U.N. versus Israel

[Shammu]

U.N. boss: Hezbollah deserves U.S. respect

Global group's deputy secretary-general
would give terrorists conference-table seat
Posted: August 3, 2006
3:15 p.m. Eastern


© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


Mark Malloch Brown
A top United Nations official says to quiet the "demons" across the "wider Islamic world" the United States and the international community must respect Hezbollah as a political party, not a terrorist organization.

"Everybody would want a solution here which takes away the recruiting power of Hezbollah in the broader Arab world," said Mark Malloch Brown, the U.N.'s deputy secretary general.

That would be one, he said, that "allows Hezbollah a political as against a militia future inside an independent Lebanon."

His comments were in an interview published in the Financial Times today.

The military conflagration in the Mideast going on now was sparked by Hezbollah's military attack on Israel, and Brown said if Hezbollah and its supporters are given that political acknowledgement the motivation for military attacks would decline.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Hezbollah's "recruitment" ability is such that it is being supplied with weaponry by a range of other organizations in the Middle East.

"If those issues can be addressed, then the support for a militarized Hezbollah falls away," Brown said. "Without that action, there's no hope.

"The idea that there is a peace which either Hezbollah would respect, or which would draw the wind out of Hezbollah's sails which doesn't address those political things is, I think, far-fetched," he said.

A "settlement" that allows the integration of Hezbollah into the family of recognized interests is needed. It would, he said, have to address the political issues of Hezbollah's cause, "as well as the military one" and would include a disarmament and reintegration plan.

After all, he said, "Hezbollah now is the principle voice of Shia Muslims in Lebanon – something like 40 percent of the population. That gives them immense power as a political party if they were to forsake the military route."

He said, for example, the issue of the Shebaa farms needs to be resolved, and that would in a broader way address Lebanon's sovereignty and define Hezbollah as a participant.

Shebaa farms is a region of about 14 square miles of land where Syria, Lebanon and Israel share borders. The region was taken by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967 and is cited by Hezbollah in justifying its attacks.

But Brown said there are many "actors" in the Middle East now, "whose acquiescence is needed if we're to find a solution."

In addition to Israel and Lebanon, and Hezbollah as a political influence, Syria and Iran also have to be participants in a resolution, he said.

"When people talk about the dangers of this spreading or not, I don't think the real danger is some kind of formal involvement of Syria and Iran, and the war regionalizing in that sense so much as it is this dangerous radicalizing of the whole Arab-Islamic world," he said.

"We feel very strongly that before this process is over that Syria needs to be consulted and brought in some way or other informally or otherwise as a party to this agreement. Its concurrence will be necessary," he said. "From day one, this has been much more of a political war than a military war in terms of how you define victory."

Brown said the Israeli military in its efforts to defang Hezbollah has attacked civilian locations in order to "dig these military assets from amidst civilians," but that still doesn't justify the level of civilian casualties. At the same time, Hezbollah has been virtually indiscriminate in its attacks, he said.

"It is making no effort to hit military targets; it's just a broadside against civilian targets," Brown said.

The U.S. and United Kingdom both carry "baggage" in the Middle East and now should provide support in the background and allow others to lead.

"The U.S. is a critical broker of peace, a vital partner to make this happen, but it's got to find others to do this with – countries such as France, others would be drawn into a peacekeeping effort, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, there's got to be an outreach to Syria and Iran even if it is not by the U.S.," he said.

Brown said Iran, which this week rejected pleas from the U.N. and confirmed it will continue trying to enrich uranium in its nuclear program, also is in a similar situation, "wanting a normalization of its relationships and to be brought back into the international community."

"We need to understand Iran's principle diplomatic objective across both of these issues: respect," he said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well this is one American that will stick to his own opinion about Hezbollah, being a terrorist organization.  They will get no respect from me.

[Shammu]

Anan Accuses Israel of Violating International Law
07:45 Aug 08, '06 / 14 Av 5766

(IsraelNN.com) In a report being prepared for the Security Council, United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan accuses Israel of violating international law in regard to the shelling of Kafr Qana. 28 people were killed in that attack.

Anan is calling for a deeper investigation into the incident, one which in earlier statements he accused Israel of a premeditated attack against civilians.

Anan Accuses Israel of Violating International Law

[Shammu]

 Ahmadinejad, Annan discuss draft resolution on Lebanon
Tehran, Aug 8, IRNA

Iran-UN-Lebanon
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called on the United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, to take " a courageous measure" to establish an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon.

In a telephone conversation on Monday, President Ahmadinejad said the issue of Lebanon can be resolved through ceasefire, punishment of criminals and observing the rights of the Lebanese people.

"The Zionist regime has been attacking Lebanon for 27 days on the pretext of releasing two captured Israeli soldiers and has destroyed its infrastructure and has killed dozens of Lebanese children and women," he said.

President Ahmadinejad said the Israeli regime and its staunch ally, the United States, are not afraid to state their major objectives such as changing the map of the Middle East.

He said it's a shame for humanity that the United States has vetoed the establishment of a ceasefire in Lebanon.

Referring to the extreme anger of regional nations about the indifference of international organizations regarding the continued Israeli attacks on Lebanon, he warned against an "explosion" in the Middle East which can be uncontrollable and spread to other countries.

President Ahmadinejad urged Annan to defend the rights of the Lebanese people.

"You can prevent the continuation of the crimes of Israel and the warmongering of the United States and Britain," he told Annan.

Ahmadinejad said the latest UN Security Council's resolution on Israel's war against Lebanon is in line with the interests of the Zionist regime.

"Lebanon is a sovereign nation and it is not likely to accept a resolution which insures the interests of the Qods-occupying regime," he noted.

UN Chief Annan, who made this telephone call, expressed sorry and regret over the continued Israeli assaults on Lebanon, stressing that he is trying his best to stop these hostilities.

"I hope this crisis will be weathered through long-term measures," Annan said.

Referring to the shame of a majority of the member-states to the Security Council for their failure to stop the war, Annan said they are currently working on a draft resolution to end the war in Lebanon due to the pressures from public opinions.

"I also accept the views of the Islamic Republic about the necessity of adopting a just and basic solution to this issue," he said.

Annan underscored that the United Nations is seeking Iran's help to resolve the crisis in the Middle East.

He added many countries are preparing their views about this draft, saying a delegation from the Arab League is presently in New York to discuss the resolution draft.


Ahmadinejad, Annan discuss draft resolution on Lebanon

[Shammu]

UN draft ‘is a new offensive’

TEHRAN (AP)
Iran described a draft UN Security Council resolution aimed at ending the Israeli-Hizbollah fighting as a new offensive against Lebanon.
“The proposed resolution is another operation against the Lebanese nation,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said.
Speaking during a conference titled, “Zionist Aggression: Regional and Global Consequences” in Tehran, Mottaki said the resolution was worded in Israel’s favour.
“The resolution considers Lebanon responsible for starting the crisis. It talks about a ceasefire while ignoring the withdrawal of Israeli forces.”
The draft resolution circulated on Saturday by the US and France does not include an Israeli withdrawal. It calls for “a full cessation of hostilities” based on “the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations.”
“It is natural that we demand a stop to an invasion. We support any consensus that all Lebanese agree on,” Mottaki told some 50 attendees, mostly from Muslim countries, and Tehran-based Muslim ambassadors.

UN draft ‘is a new offensive’

[Shammu]

U.N. rights council to discuss Israel

Tue Aug 8, 9:55 AM ET

GENEVA - The new U.N. Human Rights Council will hold a special session this week in a move initiated by Muslim countries to condemn Israel for its military offensive in Lebanon, officials said Tuesday.

In a similar session last month, the council voted 29-11 to deplore Israel's military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

The council will "consider and take action on the gross human rights violations by Israel in Lebanon," according to the request filed by Tunisia on behalf of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference.

The statement said the council should consider the July 30 Israeli air strike on the Lebanese town of Qana, which killed 28 people, as well as "countrywide targeting of innocent civilians and destruction of vital civilian infrastructure."

Marie Heuze, chief spokeswoman in Geneva for the United Nations, said the council would meet either Thursday or Friday.

The session was called because 16 countries — more than the requisite one-third of the 47-member council — backed Tunisia's request for the special session. Non-Arab countries signing the petition included China, Cuba, Russia and South Africa.

Israel and the United States, which are not on the council, criticized last month's vote, saying it was a continuation of practices by the dissolved U.N. Human Rights Commission, which singled out alleged Israeli abuses in every annual session.

Five countries abstained in the July vote, the council's first emergency meeting. The session on Lebanon will be the second.

The council replaced the discredited Human Rights Commission in June.

U.N. rights council to discuss Israel

[Shammu]

U.N. Calls Israel, Hezbollah 'Disgrace'
Last Update: 8/10/2006 7:15:15 PM

United Press International

The top United Nations humanitarian official has branded Israel and Hezbollah a disgrace for hindering access to southern Lebanon.

Speaking at U.N. offices in Geneva, Switzerland, Jan Egeland said Israel and Hezbollah were preventing relief workers from saving people's lives.

Hospitals in south Lebanon are said to be low on food and fuel, the BBC said in Beirut.

Violence continued across the border meanwhile as Israel expanded its ground excursion into Lebanon and the U.N. worked on a cease fire proposal.

U.N. Calls Israel, Hezbollah 'Disgrace'

[Shammu]

Annan pushes for Security Council resolution on Israel-Lebanon violence
Report, UN News, 10 August 2006

United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan is working "very intensely" with Security Council members and key leaders to push for a resolution concerning the situation along the Blue Line separating Israel from Lebanon.

A spokesman for Mr. Annan issued a statement in New York saying the diplomacy is taking place "both here and in capitals."

The statement also reiterated Mr. Annan's long-standing call for a cessation of hostilities. "The fighting must stop to save civilians on both sides from the nightmare they have endured for the past four weeks."

The spokesman voiced Mr. Annan's conviction that the Security Council should be able to adopt a resolution by the end of the week.

The spokesman, asked about the Secretary-General's contacts with officials, noted that the Secretary-General today had spoken by phone with United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

At a Security Council meeting on Tuesday, Qatar's Foreign Minister, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabr al-Thani, speaking for the League of Arab States, accused the 15-member body of doing nothing while the Lebanese people have become engulfed in a "bloodbath" since the conflict between Israel and Hizbollah erupted in mid-July.

Since the start of hostilities, the Security Council has adopted a resolution temporarily extending the mandate of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) through August, as well as two presidential statements on the violence.

The Council President, Ambassador Nana Effah-Apenteng of Ghana, was asked on 4 August about a view among the general public that the Council has not done enough to stop the fighting.

"We have tried our best as members of the Security Council to get action taken on the issue but there are certain realities that one has to contend with and because of those realities we have to be pragmatic and we have to be realistic and look at the option which will enable us come to a quick decision on this issue, and I think that is what we have been doing," he said.

Annan pushes for Security Council resolution on Israel-Lebanon violence

[Shammu]

U.N. diplomats close in on cease-fire resolution

By Warren P. Strobel

McClatchy Newspapers

(MCT)

WASHINGTON - The United States and France reached a tentative agreement Thursday evening on a U.N. Security Council resolution that calls for a cease-fire in Lebanon and the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops, diplomats from three nations said.

The cease-fire document, which the diplomats described as virtually complete, could be voted on as early as Friday or Saturday.

The draft resolution, which takes into account strong objections from Arab governments, calls for the deployment of a United Nations peacekeeping force to southern Lebanon in addition to the dispatch of 15,000 troops from the Lebanese army.

Israel, which sent its troops into Lebanon in reprisal for rocket firings by the militant Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah, would withdraw them in stages as the combined force of Lebanese troops and U.N. peacekeepers moved in, diplomats said.

The diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks were ongoing, described the deal as nearly complete, pending final approval in Beirut, Jerusalem, Paris and Washington.

"We're close to an agreement. To say it will be sealed tonight - that's a wish," said one European diplomat.

The deal was struck after Israel threatened to expand its ground offensive against Hezbollah, an escalation of the war that could further undermine Lebanon's frail democratic government, weaken pro-Western Arab regimes and perhaps incite Shiite Muslims in Iraq and Iran.

The conflict, which began on July 12 after Hezbollah kidnapped two Israeli army reservists and began firing rockets into northern Israel, has killed more than 1,000 Lebanese and more than 100 Israelis. Much of Lebanon's infrastructure and thousands of homes have been damaged and destroyed, and hundreds of thousands of citizens in northern Israel have taken to bomb shelters or been evacuated.

It remains to be seen how fast an international force can take the field, whether diplomacy will stop the fighting and whether the outcome will weaken or strengthen Hezbollah.

"When this is settled, they're going to be the 2-ton elephant in the room," Vali Nasr, the author of a new book on the revival of Shiite Islam, said earlier Thursday.

Hezbollah has demanded a full and immediate Israeli withdrawal as part of any cease-fire, and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has insisted that Israel will not live under the threat of future Hezbollah rocket attacks.

Nor was it immediately clear how or whether Hezbollah would be disarmed, which U.S. and Israeli officials have said is their central goal.

The U.N. force won't be empowered to disarm the group, and Lebanon's weak army is not believed to have the will or capability to do so.

That means that Hezbollah and its charismatic leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, would have three basic choices about how to respond to a U.N. cease-fire:

_The group could pocket the political capital it's gained by battling the Israelis, abide by the cease-fire and disarm. That, however, would mean abandoning the battle against Israel that's helped give the militants legitimacy.

_Rather than risk a longer war that could erode its support in Lebanon, Hezbollah could give up some weapons, try to hide the rest and lie low for a while. That might be possible because no one knows how many weapons it has, but its largest rockets and other weapons would be hard to conceal.

_Having fought the Israeli Defense Forces to what amounts to a stand-off this time, and having driven Israeli, American, British, French and Italian forces out of Lebanon in the past, Hezbollah could turn on foreign forces again, using the improvised explosives, suicide bombers, ambushes and other tactics that were effective before and are taking a toll on U.S. and Iraqi forces in Iraq today.

A second diplomat said that one focus of the cease-fire resolution is an arms embargo intended to stop new shipments of weapons to Hezbollah from Iran and Syria.

That would be a scaling-back of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's original goals in ending the conflict.

A senior State Department official said that Hezbollah's disarmament will "get worked out somewhere down the road" and "within the Lebanese political system."

Still, he said, "We feel like we've got a deal that should be able to work, not only with the French, but more importantly with the Lebanese and the Israelis."

France has offered to lead the international force and supply several thousand peacekeeping troops. President Bush and Rice have said the United States would not supply troops, but could help with logistics.

As envisioned under the resolution, the international force would be an expanded and strengthened version of the existing U.N. force in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, or United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon.

UNIFIL, which was created in March 1978, has a narrow mandate, mostly limited to observation and monitoring. With fewer than 2,000 troops, it's been powerless to stop repeated clashes between Israel and guerrilla and terrorist groups in Lebanon.

The new force would be authorized under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter, which would give it more power to use armed force and take other action.

Rice was preparing to travel to New York as early as Friday to participate in the vote and any last-minute negotiations.

Her British counterpart, Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett, broke off a vacation to travel to the United Nations. "The situation is urgent and we need now to complete the task," Beckett said.

Much of the negotiation was carried out by Rice aide David Welch, the State Department's top Middle East expert, who shuttled between Beirut and Jerusalem to gain both sides' agreement to a series of changes in the cease-fire deal.

U.N. diplomats close in on cease-fire resolution

[Shammu]

Kofi Annan to Hizbullah's rescue?
ANNE BAYEFSKY
THE JERUSALEM POST

American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is on the brink of handing President George W. Bush the worst diplomatic disaster of his presidency. She is poised to agree to UN resolutions that will tie the hands of both Israel and the United States in the war on terrorism and, in particular, inhibit future action on its number one state sponsor - Iran.

The catastrophe is the brainchild of Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who has effectively turned the United Nations into the political wing of Hizbullah. Rice and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns are working furiously to satisfy a timetable dictated by Annan, not by the interests of the United States.

How did the United Nations become the forum for producing peace between Israel and its neighbors, which have rejected the Jewish state's existence for the past six decades? In the past three weeks, a multi-headed hydra of UN actors has risen to defeat Israel on the political battlefield in an unprecedented disregard of the UN Charter's central tenet: the right of self-defense.

Existing Security Council resolutions have for years required "the Government of Lebanon to fully extend and exercise its sole and effective authority throughout the south, [and] ensure a calm environment throughout the area, including along the Blue Line, and to exert control over the use of force on its territory and from it."

A combination of Iranian aggression, Syrian support, and Lebanese impotence and malfeasance, has actively prevented the implementation of the existing resolutions.

But how did the UN respond to the aggression against the UN member state of Israel, which was launched once again from Lebanese territory and which continues to the present hour? By accusing Israel of murder, mass genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, the deliberate attack of children, and racism. UN actors have even denied that Hizbullah is a terrorist organization and analogized it to anti-Nazi resistance movements. In the last three weeks, we have heard:

Secretary-General Kofi Annan:

# Israel's "excessive use of force is to be condemned;" Israel has "torn the country to shreds... Israel's disproportionate use of force and collective punishment of the Lebanese people must stop."

# Israel is "apparently" guilty of the murder of UN soldiers. The UNIFIL soldiers were killed by Israel after it responded to Hizbullah attacks on Israeli civilians. One of the soldiers had reported only days before he died that Hizbullah's nearby actions meant Israel's response "has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity." Yet without any investigation Annan immediately called it an "apparently deliberate targeting" - an accusation he has yet to retract.

# Israel has "committed grave breaches of international humanitarian law" and "has caused, and is causing, death and suffering on a wholly unacceptable scale."

Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown:

# Hizbullah, the Iranian-proxy currently fighting Israel, is not a terrorist organization. "It is not helpful to couch this war in the language of international terrorism," said Malloch Brown, claiming Hizbullah is "completely separate and different from al-Qaida."

Jan Egeland, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator:

# "The excessive and disproportionate use of force by the Israeli Defense Forces…must stop."

Louise Arbour, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights:
# In comments Arbour directed at Israel, she said: "the bombardment of sites with alleged military significance, but resulting invariably in the killing of innocent civilians, is unjustifiable," suggesting that Israel was perpetrating "war crimes and crimes against humanity" for violating the "obligation to protect civilians during hostilities."

Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy, UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict:

# In comments directed "even-handedly" to Israel and Hizbullah, Coomaraswamy "strongly condemned the repeated attacks on civilians, and especially on children, noting that callous disregard for the lives of children has permeated this conflict from its start."

Ann Veneman, Executive Director of UNICEF:

# Veneman claimed Israel is engaged in "the continued targeting of civilians, particularly children."

Agha Shahi, Pakistani member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination:

# "Would Israel have resorted to the bombing of civilian infrastructure if it were fighting a non-Arab force? It was a war between different ethnic groups, the Arabs and the Jews."

Jose Fransisco Calitzay, Guatemalan member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination:

# Commenting on events in Lebanon, Calitzay said "mass genocide was the highest level of racism that could exist, and they had to prevent that from happening in the present case."

Mahmoud Aboul-Nasr, Egyptian member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination:

# Aboul-Nasr "objected to the designation of Hizbullah as a terrorist organization. Hizbullah was not a terrorist organization; it was a resistance movement that was fighting foreign occupation, just as there had been during the Second World War."

cont'd next post

[Shammu]

IN SHORT, the UN - which to this day cannot define terrorism - did not come to the aid of a UN member under fire from one of the world's leading terrorist organizations. It came to the aid of the terrorist by attempting to prevent the member state from exercising its right to hit back.

The Geneva Conventions clearly state that combatants are prohibited from using civilians as human shields, but if they do so, the presence of civilians does not render the area immune from military operations.

Israeli soldiers and civilians are paying with their lives daily as a consequence of Israel's efforts to avoid disproportionate action - a dramatic exercise of restraint taken in order to reduce Lebanese civilian casualties.

But in the face of the UN's obvious predilection to subvert Israel's well-being and American foreign policy interests, to whom has Secretary Rice turned to save the day? The United Nations!

THE RESULT has been as predictable as it has been disastrous. The UN's verbal assault on Israel is coupled with a three-pronged political agenda. The UN seeks to: (1) protect Hizbullah from further Israeli attacks, (2) produce a political win for Hizbullah by giving them the territorial prize of the Shaba Farms, and (3) increase UN presence, oversight and control of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Every element of this agenda is satisfied in the current draft UN resolution and is part of the declared intention of a second resolution to follow (some of which may end up being incorporated in the first.)

The resolution calls for a "full cessation of hostilities" and "the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations." What offensive military operations? Has Israel been engaged in a single military operation offensive and not defensive in nature?

The resolution reintroduces the notion that Israel might occupy Lebanese territory, calling for action on "areas where the border is disputed or uncertain, including in the Shaba farms area." Though the resolution doesn't mention the states who are party to the dispute, leaving some possibility that the territorial dispute is between Syria and Lebanon, Syria is not mentioned.

Given that the only states named in the resolution are Israel and Lebanon, either the presence of the Shaba Farms issue means Lebanese territory is occupied by Israel (contrary to explicit UN determinations in the past) or Syria's role in arming Hizbullah is now being rewarded by the UN.

The draft resolution on the current crisis says the Security Council "expresses its intention…to authorize in a further resolution under Chapter VII of the Charter the deployment of a UN mandated international force to…contribute to the implementation of a permanent cease-fire and a long-term solution."

It calls for renewed involvement of UNIFIL, the UN troops that stood and watched Hizbullah rearm and plan its deadly assault on a UN member state for the last six years.

Such an international force is to be authorized under the first-ever Chapter VII resolution - a legally binding resolution that can be implemented through sanctions or the use of force - in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. In other words, Secretary Rice has approved of a UN-authorized and monitored force that has its sights set on Israel too, coupled with a claim that Israel is currently engaged in "offensive" operations.

THE VERY UN that accuses Israel of murder and heinous violations of international law is now to be charged with judging compliance with a legally binding instrument purporting to define the terms and conditions of Israel's self-defense. The original idea of a Chapter VII force to disarm Hizbullah was coupled with a serious NATO presence. The current draft is the worst of both worlds - a much-watered down force with considerable UN-control coupled with a Chapter VII mandate that could easily be turned on the UN's perpetual whipping boy - Israel.

In addition, the draft resolution:

# fails to call in its operative section for the immediate release of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers,

# introduces the notion that settling the issue of all Lebanese prisoners detained in Israel - regardless of their crimes - will be the quid pro quo for the Israelis' release,

# speaks of financial and humanitarian assistance only to the Lebanese people while ignoring restitution or aid for the one million Israelis in bomb shelters over the last three weeks and the 300,000 displaced

# lends credibility to another manufactured grievance, the return by Israel of "remaining maps of land mines in Lebanon" - though Israel has already returned maps of old mines years ago, and no mention is made of Hizbullah providing the UN with maps of its newly-laid land mines,

# enhances Kofi Annan's authority to judge Israel by extending an open-ended invitation to inform the Security Council continually about any action he believes "might adversely affect the search for a long-term solution"

# fails to mention "Hizbullah" or terrorism even once, let alone stating that Hizbullah is directly responsible for the Lebanese civilian casualties it cynically promotes.

# omits entirely any reference to Iran or Syria, as if the address of the arms suppliers and bosses of their Hizbullah proxies are too sensitive to include.

THERE WILL be only one sure result of this move - the empowerment of terrorists whose ultimate target is the United States, Israel and all democratic values. Secretary Rice's belief that there is a serious convergence between the United Nations agenda and American foreign policy needs in the age of terrorism is a profound error in judgment for which democratic societies everywhere will be forced to pay a heavy price.

[Shammu]

 Annan condemns Security Council over Lebanon resolution delay
New York, Aug 12, IRNA

UN-Lebanon-Annan
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan condemned the Security Council's failure to act more quickly to end the Lebanon war, saying it had "badly shaken" the world's faith in the Security Council.

Speaking at the start of a council meeting which called for a "cessation of hostilities" between Israel and Lebanon, Annan said:
"I would be remiss if I did not tell you how profoundly disappointed I am that the council did not reach this point much, much earlier, a reference to the United States procrastination over the wording of the resolution after Lebanese government rejected an earlier draft resolution as favoring Israel.

"And I am convinced that my disappointment and sense of frustration are shared by hundreds of millions of people around the world."
The UN secretary general added: "All members of the Security Council must be aware that its inability to act sooner has badly shaken the worlds faith in its authority and integrity."
The 15 member Security Council voted unanimously for a resolution calling on the two belligerent parties to immediately cease hostilities following a month of fighting.

The resolution also calls for Israeli forces to withdraw from positions they have occupied in southern Lebanon in parallel with the deployment of Lebanese army units and a robust international military force in southern Lebanon.

"Israeli bombing has turned thousands of homes to rubble. It has also destroyed dozens of bridges and roads, with the result that more than a hundred thousand people cannot reach safety, nor can relief supplies reach them," he said.

"Israelis, for their part, have been newly awakened to a threat which they hoped, with good reason, to have escaped when -- as this Council certified on my recommendation -- they withdrew from Lebanon six years ago."
Annan gave a damning assessment of international action over the Middle East.

"We have just had a terrible lesson in the dangers of allowing problems to fester. We must by now all know that unless we address unfinished business, it can and will take us unawares," he said.

"Over the last five weeks we have been reminded yet again what a fragile, tense and crisis-ridden region the Middle East has become probably now more complex and difficult than ever before.

"It is now undergoing changes, shifts and realignments on a scale, and of a strategic significance, not seen since the colonial powers withdrew at the end of the Second World War."
"The Middle East, which has long figured at the very top of this Councils agenda, is likely to remain there for years to come." The United Nations "stands for a comprehensive solution, and must therefore do our utmost to address all the separate but intertwined issues and conflicts in the region," he said.

Annan condemns Security Council over Lebanon resolution delay