Mideast crisis--Blog from Jerusalem
Around 9,000 troops from 47 countries roam Afghanistan under NATO command with the goal of "assisting the government of Afghanistan and the international community in maintaining security within the country." (That does not include 19,000 U.S. troops trying to keep the country stable). In practice, the NATO role has turned into a combat role fighting the Taliban to ensure that the elected government stays in power and the country does not fall apart (or back to Taliban hands). Not only is there no foreseeable date for its withdrawal, but NATO also plans on almost doubling the force this year, since resistance has increased in the south.
So how would an international force fare in southern Lebanon? Without Hezbollah's agreement, would the force's very existence only encourage Hezbollah to "resist" a force seen as occupiers? Hezbollah's whole raison d'être is resistance.
Whatever force the world offers up, Israel will be the one to decide whether it will deploy or not. Israel is now slowly and painfully--but surely--fighting its way north through southern Lebanon. If it doesn't trust the international team to do the job it wants done, it won't pull out to let it come in.
July 24
JERUSALEM-Thirteen days into the Lebanese-Israeli conflict (or is it war?), the United States finally decided to do something about it. Or did it? U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice popped into Beirut for a surprise visit today and then over to Jerusalem before continuing to other parts of the world.
But is she just paying a courtesy visit, or is she working toward the cease-fire everyone in the world (except for the two parties actually engaged in shooting at each other) has called for?
The answer is likely to be found in her statement made en route from Washington to Beirut. She said the United States believes "a cease-fire is urgent"--but she added that the United States will work toward brokering a cease-fire only if it is "sustainable."
What makes a truce sustainable? A Lebanese source told Reuters that Rice said that Hezbollah must unconditionally return the two Israeli soldiers it captured and pull back from the border. It's not clear to me if she realizes that is not likely to happen and is saying it to gain more time or because she honestly doesn't understand how things work in the Arab world. Hezbollah would most likely kill the two soldiers rather than be forced to give them up without getting something in return and saving face. Lebanon's Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, of course, knows that and has called for a broad political deal that would include the release of Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails and the Israeli withdrawal from the disputed speck of land known as Shebaa Farms so that he can convince Hezbollah that its goals have been achieved and it is no longer needed in southern Lebanon. Hezbollah still claims Shebaa Farms for Lebanon, though the United Nations does not.
What is most likely is that Rice knows that her conditions are impossible and she is gaining time in order to help Israel create a situation on the ground that Israel and the United States believe will make a "sustainable truce" possible: i.e., cripple Hezbollah so that it can be replaced.
advertisement
