***UPDATE: If it’s up to Kofi, then it looks like 1701 is doomed to fail. The Secretary General says the operation (mentioned below) violated the cease-fire. I guess Annan just wants a cessation of hostilities rather than respect for the terms of the agreement.
That’s the bad news. The good news is the Administration’s resolve to enforce UN mandates:
The White House declined to criticize the Israeli operation, noting that Israel said it acted in reaction to arms smuggling into Lebanon and that the U.N. resolution calls for the prevention of any weapons resupply for Hezbollah.
***
It looks like the test of the West’s resolve and Kofi Annan’s commitment to the principles of the United Nations (UN) and the mandates of its resolutions on the disarming of militias in Lebanon has come sooner than I anticipated. Israel launched a commando raid into the Lebanese town of Baalbek to “prevent the smuggling of arms to Hizbullah” (link via Pajamas). As rearmament of Hezbollah is a violation of UN Resolution 1701, such smuggling means that terror group — and those responsible for providing arms to it — has breached the agreement.
Now that “Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora phoned UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to protest“, the Secretary General has the chance to show his stuff by making clear that the resolution calls for Hezbollah’s disarmament and condemning attempts to resupply the terror group. And recognizing Israel’s right to self-defense if the resolution is breached.
That Israel continues to take defensive actions indicates that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert recognizes that 1701 does not call for an unconditional cease-fire. And confirms my view that the resolution is not entirely bad. As Captain Ed wrote, “If [Hezbollah Chief] Nasrallah balks, then Israel will have a green light and a wide window to finish the job, and they will have lost very little in the hours it will take for the gambit to play to its conclusion.”
And it’s not just Hezbollah’s leaders who appears to be balking. Another man not known for keeping his word, French President Jacques Chirac, has pledged only 400 French troops to the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon. “France had been widely expected to increase its contribution to UNIFIL after the U.N. Security Council approved a resolution drafted by France and the U.S. last Friday.” The UN “is disappointed with the French contribution” (link via Captain Ed).
As the UN-brokered cease-fire is beginning to come apart, it’s becoming increasingly clear which parties take UN Resolutions seriously and which parties see them merely as opportunities for self-congratulation.
Along with Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi, Chirac is concerned about “the rules of engagement” for troops operating under the Resolution. Before sending troops, Prodi asked Annan for “a clear mandate, without any ambiguity and with very precise rules of engagement, for the soldiers who will be deployed.”
The ball is now in Kofi Annan’s court. It’s up to him to make 1701 effective. Yesterday, I expressed some hope that he might stand up for the good principles set forth in this flawed resolution. Will the Secretary General condemn Hezbollah — and the nations attempting to resupply its guerillas? Will he set forth clear rules of engagement, allowing troops deployed in southern Lebanon to disarm those militias operating in violation of a number of UN resolutions?
If Annan does not condemn Hezbollah and muster an international force (and define clear rules of engagement for them), hostilities will resume. But, this time it will not only be Hezbollah who will be responsible for the violence, but the Secretary General as well. For he will have failed to stand up for a resolution that he had long been eager to see passed.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
” Israel launched a commando raid into the Lebanese town of Baalbek […] the Secretary General has the chance to show his stuff by making clear that the resolution calls for Hezbollah’s disarmament and condemning attempts to resupply the terror group.”
A nice and optomistic expectation you have of Kofi. And The Result?
“Secretary-General Kofi Annan called the operation a violation of the U.N. truce”
Not one reporter on TV media has called Kofi to task. Nor will they.
This is all a terrible charade, and the worst betrayal of civilization by the U.N. in its sad and sordid history. The organized U.N. peacekeeper gang rapes of children is up there near #1 too, I guess.
This charade is not the end of the meaning of Lebanon. It is the end of the meaning of the United Nations.
Some countries such as Malaysia refuse to recognize Israel’s right to exist but are to be a part of this “neutral” peacekeeping force. For each Malaysian soldier in the contingent, why isn’t there an equal soldier from a country that has sworn that the Hezbollah military force must be destroyed? You know the answer.
The United Nations is dead, festering, contaminated and murderously contagious. Let’s get this shambling corpse of a monstrous, evil institution buried as soon as possible.
Don’t expect Kofi Annan to do anything that requires a backbone, principles and integrity.
Michael, you’re right. I was wrong to hope that the Secretary General go do his job and be a neutral arbiter.
Let’s hope that Ambassador Bolton takes him to task.
I understand that Kofi’s term is set to expire. I hope his replacement has a pair.
Regards,
Peter H.
What can he do???
I really think you are unfairly placing the onus on Kofi.
The leader of the UN has less power than the minority leader of the House of Reps. Even if he/she has all of the balls in the world, he/she would be at the whim of the security council and the countries who supplies troops. All he/she has the power to do is get people talking and strive toward dialoged instead of conflict.
What I want him to do, Keogh, is — at the very least — to criticize Hezbollah for attempting to rearm in violation of 1701. And to see Israel’s operation in context of that violation.
That makes sense.
But I suppose he would like only the international force to enforce the ceasefire.
Can you imagine if McEnroe got to call his own ins and outs?
Further, since his power is so limited he is has to wait for a more obvious breach of cease fire from Hezbollah to start his criticism.
Unfortunately, I am sure the Sec. Council in October will elect an equally spineless individual to be Sec. Gen. Kofi is a disgrace when it was HIS UN that permitted Hezbollah to continue to hold the Lebanese government hostage and not enforce Res. 1559. The Hezzies are still re-arming in clear violation of 2 resolultions now and Kofi still is too blind to speak the truth. Good riddance to him and the sooner the better.
GPW, thanks for providing the answer in #6 that I was going to direct at 401(k) plan. Great minds think alike.
Regards,
Peter H.
This post is funny as heck. What does this poster expect Kofi Annan to do? Stand on the Lebanese/Israeli border with a rifle? And point it at anyone who moves? I mean, give me a break.
The naivete of the post is astounding, and makes me wonder whether the poster really is in La-La-Land, das Land des HappyEnds.
Regarding comment #6 by GayPatriotWest — August 20, 2006 @ 5:07 am – August 20, 2006
I am merely reminded of
Sticks and Stones: Madame Supertanker’s diplomatic strategy: If breaking their bones doesn’t work, try calling them names.
Fat lot of good calling them names is going to do for you. Breaking bones didn’t work, calling them names will have them rolling in the streets laughing, so what do you bois suggest next?
NB: for the uninitiated, the cited poster refers to Condasleeza Rice as “Madame Supertanker” because her former employer, ExxonMobil, named a supertanker after her.
Raj, once againk, if you bothered to read what I said, you would know what I would have Kofi do. And Peter notes in comment #9, I provide the answer in comment #6.
Dan, raj likely read your post; he just didn’t comprehend it. It’s easier to play games than to debate.
Right on, Matt. And of course, RajIan’s calling Condi names just proves, as we already knew, that he’s a racist — at least according to IanRaj’s diatribes last week.
NDXXX, raj is a racist and a sockpuppet who likes ChickenHawk taunts. How low can he go?
Wait, it’s only Monday –the week is young.
#11 Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest) — August 21, 2006 @ 2:40 am – August 21, 2006
Raj, once againk, if you bothered to read what I said, you would know what I would have Kofi do.
It might surprise you to know that I actually did read what you claimed that you wanted Annan to do. But what you claimed that you wanted Annan to do didn’t make a whole lot of sense. Succinctly stated, in the bowels of your post, you said that you wanted Annan to talk. Talking might be a good exercise for pundits, but how does that square with the title of the post “It’s Up to Kofi to Make 1701 Work,” if what you really want is an effective solution? I’ll merely refer you again, member of the Hollywood “das Land des Happy Ends crowd” to those memorable words of Eliza Doolittle. Why aren’t you “so sick of words”?
Will the Secretary General condemn Hezbollah — and the nations attempting to resupply its guerillas?
Interesting. Immer mehr Talk. I guess it escaped your notice that trade “sanctions” don’t work very well, particularly when you have a country–such as Iran–that has a prized natural resource. Iran, of course, is the primary benefactor of Hezbollah.
Will he set forth clear rules of engagement, allowing troops deployed in southern Lebanon to disarm those militias operating in violation of a number of UN resolutions? If Annan does not condemn Hezbollah and muster an international force (and define clear rules of engagement for them), hostilities will resume.
Um, Annan can’t do what the members of the UN don’t want him to do. Nor will he do what the members of the UN don’t want him to do. In many ways, he is like the Queen of England, beholden to the then-current PM. Nor will he do what members of the UN don’t give him the resources to do. I guess it has escaped your notice that the French, who sponsored the currently approved resolution offered to double the size of their contingent in Lebanon. From 200 to 400. And that is a conservative Chirac government. And that leaves the UN short some 14,600 (or so) of the 15,000 projected for the revived UNIFIL mission.
Let’s understand something. It is fairly clear that your primary interest in this issue is to bash the United Nations. Why don’t you just admit it? It would be fine with me. But don’t pussy-foot around the issue, as you have been doing for some time. Let’s get rid of the United Nations. It has been a whipping-bub for conservatives too long, and a “hide behind” for liberals. Get rid of it. That’s what you really want, isn’t it?
#13 North Dallas Thirty — August 21, 2006 @ 12:13 pm – August 21, 2006
And of course, RajIan’s calling Condi names just proves, as we already knew, that he’s a racist…
Oh, the dissembler NDXXX pipes up. So, according to him, calling someone “Debbie StupidCow” is OK, right? As the Michiganders (and former Michiganders) have done here, with no opposition from NDXXX. More below.
#14 Michigan-Matt — August 21, 2006 @ 4:40 pm – August 21, 2006
NDXXX, raj is a racist…
That’s about as dumb as saying that someone who opposes the then-current policy of the then-current government in Israel (whoever is running the government) is an anti-semite.
Oh, the dissembler NDXXX pipes up. So, according to him, calling someone “Debbie StupidCow” is OK, right?
Well, based on her record and her weight, she is rather unintelligent and obese.
Now go ahead and start your BMI whining, Raj; as I told you, mine is a rounded value of 30. Go ahead, I dare you.
That’s about as dumb as saying that someone who opposes the then-current policy of the then-current government in Israel (whoever is running the government) is an anti-semite.
Unfortunately, RajIan, that’s not what you did; you specifically namecalled a person of color — ironically, after your sockpuppet identity of IanRaj spent last week screaming that allegedly namecalling a person of color proved that one was a racist.
Only one of your sockpuppet identities can be right at a time. Make a decision whether it will be RajIan’s assertion that you can namecall anyone you like as long as you don’t like their political affiliation, or IanRaj’s assertion that doing so brands one permanently as a racist.
raj/Ian at #14, I’m still trying to grasp why you think you’re worthy of debate here? You routinely call others liars, you spin whatever is written into what you want while claiming all who oppose your view have no facts, you offer opinions as facts when the truth never warrants such a claim, and you operate in a manner intended to inflame, incite, and ankle-bite without a scrap of accountability.
Please, don’t do the usual “Well, answer my question first before I respond to your comment” nonsense taken straight from the kindergarten playground.
You’ve called the host here a liar. You’ve called others bigots and racists while making bigoted and racist statements without pause. You been pointed out as being wrong –without exception– and then move on to some equally outrageous pontification.
You need to go back, atone for your sins, offer a sincere apology and then seek putative redemption in the marketplace of ideas here. You owe it to yourself as a man or men as it were.
Until then, you aren’t worthy of debate. Integrity is a word you need to comprehend and value –at this point, you clearly don’t.
Put the sockpuppets away, get serious.
You guys are nuts…so now in the hyper-sensitive, insecure world of rightists you can’t give people in power non-racial nick names?
And in the next sentences you lambaste someone for things he has not really done.
And in the next paragraph you stone someone over your own sins….
Jeez…you are worse than the Pharisees.
I am not defending the guy, as I am sure he is quite capable at dealing with your stones.
I am more remarking on how you throw and throw and throw
#20 keogh — August 22, 2006 @ 3:57 pm – August 22, 2006
You guys are nuts…
You have to understand the mindset of the MightyRighties of the 101st Keyboard Brigade, to whom this web site is marketed.
I’ve been reading and posting on MightyRighty web sites for over a decade. FreeRepublic.com (Rush Lamebrain’s favorite web site). LittleGreenGoofballs, Charles Johnson’s anti-palestininan web site. I even posted on Jeff (what’s his name? Jackass)’s Protein Wisdom web site for a bit.
One thing that you have to understand is that the MightyRighties
(i) are uninterested in facts (like inCuriousGeorge);
(ii) if they can’t beat you down with facts that they don’t have, they will say that they will ignore you (don’t believe it), and
(iii) if that doesn’t work to drive you away, they will try to get the webmaster to get you banned, and, if that doesn’t even work, they will get the webmaster to delete your comments.
That’s the MightyRighty’s credo. (i) is like Robert “NoFacts.” (ii) is like “LaLaLa I can’t hear you (although obviously they do). (iii) is like “Oh, my goodness, it’s too painfull to read that stuff.”
It’s funny as heck. But that’s the mindset of the MightyRighties of the 101st Keyboard Brigade.
BTW, it’s a mistake to take them as seriously as they apparently take themselves.