from rebuilding itself. The question is how far are we willing to go to do that."

So with soldiers holding a line along the Litani River, the IDF is now waiting for the 15,000 UN observers to deploy in southern Lebanon, together with the Lebanese army, as stipulated under the ceasefire agreement. Deputy IDF Chief of Staff Maj.-Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky told The Post Sunday that the multinational force was expected to begin deploying in the coming days and that there was a chance that the IDF would begin withdrawing from Lebanon by the end of the week.

"It could take just a few days for the multinational force to arrive," Kaplinsky said from a bunker in Northern Command headquarters in Safed. "Until then, we will continue to defend ourselves and we will engage anyone who we believe is endangering our soldiers."

Not all of the details of how the cease-fire will be enforced have been worked out and late Sunday night, senior IDF officers, led by head of the IDF Planning Directorate Maj.-Gen. Haki Harel, met with top UN officials to iron out the issues left open.

Despite the public uproar over the late launching of the massive ground offensive up to the Litani River on Friday, the high-ranking officer said that the operation created the right conditions for the cease-fire agreement. Defense Minister Amir Peretz backed up the officer. "We would not have succeeded in creating an Israel-favorable agreement without the operation launched on Friday," Peretz said during a tour of the Northern Command.

Also Sunday, a day after the bloodiest day of battle claimed the lives of 24 IDF soldiers, fighting continued on Sunday with clashes in Randumia, Abu-Turin, Tel-Nahes and Ayta al-Shab that left five soldiers dead. Over 15 Hizbullah gunmen were killed in the clashes.

In the central Lebanese village of Abu-Tawil, one officer and three reservists were killed when Hizbullah guerillas fired anti-tank missiles into their infantry force. Another three soldiers were seriously wounded. Further south, in the village of Tel-Nahes, an officer was killed and another seriously wounded when an anti-tank missile scored a direct hit on their tank. Later in the day, a number of soldiers were wounded when a Katyusha landed in an Israeli village near Kiryat Shmona. Another 21 soldiers were lightly wounded throughout the day.

IDF to uphold 'fragile' cease-fire (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525865627&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)

Fragile Ceasefire Holding, Despite Two Incidents
16:48 Aug 14, '06 / 20 Av 5766
by Hillel Fendel

Two Hizbullah terrorists were killed in two separate clashes with IDF troops in southern Lebanon, but the ceasefire is largely holding. 161 Israelis hospitalized with wartime wounds.

At noon, the first ceasefire-threatening incident was reported: A Hizbullah terrorist cell detected "moving in a threatening manner," according to the IDF announcement, was fired upon by an IDF force near Hadta, in the western sector of southern Lebanon. One terrorist was killed.

Shortly afterwards, another terrorist was killed in a separate clash in the eastern sector. No Israelis were hurt in the battles.

The two incidents have been the only clashes since 8 AM this morning, when the UN-approved ceasefire took effect.

Nine IDF soldiers were killed on Sunday, in the last 24 hours before the onset of the ceasefire. Four of them were killed late yesterday morning by an anti-tank rocket at an infantry force, an officer was killed by a mortar shell, and two reservists were killed yesterday evening by an anti-tank shell. Late this afternoon (Monday), it was learned that two other soldiers had been killed Sunday night in an anti-tank rocket strike.

Northern Command O.C. Gen. Udi Adam says he is concerned about the "fragility" of the ceasefire, saying that the arrangement has many "holes."

The three hospitals in the north - Rambam in Haifa, Sieff in Tzfat, and Nahariya - are currently treating 114 soldiers and 47 civilians wounded in the nearly five weeks of warfare. Among them are 34 in serious condition and 47 in moderate condition; the others are listed as lightly wounded.

The proportion of Israelis killed in the warfare are very similar: 41 civilians, among them 17 Arabs and Druze, and 117 soldiers.

Since the war started, Sieff Hospital admitted 1,479 patients with war injuries, among them 796 soldiers.

Though the ceasefire has taken effect, Defense Minister Amir Peretz made it clear that the naval and land blockade of Lebanon would not be lifted until other elements of the UN ceasefire resolution have been implemented. Travel in and out of Lebanon will be restricted until a system to supervise border crossings and prevent terrorists from acquiring arms from outside the country is put into effect.

The army went to great pains to make sure that each of the 30,000 troops in Lebanon understands that no offensive action is to be taken, unless life-threatening Hizbullah action is detected. The noted presence of an armed Hizbullah terrorist or a vehicle carrying arms or weapons will result in IDF fire.

This, in contrast with a document sent by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to Israel, saying that Israel will be permitted to open fire only after a request for such is submitted to the UN and the UN approves it in writing.

Hizbullah's Last Surprises
In the last night of fighting before the ceasefire went into effect, Hizbullah planned at least two major attacks against Israel. An IDF reserves force operating in Lebanon just north of the Israeli border city Metulah discovered a truck-bomb on its way to an attack - either in Israel or against IDF forces in the area. The forces attacked and destroyed the truck.

In addition, two Hizbullah drones headed south towards Israel were detected and downed. One of the two may have fallen because of a malfunction. At least one of them was found to be carrying explosives.

The IDF also continued to attack terrorist targets and infrastructures, as well as the terrorists themselves, in southern Lebanon, last night. Among the 178 targets attacked aerially last night were 11 Katyusha launchers, 122 buildings that served as Hizbullah weapons storehouses and the like, four tunnels, and more. In addition, two terrorists were killed and two others were hit in two separate incidents over the night.

The names of 23 of the 24 IDF soldiers killed on Saturday were known by Sunday morning, and the last one - Sgt. Uri Grossman, 20, of Mevaseret Zion - was cleared for publication yesterday. He was the son of the well-known left-wing writer David Grossman, who held a joint press conference with two other authors just this past Thursday, calling on the government to agree to a ceasefire and not to expand the ground offensive.

The IDF estimates that over 530 Hizbullah terrorists were killed in the course of the warfare. The army publicized the names of 180 of them, who were positively identified, by dropping leaflets and temporarily taking over the Hizbullah television and radio station. The IDF has another several dozen names of terrorists it knows are dead.

Fragile Ceasefire Holding, Despite Two Incidents (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=109997)

The United Nicomdingbats Shield of Terror

Israel is faced on its northern and southern borders with two Islamic-fascist terrorist organizations determined to wipe it from the face of the earth. These organizations have operated with impunity as the effective governments in the territories used to launch attacks against Israel while UN observers have stood by and done nothing. Yet the United Nations literally and figuratively shields the Hamas and Hezbollah terrorist organizations while trying to immobilize Israel when Israel finally decides to strike back.

For example, the UN has facilitated resumption of the financial aid gravy train to Hamas without obtaining a single concession in return. Asked for an update on the financial situation of the Palestinian Authority, a spokesman for Secretary General Kofi Annan noted in a press briefing on August 7th that “a funding mechanism is up and running for the funding of the Authority”. All Kofi Annan ever cared about was to keep the Palestinian government afloat at Western taxpayers’ expense.

The Palestine Authority today is in the grip of the Hamas terrorist organization. It does not matter to the UN that Hamas still refuses to pursue negotiations with Israel over a secure two state solution, much less recognize Israel’s right to exist. It does not matter to the UN that the Palestinian Authority was already sitting on more than a billion dollars of investments recovered from Arafat that it has failed to tap first to help the Palestinian people before asking for hand-outs. Every dollar that the UN and its cohorts channel to the Palestinian Authority aid program gives Hamas the ability to hoard the money it already has for its war against Israel. In the UN’s world, terrorists are rewarded with more money.

Beyond financial rewards, the United Nations confers legitimacy upon terrorist organizations by giving them a platform for their “issues” and a shield for their terror operations. Denying all sense of reality, the United Nations refuses to acknowledge that Hamas or Hezbollah are part of a dangerous global terrorist network whose common denominator is Islamic fascism.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is a revealing exchange with Kofi Annan’s press spokesperson at a daily press briefing back in January 2006 regarding Hamas:

Question: Does the Secretary-General consider Hamas to be a terrorist organization?

Spokesman: The Secretary-General has denounced in clear terms every time any organization has done a terrorist act, including when those acts were claimed by Hamas.

Question: But that doesn’t answer my question.

Spokesman: There is no United Nations label that I know of, of a terrorist organization.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nothing has changed. In an interview recently with the Financial Times, UN Deputy Secretary General Mark Malloch Brown declared that “it’s not helpful to couch this war between Israel and Hezbollah in the language of international terrorism”. They deserve a “settlement which addresses the political issues of their cause as well as the military ones.” He fails to mention that the common cause of all Islamic-fascist terrorists. Hezbollah and Hamas included is to bring as much of the world as possible under Islamic rule and to destroy Western secular democracies in the process. Instead, in an effort to make us feel better, Malloch Brown assured us that Hezbollah’s “roots historically are completely separate and different from Al Qaeda.” That is sort of like saying that imperial Japan and Nazi Germany had such different histories that we should never have lumped them together as part of a global fascist axis during World War II.

For good measure, Malloch Brown portrayed Hezbollah’s biggest funder and weapons supplier. Iran as some sort of Rodney Dangerfield character who yearns for nothing more than “respect.” Malloch Brown opined that Iran’s support of Hezbollah and its nuclear enrichment program were all part of a grand strategy to achieve its most precious wish, “a normalization of its relationships and to be brought back into the international community.” The fact that Iran’s president has repeatedly called for the annihilation of a UN member state and is building a nuclear arsenal to do just that in defiance of the international community does not seem to enter into the UN Deputy Secretary General’s calculation of what it takes for a UN member state to truly earn respect.

Malloch Brown, by the way, was the same individual who publicly lambasted Middle America several weeks ago for being so ignorant about the UN’s valuable role in the world. Every time Malloch Brown opens his mouth, he demonstrates why so many people in America are right to question the UN’s value and the moral compass of its leaders.

Indeed, Kofi Annan has the blood of civilians and UN observers on his own hands, because he failed to take action when he had the chance to save lives. For example, he personally rebuffed an advance warning to the UN from the Israeli Defense Force that the United Nicomdingbats should help remove innocent civilians from certain villages where fighting was expected to ensue. Here is what this self-righteous ‘humanitarian’ said in response to a question at a press briefing on July 30th: “It's not the time to undertake to evacuate villages. And besides, as I said, such requests would normally come from a government.”

Kofi Annan would rather stand on ceremony and wait for a request to help evacuate civilians come through normal diplomatic channels than act immediately to save lives and avert a humanitarian crisis. This is reminiscent Annan’s choice to ignore repeated reports coming from UN personnel on the ground near the Lebanese Israeli border regarding the dangers they were facing as Hezbollah rockets were being fired from the vicinity of their posts and the IDF bombarded suspected Hezbollah positions in response. Kofi refused to remove them from harm’s way until tragedy struck and four UN observers were killed. He blamed Israel, giving Hezbollah a moral victory of sorts by portraying their enemy as the international pariah while also absolving himself of any personal responsibility for what happened.

UN leaders have done everything possible to shield Hezbollah by trying to put Israel into a box. The United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Lebanon, David Shearer, has just called on the IDF to end its attacks on civilian infrastructure and to cease all actions hindering the supply of humanitarian relief supplies to the hundreds of thousands of displaced people across the country. According to a statement issued by Shearer, bombardments by the IDF have seriously curtailed vital supply routes between the north and south of Lebanon. Meanwhile Hezbollah’s use of the same infrastructure and the same supply routes to re-arm itself, and to conduct its terrorist rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, is simply ignored. By this way of thinking, Hezbollah can mix with the civilian population, hiding among them as shields to launch their rockets against Israeli civilians, and then have their buddies at the UN claim a violation of international law when Israel responds and Hezbollah’s shields are inevitably caught in the cross-fire.

Immediate “cessation of hostilities” is the mantra being circulated in the halls of the United Nations as efforts to put together a Security Council resolution acceptable to all sides continue. The United States and France have proposed a two-step approach, starting with a resolution that would leave Israeli forces in place temporarily but require them to cease any “offensive” operations while Hezbollah also ceases its hostilities. Given Hezbollah’s track record, cessation of hostilities will mean Israel must stop in its tracks while Hezbollah will use any pause in fighting to rearm and reposition itself for the next attack. The same UN peacekeepers, who stood by for six years and did nothing to prevent the current crisis, will be expected to monitor this first phase. In any case, Lebanon has already rejected the French American proposal. Its government mouthed Hezbollah’s unconditional demand for immediate withdrawal of all Israeli troops and offered six years too late to send 15,000 of its own troops to southern Lebanon instead. How anyone could seriously believe that these untrained troops would take any actions against the highly trained and armed Hezbollah is beyond belief.

If the French American proposal should somehow move forward and the first resolution is passed, the second step would involve Security Council authorization of the deployment of an international force to southern Lebanon to enforce the terms of an overall settlement of the conflict. At that time, Israeli troops would leave Lebanon altogether to be replaced by the international force, the Lebanese army would receive training and Hezbollah would be disarmed. At least, that is the theory. But it ignores the power brokers who have armed and financed Hezbollah all these years and have no incentive today to change course. Unless Iran and Syria are themselves brought under the Article VII enforcement provisions of the UN Charter and immediately subject to tough UN sanctions if they continue to support Hezbollah, the second resolution would solve nothing.

Based on the UN’s track record to date as a useful shield for Hezbollah, Hamas and their state sponsors, the terrorists will have little to worry about as long as the United Nations remains involved.

Annan details Mideast cease-fire terms

By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer Mon Aug 14, 10:39 PM ET

UNITED NATIONS - Secretary-General Kofi Annan has warned Israel and Lebanon against occupying additional territory and told them to refrain from responding to any attacks "except where clearly required in immediate self-defense."

A copy of a letter that Annan sent to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was obtained Monday by The Associated Press. It set out the U.N.'s expectations of how both sides will fulfill their obligations under the Security Council resolution adopted Friday.

A similar letter was sent to Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said.

The resolution called for an end to the war between Israel and Hezbollah militants, and authorized up to 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help 15,000 Lebanese troops take control of south Lebanon, which was under Hezbollah's control, as Israel withdraws. The cessation of hostilities took effect early Monday, the 34th day of fighting that claimed more than 900 lives.

Annan told Israel and Lebanon in the letters sent Sunday that once the cessation of hostilities took effect there must be no firing from the ground, sea or air into the other side's territory or at its forces.

Lebanon and Israel must immediately inform the United Nations if they have been fired on, with as much detail as possible, "refraining from responding except where clearly required in immediate self-defense," Annan said.

Neither side can occupy — or seek to occupy — any additional territory from the other side, he said.

Under the U.N. resolution, Hezbollah is required to immediately stop all attacks but Israel is only required to immediately stop "all offensive military operations."

In the case of any firing, Annan said that "the U.N. undertakes to bring, in an impartial manner, such incidents to the attention of the Security Council as quickly as possible."

Annan also said each side must refrain "from any changes in the strength, composition or disposition of its forces ... unless it notified the U.N. in advance and the U.N. in turn is able to inform the other side."

He asked the two leaders to designate a general who would be accessible to the commander of the U.N. force, known as UNIFIL, French Maj. Gen. Alain Pellegrini. The three generals met Monday morning — just hours after the cessation of hostilities began — at the U.N. position on the border crossing on the Mediterranean coast at Ras Naqoura.

Annan details Mideast cease-fire terms (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060815/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_mideast_fighting_2)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Some one starts shooting at me, I'm shooting back. Permission or no permission.

Livni: Must return kidnapped troops

Livni leaving Tuesday night for meeting with Kofi Annan. On the agenda: Implementation of UNSCR 1701 and a return of kidnapped Israeli soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Says to Ynet: 'As long as soldiers are not returned, the operation is not complete'
Ronny Sofer

Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, will leave for New York Tuesday night for a meeting with UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan. A primary topic on the agenda will be the return of kidnapped soldiers, Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser.

In an interview with Ynet, Livni emphasized that "an end of the fighting does not mean an end of the process…The process of returning our kidnapped soldiers will continue. As long as the soldiers are not returned, the operation is not complete. It is the duty of the Israeli government to bring these soldiers home and it will do so."

Livni spoke with Ynet during her tour of northern communities: Nahariya, Kiryat Shmona, Carmiel and Tiberias. In response to claims that military operations should have continued, Livni said: "Military operations, regardless of duration, could not have produced outcomes. It was necessary to move on and focus on the political phase, which was in motion from the onset of the conflict. I believe that the results of the ceasefire agreement, if implemented, are enough. We will only be able to evaluate this in the long-term, not now."

Resolution must be properly implemented

According to Livni, "Hizbullah is currently crippled. It will not risk clashing with Lebanese armed forces. We must understand that there is a chance that this process can change everything that is happening in Lebanon. I'm referring to a multinational force, an embargo on Syria and Iran, distancing Hizbullah from the border. The true test of the military operation and the political process will take place over time. We need to see, over time, if the clauses of the resolution are implemented."

Regarding her imminent meeting with Annan, Livni states: "I'm going to meet with the UN Secretary-General in order to ensure that the Security Council resolution is properly implemented. I'm not using this word in order exert pressure, rather I want to confirm that procedures are taking place in accordance with Israel's understanding of the resolution.

"I want to emphasize that the future is not only in the hands of the Israeli government, but also in the hands of the Lebanese government. UNSCR 1701 must be implemented in its entirety and any Hizbullah fire in Lebanon will constitute a violation of the resolution. Hizbullah was called to stop its assaults immediately, not only against Israel, but also against IDF soldiers remaining in Lebanon and I call for a full realization of this ceasefire," she added.

Effects must be examined over time

In response to a Ynet question regarding plans to create an inquiry committee to examine government failures in handling the conflict, Livni answered "I think the government is responsible for everything it does. I think it is right to censure things if required, but we need time in order to examine the effects and in order to see if the government behaved correctly."

Livni also addressed the issue of Iranian and Syrian involvement in Lebanon, saying: "UNSCR 1701 is intended to loosen these countries' grip on Lebanon. The resolution is contrary to Iranian interests. They desire a front with Israel via Hizbullah. The resolution prevents this and distances Hizbullah."

"Regarding Syria, it will need to decide where it stands. Lebanon is supposed to take off in a different direction, without it. The Syrians cannot influence Lebanon without Hizbullah," she added.

Additionally, Livni discussed the homefront, during meetings with northern mayors: "I visited during the battles, the day after. I think that the Israel government is responsible for dealing with any problem that you bring up. The government intends to do this. Many of these issues will already be discussed in the upcoming cabinet meeting, Sunday."

Livni: Must return kidnapped troops (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3291739,00.html)

France considers only symbolic force for UN
Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:45 PM BST170
Email This Article | Print This Article | RSS
[-] Text

By Crispian Balmer

PARIS (Reuters) - France is considering providing only a symbolic force for the United Nations contingent in Lebanon, and not the thousands of troops UN officials had hoped, Le Monde newspaper said on Thursday.

If true, such a move could seriously delay the UN mission, seen as vital to securing peace between Israel and Hizbollah guerrillas, or even scupper the whole operation.

Quoting U.N. and diplomatic sources, Le Monde said France might send just a dozen officers and around 200 personnel from an engineering division for the beefed-up UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

President Jacques Chirac's office said the military options "were still under review".

A French diplomatic source said France had always highlighted the dangers of such a mission and said the conditions for the operation had to be clarified.

The source added there was no turnaround in the French position and no misunderstanding with the United Nations.

French Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said on Wednesday that France was willing to lead the UN force until at least February, so long as it was given a clear mandate.

However, she declined to say how many troops France would commit to UNIFIL, which is eventually expected to consist of 15,000 soldiers, up from 2,000 at present.

The United Nations hopes France will lead advance contingents of up to 3,500 troops to south Lebanon which the world body wants to field within two weeks.

PEACEKEEPING NIGHTMARES

France was at the forefront of diplomatic efforts in the United Nations to bring about the ceasefire between Israel and Hizbollah which came into effect earlier this week.

But the French military has strong reservations about the U.N. mission following disastrous peacekeeping missions over the past three decades -- notably in Lebanon and Bosnia.

Other potential troop-contributing nations are due to meet U.N. peacekeeping officials on Thursday to discuss the operation ground rules. Many have not firmly committed any soldiers to UNIFIL before they see what France will do.

Le Monde said France was ready to offer the United Nations the use of a rapid reaction force, but would not place the troops under UN control.

The influential daily quoted UN sources as saying the French position "threatened the entire process" because it could lead other countries to believe that Paris did not believe in the validity of the United Nations mission.

A military source told the paper the French hesitation was caused by the "traumatism of Bosnia" and "fears of reprisals from Syria or Iran".

Some 84 French troops died during a UN peacekeeping mission to Bosnia in the early 1990s, and other soldiers were taken hostage by Bosnian Serbs.

During an earlier mission to Beirut in 1983, bomb attacks blamed on Muslim guerrillas killed 58 French paratroopers.

French officials said earlier this week that Paris was particularly anxious to get reassurances about who will disarm Hizbollah, and when.

The guerrilla movement is backed by Syria and Iran, two countries locked in an increasingly bitter diplomatic battle with France. Paris is worried French troops in Lebanon could unwittingly find themselves caught up in the row.

France considers only symbolic force for UN (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-08-17T114457Z_01_L17570138_RTRUKOC_0_UK-MIDEAST-UN-FRANCE.xml&archived=False)

Why am I not suprised??

Emergency meeting to decide on force

Ewen MacAskill
Thursday August 17, 2006
The Guardian

The UN is to hold an emergency meeting today of 45 countries that have offered troops for a 13,000-strong Lebanon peacekeeping mission, to confirm contributions and speed up deployment.

Amid confusion over deployment, the Israeli army is threatening to stall the withdrawal of its forces from southern Lebanon until the UN force is in place. Dan Halutz, Israel's chief of staff, said yesterday his troops would stop withdrawing unless the Lebanese army began to deploy within days, and his troops could remain in southern Lebanon until a multinational force was deployed. He said on Tuesday, as Israeli troops began to withdraw, that they could be out in 10 days.

There have been conflicting opinions among potential contributors about the speed of the UN deployment, ranging from days to months. Hedi Annabi, assistant UN secretary general for peacekeeping, said yesterday the UN hoped an initial contingent of 3,500 could be deployed in 10-15 days.

As yet no country has made a firm offer. Philippe Douste-Blazy, foreign minister of France, which is expected to lead the force, said during a visit to Beirut yesterday that his country would commit troops but did not specify how many.

France, along with others, is delaying deployment until the UN mandate is clarified. Israel says it expects the UN force to disarm Hizbullah but France does not see that as its role.

The deployment is also complicated by the lack of rules of engagement and Israeli objections to troops from Muslim countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia which do not recognise Israel.

The ceasefire plan, agreed by the security council on Friday, envisages a phased withdrawal of the Israeli army. It will be replaced by a Lebanese army contingent of 15,000, backed by a 13,000-strong UN force that will absorb Unifil, the current UN force on the Israel-Lebanon border.

A European diplomat said yesterday: "Everyone is aware of the need to get there quickly. There is hope that the first people will start arriving within a couple of weeks."

Emergency meeting (UN) to decide on force (http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/story/0,,1851823,00.html)

U.N. resolution already pointless
By Boston Herald editorial staff
Saturday, August 19, 2006

Once again the United Nations stands revealed as a fraud. :o ::)

The Security Council resolution that ended the fighting between Israel and the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon called for the area up to now controlled by Hezbollah to be “free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons” except those of the planned U.N. peacekeeping force and the Lebanese government.

The ink is not dry and already the Lebanese government, Hezbollah and France, which was expected to lead the peacekeepers, have said, in effect, “What, me worry?”

The United States appears ready to kick the can down the road again. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says it’s up to the Lebanese government, not the forthcoming U.N. force, to make Hezbollah to give up its missiles and other weapons.

The Lebanese Army began deploying into the south, but under a deal that permits Hezbollah to keep its arms depots. The government says that only the army will be allowed to carry weapons. Nothing was said about weapons storage. Lebanon’s president said it was “disgraceful” to demand disarmament of Hezbollah. Hezbollah said it would have “no visible military presence.”

Israel is urging the United Nations to disarm Hezbollah and block resupply. It’s getting the brush-off. U.N. officials have been largely mum.

Hezbollah has turned its fighters into relief workers, swarming everywhere with forms for owners of damaged houses to claim rebuilding help. This is a political move of genius, designed to portray the government as incompetent.

Hezbollah has been banged about militarily, and has many fewer rockets than it did before the fighting. However, it has not been seen to be defeated, essential for any progress toward peace. Neither Iran, arms supplier to Hezbollah, nor Syria, Iran’s ally and essential supply route for Hezbollah, has suffered the slightest inconvenience for their hostile roles.

Dennis Ross, U.S. Mideast negotiator for the first President Bush and for President Clinton, has written that Syria might be ready to deal, and disown Hezbollah if France promises sanctions in response to any future threat to French troops from arms that come through Syria. But President Bashir Assad has never shown any interest in deals.

What goes around comes around. The survival of an armed Hezbollah means even bloodier, more desperate fighting down the road.

U.N. resolution already pointless (http://news.bostonherald.com/editorial/view.bg?articleid=153471&format=text)

Annan to give UNIFIL 'teeth'
Herb Keinon, THE JERUSALEM POST Aug. 21, 2006

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is expected to recommend Monday that the rules of engagement of the enhanced UNIFIL force to be deployed in Lebanon include opening fire on Hizbullah where necessary, The Jerusalem Post has learned.

While UN Security Council Resolution 1701 mandated an enhanced UNIFIL force to help the Lebanese Army deploy south and along the border with Syria, it did not spell out the operational procedures of this force.

Israel has been pushing for the need for an effective force, arguing that one of the criteria would be the ability to open fire on Hizbullah if the force saw, for instance, Hizbullah launching rockets toward Israel. This matter came up at a meeting Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni held last week in New York with Annan.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, in a telephone conversation in the afternoon with Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi on Sunday, said that Israel would like to see Italy lead the force, a change from the widespread expectation that France would be heading it up.

According to a statement issued from Olmert's office, the prime minister told Prodi that Israel viewed Italy's sending troops as "vital" to the implementation of the resolution and that this would be an important contribution to "peace and security in the Middle East."

Olmert told Prodi that it was not only important that Italy lead this force, but also that Rome send troops to monitor the Lebanese-Syrian border to stop the rearmament of Hizbullah.

Prodi, according to the Prime Minister's Office, said that Italy intended to send a "significant" force, and that he would bring the issue up before the Italian parliament "as soon as possible."

The question of the rules of engagement was addressed last Thursday in New York at a meeting of those countries considering sending troops to the force, with some of those countries opposed to being able to open fire, concerned that Hizbullah would then shoot back.

Nevertheless, reports reaching Jerusalem Sunday indicated that Annan, in interim suggestions that are expected to be presented Monday, would give UNIFIL clear authorization to open fire.

"This is to date the most explicit expression of the upgrade to the UNIFIL force that has yet been received," one senior diplomatic official said.
Nevertheless, even if the UNIFIL forces had authorization to open fire, whether they would indeed do so and subject themselves to a firefight with Hizbullah is questionable. Officials in the Prime Minister's Office reserved judgment, saying they wanted to see the recommendation before responding.

In a related development, Olmert said after the cabinet meeting Sunday that Israel would not agree to the participation in this force of countries who do not have ties with Israel. Ironically, the countries that have expressed the most interest in sending troops to the force are from Muslim countries without diplomatic relations with Israel: Indonesia, Malaysia and Bangladesh.

Senior officials in Jerusalem said Sunday, after meetings Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul held in Jerusalem with Olmert, Livni and Defense Minister Amir Peretz, that Israel had no objection to Turkey - also a Muslim country - taking part in the force.

Turkish officials said that Ankara had not yet made a final decision on whether to send troops, and the decision would depend to a large extent on the rules of engagement. Gul paid a few hours' visit to Jerusalem on Sunday afternoon after going to Lebanon. He also met in the evening with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
Livni told the cabinet that it was understood in her meeting with Annan that any decision on the makeup of the force would be made in consultation with Israel.

Peretz said that the UNIFIL force was a central factor in the Lebanese Army's deployment in southern Lebanon, and that a professional, multinational force made up of 15,000 troops deployed in the South and on Lebanon's border with Israel would be an "important test." He added that the deployment of this force would change public opinion in Israel about the war and bring about "an understanding of the achievements of the operation."

Israel would continue to prevent the deployment of the Lebanese army within two kilometers of the border until the new UNIFIL force was deployed, Peretz said, adding that Israel would not allow Hizbullah to return to the border.

"If a multinational force deploys in southern Lebanon, and we find ourselves facing a demilitarized zone, then from our point of view the goals were achieved," Peretz said of the outcome of the war.

Peretz was not the only one in the meeting casting the war as a victory. Olmert said that Israel had not been surprised by Hizbullah's capabilities during the war, and knew that it had amassed thousand of missiles over the years.

"We were aware of Syria and Iran's contribution to Hizbullah, and knew the extent of their weaponry," he said. "In the last few years we chose to focus on other important issues that led to the building of a stronger Israel. The fighting enabled us to uncover Hizbullah's abilities and to change the reality of the past."

Peretz warned that the international community was ignoring immediate Iranian involvement in the rehabilitation of southern Lebanon, including the providing of Iranian funds to the population. International financial assistance in rehabilitating southern Lebanon was critical, he said.

The defense minister, responding to the public criticism of the outcome of the war, said that Hizbullah had presented itself as the victor, but "if you look at the facts, there is no doubt that this was a victory for Israel."

Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz also claimed victory, though "on points" and not by a "knockout."

"We never said it would be a knockout," Halutz was quoted as telling the cabinet. "But with time you will see that if you add up the points the goals were achieved." Halutz defined these goals as regaining deterrence, delivering Hizbullah a painful blow, pushing Lebanon and the Lebanese army into taking responsibility for the country, and creating pressure on Hizbullah to release the captured IDF soldiers.

Regarding the chorus of complaints from reservists about the way the war was carried out, Halutz said that all complaints would be looked into and that the IDF had nothing to hide. "We will examine ourselves, from myself to the last of the soldiers," he said.

He said that, alongside the stories of bravery and heroism, there were "other things that need to be changed. And just as we will give out medals, we will also give out the opposite," he said.

Halutz said that during the war Israel had killed some 500 Hizbullah fighters and damaged some 10,000 Hizbullah targets. He added that the Lebanese army had begun deploying some 1,500 troops in the south, including 50 tanks and 100 armored personnel carriers.

Olmert, meanwhile, warned the cabinet ministers against talking either of war or peace with Syria. "People do not have to warn us of the Syrian war threat on a daily basis, nor, on the other hand, immediately jump forth to negotiate with the country," he said.

He said that comments of war or peace with Syria were not necessarily understood in Damascus as intended. "We must be very careful at this time, even though we are prepared for anything," he said.

Peretz last week suggested the possibility of negotiating with Syria when he said that the war may have created an opportunity for renewed dialogue with Syria. Syrian President Bashar Assad, meanwhile, warned last week that peace was not the only way Syria could regain the Golan.

Annan to give UNIFIL 'teeth' (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525913247&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'll believe it, when I see it........

ChristiansUnite Forums

Theology => Prophecy - Current Events => Topic started by: Shammu on August 11, 2006, 10:48:12 PM