|
|
By Bruce S. Ticker
August 13, 2006
The ideal United Nations cease-fire resolution would have stated: ?Hezbollah must disband and return the kidnapped soldiers to Israel. If not, the international force in tandem with Israel will crush you?even if it means destroying what is left of Lebanon.?
Who would expect perfection from the United Nations Security Council? The resolution approved by the Security Council on Friday is not even minimally acceptable. It fails to demand the unconditional release of the two soldiers who have been held since July 12.
The capture of the soldiers is the reason that Israel went to war with Hezbollah in the first place. If they do not get the soldiers back, why should they cease military operations? On those grounds alone, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert should have rejected the resolution.
We all know this was an overt act of war and that the kidnappings provoked this war. There were no legitimate reasons. Israel left Gaza a year ago and pulled its troops from Lebanon six years ago, and until this happened Israel planned to dismantle some settlements in the West Bank. Maybe the rocket attacks will stop, but probably most Israelis would prefer living with the rockets to giving up the two soldiers, if they had to choose.
Acceptance of this resolution is the same as waving a flag of surrender. Olmert is telling Hezbollah that Israel will cease using force before they are released. This can mean anything. The worst would be negotiating for the release of Lebanese prisoners.
The New York Times recently reported that Hezbollah wants an inmate who murdered a father and his young daughter during a raid in Israel nearly three decades ago, along with others whom Israel says were involved in terrorism. It is not clear if some of these prisoners might have been unjustly jailed, but letting terrorists go is a non-starter.
The smartest move would have been to leave the Israelis to continue their offensive and have an international force swoop in from the north, and together they might either cripple or finish off Hezbollah which would be caught in the middle.
Of course, the Security Council is allowing Lebanon have its way by forcing Israel out of southern Lebanon once up to 15,000 international troops along with the same number of Lebanese soldiers enter the area with the intent of controlling Hezbollah.
Lebanon?s government deserves to be ignored. They harbored Hezbollah and permitted them to transport weapons and troops from Syria. Why should the U.N. take them seriously?
Besides, how will the international forces control Hezbollah if Israel is having so much trouble? Will the Lebanese army do its part?
It is understandable why European countries are bowing to the Arabs. They?re afraid of terrorist attacks in their own backyards since they are much more accessible to the Middle East than the United States.
Maybe there was a private agreement that, once the cease-fire goes into effect, Hezbollah will release the two soldiers in a grand show of good faith. If the resolution?s end result is release of the soldiers and a permanent end to the conflict, then maybe this way of going about it is worthwhile. Of course, most supporters of Israel do not believe for a minute that this resolution will do any good.
The only possibility of a good result is that in time the Lebanese -- including the Shiites -- will compel Hezbollah to account for themselves, as was suggested by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman and an Arabic writer. What was the point of this war if so many lives were shattered?
We can only hope.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
