Update [2006-8-1 10:59:29 by Steven D]: Things look even bleaker for a cease fire than I first reported. Check out this story which indicates Israel has decided to expand it’s ground campaign in South Lebanon:
JERUSALEM (CNN) — Israel’s Security Cabinet has approved an expansion of the ground campaign against Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon, Israeli officials said early Tuesday.
The announcement came hours after Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said his military was inflicting heavy damage on Hezbollah and rejected international calls for a cease-fire until Israel has pushed the Shiite Muslim militia back from its borders.
“Quite a few days of fighting are still before us,” Olmert told a conference of local officials.
—————————————————————————————
Not for a long time if <a href=this report is accurate:
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Monday told British Prime Minister Tony Blair that as soon as an international force deploys along the Israel-Lebanon and Lebanon-Syria borders, “it will be possible to implement a cease-fire.”
Also Monday, government and defense officials said that Israel will release two Lebanese prisoners in return for the two soldiers abducted by Hezbollah as part of a cease-fire agreement.
The sources added that the UN Security Council would call for a cease-fire in Lebanon on Friday, and it could take effect as early as Saturday.
Alternatively, the fighting might continue for a few more days.
Seems positive, at first glance, but here’s the rub. Who will be willing to send their nation’s troops to join this International force in South Lebanon? Other Arab countries? Unlikely. NATO forces? Again a problem, especially considering the fragile nature of the Lebanese government which might be ready to collapse at any moment, sending the country into further chaos. Any force, but particularly a European comprised force will be seen as occupiers.
That pretty much leaves the USA and the UK to form the bulk of this force, by my reckoning, neither of which has any credibility in the Arab world at the present time. Much less, the objection I can see coming from Syria, which will resist as much as possible allowing an American force on it’s borders, in light of the current rhetoric issuing from the Bush camp regarding the necessity for regime change.
I may be wrong. Perhaps Germany, France and some other NATO countries from Eastern Europe will step up to the plate and pledge troops for this force, but I wouldn’t count on it. If Israel is insistent on this position that UN troops must deploy as part of any cease fire, we may be in for a long period of continued fighting between Hizbollah and Israel, with the danger of a wider conflict with Syria always a concern.
Besides that, it dosesn’t appear the US is really all that eager for a cease fire just yet:
(cont.)
Meanwhile, differences of opinion emerged yesterday during preliminary talks among the U.S., France and other Security Council members regarding the priorities for a cease-fire.
Lebanon has asked to express its position during the deliberations, and a senior minister allied with Prime Minister Fouad Siniora is expected in New York.
Lebanon on Monday demanded that Israel agree to an immediate ceasefire as the two nations sparred at a special UN Security Council meeting on the new Middle East crisis.
A draft resolution is to be proposed by France, although sources at UN Headquarters said that the U.S. is also considering proposing a resolution of its own. The differences of opinion revolve mainly around the centrality of a cease-fire and when it should take effect.
France is demanding an immediate cease-fire as a central goal, saying that this would enable implementation of Resolution 1559 and the deployment of an international force. However, the U.S. wants a resolution designed to advance a number of elements that would form the basis for a long-term cease-fire.
Seems our President wants to continue taking advantage of his “oppportunity” to remake the Middle east for quite a bit longer, now doesn’t it? Oh, and by the way, guess who the neocons are back in love with:
However, after months of disillusionment, America’s neo-conservatives have fallen in love again with the Bush administration because of its support for Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon. […]
“This is exactly the right strategy, which you could call ‘Don’t just do something, stand there [while Israel continues its military campaign]’,” said David Frum, a former speechwriter to George W. Bush, who helped draft the president’s 2002 ‘Axis of Evil’ address.
“What we are seeing are precisely the same divisions as we saw over Iraq with the neo-conservatives rallying behind Mr Bush and almost everyone else feeling rising panic at the direction of American diplomacy,” said Francis Fukuyama, a former neo-conservative. […]
In spite of the American public’s scepticism, Mr Bush is largely insulated from a political backlash by the muted stance of the opposition Democrats, who are nervous of being painted as weak on national security in the build-up to mid-term elections in November.
Isn’t that convenient. Note that last paragraph. Cowering Democrats afraid to speak out against Bush’s bully boy foreign policy because of fear of being called “softies.” Just in time for the mid term elections, you say? And we thought Karl Rove had been removed from all his policy functions. Silly liberals, we are. The real reason Israel launched this war now is coming clearer every day.
UN Peacekeeping Force for Lebanon
I don’t think that Assad Jr. is going to see the other side of this. Regime change in Syria seems like to only way to reverse this humiliation and change the story from a great defeat at the hands of a pissant terrorist group into a great victory over tyranny.
But what will we do with Syria after we break it?
What will we do? The same thing we are doing in Iraq — screw the pooch.
I have always said that the US will get into Syria 2 years ago. It then will wrap up the total space that they need. Look at this they want tactically/strategically, it will present for our ideas of how things will work out, according to rummy and cheney. All the areas then around Israel will be secure for them..Talk about proxy!!! Geez!
as long as there is good pr, it will continue for as long as the US wants
There will be peace when the puppetmasters in Washington find it useful. Meanwhle, they are doing their best to pull Syrian and Iran into the fray to further the neocon agenda of “remaking” the region.
it is time we started to get our p’s and q’s straight, don’t you?
then in the mean time this continues to occur, which for me was the beginning of this whole affair
With all t hat I have read and I can tell you I have read lots, I find that bush and his minions have been very busy getting this plan of confusion and destruction in the world ongoing. We as Americans really must put a stop to this and must before the end of this mans term–08.
Do you all understand what can happen before this 08 end of term can mean for everyone. Our world is depending on those of us in America to see that this mess is stopped. This is why it is so very important for us to elect and send democrats to congress this year. We also must hold their feet to the fire to see that they do what they were elected to do, for us we the ppl. Upon campaigning, these contenders must understand that they are working for us, the ones who elect them, and nothing else, nothing any more than that. We expect them to do the right thing and when they don’t they should expect we, the ppl, will get angry with them and let them know about our anger. That they can exit the door the way they entered into this arena. We must send a very clear message to them.
And Blair and Merkel are making sure that the EU doesn’t do anything foolish like call for a ceasefire.
You do have a point. It will hopefully backfire on them as well. It is up to the Europeans to see that they get what is coming to them as well. While you are over there, you have that responsibility as we have ours over here. Now get on your bandwagon and get it done. :o) I say that kindly, for I know it is not an easy job, like ours is not easy here either. But you do understand we have to try to take them all down. It is necessary to do what is right for the world as a whole. Hopefully taking out the bad boys II, here, will matter a whole hell of a lot. What ya say, Coleman?….can you do it? You see if we keep feeding this president and his henchmen/women, they get stronger. When we stop this feeding frenzy, it will stop as well.
.
WASHINGTON (AFP) – A leading Republican senator urged US President George W. Bush to call for an immediate ceasefire in the war between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon.
“The sickening slaughter on both sides must end now. President Bush must call for an immediate ceasefire. This madness must stop.”
Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel, a possible candidate in the 2008 presidential election, said on the Senate floor.
The Bush administration has been under pressure from Arab and European states to press Israel into halting its offensive, but has received relatively limited pressure from US lawmakers – especially those in his own party – to do the same.
Hagel, the second-ranking Republican on the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee and a critic of Bush’s war in Iraq, said the US link to Israel was a “special and historic one” but also coming at the cost of relations with Arab states. “It need not and cannot be at the expense of our Arab and Muslim relationships.”
Hagel said it was neither in US or Israeli interest to isolate themselves from Europe and the Arab world by pursuing the Lebanon campaign in the face of mounting criticism of its mounting civilian toll.
“The United States and Israel must understand that it is not in their long-term interests to allow themselves to become isolated in the Middle East and the world.”
He argued the military campaign will do little to weaken either Hezbollah in Lebanon or Hamas in the Gaza Strip — both recognized as terrorist organizations by Washington.
“Military action alone will not destroy Hezbollah or Hamas.”
Hagel urged Bush to revise his policy of isolating Iran and Syria for their support of Hezbollah, saying a meaningful political settlement was unachievable without engagement of both countries. “Both countries exert influence in the region in ways that undermine stability and security,” Hagel argued. “Both Damascus and Tehran must hear from America directly.”
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
Oui, we hear these words from him but he does not walk the walk of his talk. When it comes down right on the vote he posses, he betrays us always. He knows like any good politician, he can say words we all want to hear, but he will not help change the situation at all. After all he is a republican, who wants to be president, someday. He is working towards this!
We all have heard him say things good to our ears, but he never follows through on them. See where I am coming from.
Hagel has no power. No one in congress has power sufficient to thwart the Bush regime’s insane agenda because the mechanisms of democracy are broken. Only popular revolution here at home in the US, combined with absolute outrage declared by the rest of the (so-called) civilized world (combined with an economic boycott of the US), will stop this madness.
The governments of the US and now Israel need to be isolated from the civilized community as the pariahs that they are.
.
This view has not been heard in Washington D.C. lately. See link posted by Steven D, the neocons are delighted by the stance of Republicans and Democrats. Fear to lose an election determines the morality of foreign policy. The voter will have no choice this fall when Democrats keep positioning themselves as Republican-Lites.
WASHINGTON (FT) July 30 — In spite of the American public’s scepticism, Mr Bush is largely insulated from a political backlash by the muted stance of the opposition Democrats, who are nervous of being painted as weak on national security in the build-up to mid-term elections in November. Last week Hillary Clinton, a potential presidential candidate, scolded Nouri al-Maliki, the visiting Iraqi prime minister, for having criticised Israel.
“His refusal to denounce Hizbollah and his condemnation of Israel send exactly the wrong message about the importance of fighting terrorism and bringing stability and peace to the Middle East,” said Mrs Clinton. “[He should] recognise the right of Israel to defend itself from terrorist aggression.”
Criticism of Mr Bush by Washington’s generally bipartisan think-tanks has grown shriller in recent days, particularly in the wake of the Israeli strike on Qana that killed dozens of civilians. It has focused on two areas: Washington’s support for Israel’s military campaign and Ms Rice’s refusal to consider talking to Syria or to Iran.
“It is absolutely baffling to me and almost everyone I know – Republican or Democrat – how Ms Rice and Mr Bush think this strategy will achieve their objectives,” said Zbigniew Brzezinski, a former head of the National Security Council. “The Bush administration is allowing itself to be suckered into believing it can achieve political goals through military means. They seem to have learned nothing from Iraq.”
Mr Armitage, the last senior US official to talk to the government of Syria in 2004, said he “completely disagreed” with Ms Rice’s description of the conflict as the “birth pangs of a new Middle East”. He said: “The administration has an irrational fear that talking is a sign of weakness. It is the best way of gathering information and influencing events.”
Lebanon civilian deaths already over 600 – Israeli forces have razed whole villages, similar to the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
● Juan Cole on US policy and Lebanon – August 1
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
this from the big orange that just about says it all for me
whoops, this was for another thread..sorry folks..ignore it