UN Security Council resolution on Lebanon to be presented tomorrow
All of our major newspapers are reporting that a resolution will be presented to the UN Security Council tomorrow that is designed to bring an end to the fighting in Lebanon.HaAretz has some details about the new resolution:
The resolution will stop short of requiring peacekeepers to disarm Hezbollah but will call for an embargo to prevent the group from bringing in arms from Iran and Syria, a senior Israeli official said on Thursday.YNet has a slightly different formulation:
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the resolution would also call for creation of "an emboldened UNIFIL", the UN force currently in Lebanon and long derided by Israel as ineffective.
No other details about the document were immediately available.
But the official said: "The (international) force will not have any mandate to disarm Hezbollah."
The official added that the resolution, aimed at ceasing a month of fighting between Israel and Hizbollah, would also include "an embargo that will prevent the supply of arms to Lebanon that are not for the Lebanese army." [And if the Lebanese army gives Hezbullah arms or allows them to steal them? CiJ]
Officials in Jerusalem were hopeful the new resolution would be based on Chapter Seven of the UN Charter rather than Chapter Six, which was referenced as the foundation of an earlier U.S.-French cease-fire resolution.
A resolution which invokes Chapter Seven would empower an international contingent of troops in Lebanon to apply force and level sanctions against any party which violates the terms of the cease-fire. [How are you going to prove a violation? What are you going to force whom to do? The only thing anyone needed to be forced to do is to disarm Hezbullah. This resolution neuters that requirement. CiJ]
As such, there would be no need in formulating an additional Security Council resolution which would detail the force's mandate. In recent weeks, a number of countries announced they would agree to contribute soldiers to any multi-national force deployed in Lebanon.
"A new proposal is being drafted, which has positive significance that may bring the war to an end," Kadima MK Otniel Schneller quoted Prime Minister Ehud Olmert as saying. "But if the draft is not accepted there is the Cabinet decision." [The fact that the traitorous Otniel Schneller is being used as Olmert's point man on this speaks volumes. He's stooping awfully low - and has run out of stronger people who support him - if he is using Schneller. CiJ]
France expects that diplomats working on a deal over a United Nations resolution on Lebanon will reach an accord soon, Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said on Thursday.
"Things are moving in New York today. I hope they move even more quickly and in the hours to come," he told reporters.
"We expect, from one moment to the next, an accord in New York," he said.
According to sources in Jerusalem, the new formula is premised on four components:YNet adds:
1. The deployment of a genuine military forces, apparently French and German, in southern Lebanon [This is at odds with the HaAretz account. CiJ]
2. The implementation of Resolution 1559 [Does 1559 call for disarming Hezbullah? CiJ]
3. Negotiations on a prisoner swap [Olmert is going to yield on this and we will end up trading Samir Kuntar for the two kidnapped soldiers. Olmert has no shame. CiJ]
4. The establishment of a mechanism for future Israeli-Lebanese dealings
The American-French draft resolution has been forwarded to both Israel and Lebanon for approval. Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Gillerman said the new proposal envisions the IDF staying in Lebanon until it is replaced by a multinational force. [I didn't see that anywhere in either description above. CiJ] Israel hopes such force would have a mandate to deploy across the region and prevent the transfer of weapons from Iran and Syria. [But let Hezbullah keep the rockets they currently have? CiJ]
The proposal being formulated followed a meeting Thursday morning between the American and French UN ambassadors, and still needs to be approved by Britain, Russia and China before being presented to the Security Council. American officials again stressed the need to avoid a gap between words and deeds on the ground, in order to avoid a return to the reality that prevailed before July 12.I don't believe the 'multi-national force' will ever happen if this goes through. You heard it here first. And Hezbullah will come out of this as the heros of the Arab world.
I will also predict that it will eventually come to light that the US did not want to agree to such a weak resolution, and that Ehud Olmert insisted on it.
For those who have asked, the Knesset is on summer recess, and would require 30 (out of 120) signatures to convene before October. The only way to bring down the government by no confidence is to get 61 MK's to agree on someone to replace Olmert - not likely to happen. The only thing we can hope for is that MK's start defying 'coalition discipline,' and/or that parties withdraw from the coalition leaving him unable to govern. But even if that happens, it would likely leave Olmert in power until he is unable to pass a budget by March 31, 2007.
I'm tempted to curse at this - in case anyone missed where I stand - but I still want you to let your kids read this blog. This is awful!
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:50 PM
5 Comments:
Why this ever got into the hands of the U.N. is creating, with the help of Olmert, the problem. And yet again Olmert backed down from the IDF going on to Latani.And he expects the terrorists to take this seriously? It should have been done weeks ago.
Where Israel is concerned, there never can be a fair or just resolution.
The arabs must be drooling.As for you using curse words? A lot of kids today could teach their parents a new vocabulary.
*sighs* I knew not to trust Olmert. *sighs again*
I only wish Bibi were in power!
As far as Kuntar goes...I do not believe in the death penalty, but this man deserves to die as an exception to my general belief.
*despairs at the general state of the world*
Chris,
I posted it yesterday, but it wasn't from HaAretz. It was from something called Israel Insider, which is outside the MSM. It's called "What's really going on in Lebanon - MUST READ." Scroll down the home page to find it. I posted it yesterday morning.
Red Tulips,
Bibi would only be better if he learned the lessons of his first term. In his first term, he brought us the Why Why Wye Agreement, in which he gave up most of Hebron for nothing (he was supposed to get Jonathan Pollard released and Clinton reneged but the price was too small and irrelevant for what he gave up.
Shumbaayamylord,
Netanyhau would be much better for foreign or finance than for defense. And I'm not sure Ya'alon even wants to be Prime Minister (and he has NO experience in the political echelon - not even an MK). And which party's hacks do you think will nominate him. Remember Itzik Mordechai? Ehud Barak?
Kranky,
Towards the end of this post, I discuss the "no confidence" possibilities. They are few and far between. The Knesset was upset at how quickly Prime Ministers were being thrown out, so it legislated restraint on itself, endowed it as a "basic law" (supermajority requirement to change) and made it almost impossible to get rid of the PM. The only hope is mass demonstrations in the streets that start to make Kadima MK's fear for their careers. But that won't happen as long as the army is in Lebanon.
If Olmert accepts a ceasefire with the current status quo, I will stop being a Zionist, and start supporting a one-state solution with the expulsion of Jews and the establishment of an Arab Muslim state in what is now Israel.
Like the commander of the Golani brigade said at the start of this now pointless effort, those who won't fight for liberty don't deserve it.
Carl:
I didn't think of what you said re: Bibi, but you are right. I do think he has learned his lessons from the first term, though.
I linked this entry on my own blog - it sums up the situation at the UN rather well.
Post a Comment
<< Home