Redefining Peacekeeping in Lebanon

Someone better clear matters up at the UN as to the mission of these so-called peacekeepers in Lebanon.

"We think the best solution for disarming Hezbollah is to make an exclusion zone with the retreat of the Israeli army on one side and the deployment of the Lebanese army on the other, reinforced by the U.N. troops," he said.

"Our objective is clear, to disarm Hezbollah," Douste-Blazy said, but added that military force was not the answer. "The only solution is to have a political solution."

Annan said Hezbollah could not be disarmed by force.

"The troops are not going there to disarm Hezbollah, let's be clear on that," he said.

Harsh language isn't going to make Hizbullah disarm, and there's absolutely no reason for Hizbullah to willingly lay down their arms whatsoever. They still have sufficient weaponry to make life difficult for the Lebanese government, and the peacekeepers are too lightly armed to deal with them either.

In fact, I don't think anyone at the UN has a clue what those troops are supposed to be doing except show the world that they're in Lebanon. Syria doesn't want them along the border with Syria, which is precisely where they should be located to ensure that Hizbullah isn't able to get the weapons smuggled into Lebanon via the Syrian border.

Let me remind Kofi what the UN Security Council agreed to in UN SCR 1701. That document reaffirms UN SCR 1559, which requires the disarmament of all militias in Lebanon, including Hizbullah:

-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
27 July 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;

The UN is supposed to assist the Lebanese government in the fulfillment of these obligations and requirements. By punting on the issue of disarmament of Hizbullah by claiming that they cannot be disarmed by force, Annan is permitting Hizbullah to continue operating with impunity in Lebanon despite the UN ceasefire resolution expressly obligating action.

Now, there are a couple of reasons that Annan said that the peacekeepers wouldn't be forcibly disarming Hizbullah. That's because no one would ever send their troops under those conditions because they'd come under attack just as easily as Israel did. Nor do these countries want to be seen as overtly or tacitly assisting Israel in its war against terrorists despite the fact that Israel is on the vanguard of the fight against the Islamists.

So, the diplomats have managed to effectuate a ceasefire that doesn't address the key issues, including the release of the two Israeli soldiers taken by Hizbullah in the opening attack on Israel.