Powered by WebAds

Thursday, August 10, 2006

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.

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.
YNet has a slightly different formulation:
According to sources in Jerusalem, the new formula is premised on four components:

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
YNet adds:
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!

8 Comments:

At 10:38 PM, Blogger Lois Koenig said...

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.

 
At 1:08 AM, Blogger Chris said...

You folks saw the story by now that's exploded out of Ha'aretz, I believe. Apparently, IDF presented Olmert with a plan for a Wehrmacht-style blitz into Lebanon early in the war. He temporized and turned it down. Further, Olmert received the green light from Condi to take down the Syrians if necessary.

Condi was never the problem. It was always Olmert and Peretz. Bush and Condi were always hoping that the IDF would be used to put the Iranians back in the box.

Now, there will be a terrible war. We will win, but how many Israelis must die before the fascist government in Tehran falls?

Meantime, before the war with Iran does come, we here in America cannot go to war against Iran with Olmert as Israeli Prime Minister. He must go. Bring on Netanyahu.

Neville Chamberlain must leave the building.

 
At 1:34 AM, Blogger Red Tulips said...

*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*

 
At 2:00 AM, Blogger ShumBaayaMyLord said...

Carl thanks for sharing this important albeit rage-inducing info.

Olmert has to go now--he is the Elchanan Tannenbaum of the political echelon. Olmert's toxic brand of narcissism is a public threat; this was always a profound moral problem in conditions of relative calm (absence of a "hot" war), what with the example of smug moral turpitude he set--it is utterly terrifying in the current circumstances. It's a cast of mind that verges on treason.

Time to organize politically/fundraising-wise on the US scene in order to bring Olmert down; there must be some way to accomplish this democratically well in advance of the dates and scenarios you (Carl) describe.

The person to replace Olmert is not Netanyahu but rather Moshe Ya'alon. Netanyahu could be effective as Defense Minister, though--so long as he were willing to accept the position. (Alternatively, I would go with Yuval Steinitz.) But neither Israel nor he can be seriously considered ready for his return to the PM's seat quite yet. Certainly he could be Finance Minister--was in some ways fairly good in that role last time around

 
At 7:01 AM, Blogger Kranky (in the civilized world) said...

Wow... Carl this is terrible news. Olmert really screwed the pooch on this. That ground war needs to be raging full force. Should have been for the past 30 days.

I am so sorry you and the rest of Israel is saddled with this ... person.

Is there anything in the Israeli constitution for a recall vote, or a no confidence vote? I know Israeli politics is basically screwy. Reminds me of Lefties-Gone-Wild all with their hands deep in the cookie jar. Anyone think they can hammer enough sense into real leaders and get them elected fast?

 
At 7:37 AM, Blogger Carl in Jerusalem said...

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.

 
At 8:24 AM, Blogger Ronnie Schreiber said...

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.

 
At 2:07 PM, Blogger Red Tulips said...

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

Google