The UN force in Lebanon - what's the point?

Elrohir

RELATIONAL VALORIZATION
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
12,507
UN will not stop Syria sending weapons to Lebanon
By Harry De Quetteville and Michael Hirst
(Filed: 27/08/2006)

The United Nations peacekeeping force to be deployed in Lebanon is facing further criticism after the admission that its forces will not even be allowed to intercept shipments of arms to Hezbollah from Syria.

Speaking in Brussels before heading to the region, Kofi Annan, pictured below, the UN Secretary-General, confirmed that the 15,000-strong force will not meet Israeli demands to police the routes used by the militia to smuggle missiles from Syria.

"Troops are not going in there to disarm - let's be clear,"
he said. Instead, the Unifil force will only carry out interception missions if asked by the Lebanese government - which has made no such request. Syria, meanwhile, accused by Israel of re-arming Hezbollah during the recent conflict, has said the deployment of any UN forces near its border would be considered a "hostile act".

Mr Annan's disclosure of more limits on the UN force's remit will act as a further blow to its credibility as a peacekeeping force. It is already devoid of any mandate to disarm Hezbollah of its existing weapons, and now appears powerless to stop the militia re-arming. Critics point out that new stocks of weapons and missiles could end up being used against the Unifil troops themselves, should their mission go awry and end up in clashes with Hezbollah fighters.

The Israeli government, which has argued that the force lacks a sufficiently robust mandate, said it doubted that Unifil would be able to make any worthwhile contribution if it was not able to prevent Hezbollah re-arming.

"Our expectation is that the international force will help the Lebanese army implement UN resolution 1701, which insists on an international arms embargo," Mark Regev, an Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, said. "If the international force doesn't meet those expectations then this window for changing the current reality will close".

Mr Annan is due to arrive in Beirut tomorrow to discuss the Unifil deployment, as well as measures to secure the border with Syria, with Faoud Siniora, the Lebanese prime minister.

On Friday, European nations pledged up to 7,000 troops to form the core of the force: 3,000 from Italy; 2,000 from France; 1,200 from Spain; 1,000 from Poland; 400 from Belgium and 200 from Finland. Muslim nations including Malaysia, Indonesia, and Burma have also given "firm commitments", said Mr Annan.

The bolstered force will back up 15,000 soldiers from the Lebanese army, who are supposed to be gradually establishing their remit over Hezbollah-held territory in southern Lebanon while Israel pulls out the remnants of its invasion force.

However, there remain serious doubts as to whether the force will be any more effective in curbing Hezbollah's activities than the existing UN troop presence, whose role was merely to observe. While Mr Annan described them the "backbone" of a strengthened UN peacekeeping force, their only clear mandate is to be able to shoot in self-defence.

Further doubts were sown last week by remarks from Philippe Douste-Blazy, the French foreign minister, who said the force would mark out "exclusion zones", in which armed militias would be disarmed, as "the best way to remove Hezbollah's weapons".

Removing Hezbollah's secret weapons stashes is instead a task left to the Lebanese army, but few believe they have the political will to do so.

General Jean Salvan, a French former commander of peacekeeping troops in Lebanon, is among those questioning the mission's potential effectiveness. "Hostilities were called off two weeks ago already," he said. "So Hezbollah has had plenty of time either to hide its equipment very well or to bring it back to secure zones."

He added that there was no guarantee that troops would not be attacked. "A lot of that depends on Syria, it depends on Iran, it depends on Israel and it depends on Hezbollah."

Questions also remain about whether a Lebanese mission could antagonize Islamic communities in contributor European nations - especially France - if clashes with Hezbollah take place. The French have emphasised the importance of including Muslim countries in the force.

The UN force in Lebanon can't even disarm Hezbollah. In words of the Secretary General of the UN, "Troops are not going in there to disarm - let's be clear". Yeah, it's clear Kofi - the UN doesn't care about Israel, and can't even put together a semi-competent peacekeeping force.

So - what is the point of sending a peacekeeping force to disarm Hezbollah, and keep the peace between Lebanon and Israel if it can't disarm Hezbollah? If Hezbollah is on Israel's northern border armed, then the fighting will continue. That's how it is. If the UNIFIL can't disarm Hezbollah - then they shouldn't even bother. Just tell Israel, and have them finish the job. And don't whine this time about a "dispraportionate response", because the UN had it's chance, and it's screwed it up.

Comments? Alternate points of view?
 
Uhm....someone needs to tell Kofi that the UN resolution on the cease fire does in fact state it will disarm militias not part of the Lebanese army.

Apparently Kofi is so inept he cant even read the UNs own resolutions.

Figures.

I predict more shooting in less than a month.
 
Its there to make Israel and the US look bad and make the UN look good. As a side effect it gave hezbola credability beyond what it could get by its self.
 
Elrohir said:
The UN force in Lebanon can't even disarm Hezbollah. In words of the Secretary General of the UN, "Troops are not going in there to disarm - let's be clear". Yeah, it's clear Kofi - the UN doesn't care about Israel, and can't even put together a semi-competent peacekeeping force.

So - what is the point of sending a peacekeeping force to disarm Hezbollah, and keep the peace between Lebanon and Israel if it can't disarm Hezbollah? If Hezbollah is on Israel's northern border armed, then the fighting will continue. That's how it is. If the UNIFIL can't disarm Hezbollah - then they shouldn't even bother. Just tell Israel, and have them finish the job. And don't whine this time about a "dispraportionate response", because the UN had it's chance, and it's screwed it up.

Comments? Alternate points of view?

Just few words: WHAT DID YOU EXPECT?

It is UN, not NATO. UN is about making compromises that please everybody and achieve nothing. That's the way this organization works. This new UNIFIL nonsense is a nice example of that. Unfortunately this time again, our boys are going to die because of it.
 
Leha said:
UNIFIL can't even carry out their "observation" duty. Just look at this nice Hezbollah bunker being built in a hundred yards of UN post:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1154525953897&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Actually, UNIFIL were spying on IDF for Hezbolla in the latest war :

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/622bqwjn.asp

Winner, nice signature BTW.

UN spying for hezbollah? what paranoid fantasy is this?

of course you like his signature. :shake:
 
Jawz II said:
UN spying for hezbollah? what paranoid fantasy is this?

of course you like his signature. :shake:

His signature is funny but only in that it has no sense of the reality of the situaiton and is obviously racist.:rolleyes:

It's propoganda for those who have devoided themselves form the issue to a great extent, it's clearly false and thus clearly a waste of a signature, by the look of it. Quote an educated man not a comedian, at least they know something about the realities behind the lies.
 
Jawz II said:
UN spying for hezbollah? what paranoid fantasy is this?

of course you like his signature. :shake:


"Yesterday and during last night, the IDF moved significant reinforcements, including a number of tanks, armored personnel carriers, bulldozers and infantry, to the area of Marun Al Ras inside Lebanese territory. The IDF advanced from that area north toward Bint Jubayl, and south towards Yarun."

I call this spying. No such "observations" about Hezbollah movements in UNIFIL reports.
 
Leha said:
UNIFIL can't even carry out their "observation" duty. Just look at this nice Hezbollah bunker being built in a hundred yards of UN post:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?c=JPArticle&cid=1154525953897&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull


Actually, UNIFIL were spying on IDF for Hezbolla in the latest war :

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/622bqwjn.asp

UN has always been more critical about the democratic countries than about the totalitarian hellholes. Moral relativists live in illusion, that being democratic means you are more responsible than your undemocratic enemies. You know, it is easier to criticize the democratic countries, because the undemocratic ones simply ignore them.

Winner, nice signature BTW.

Thanks ;)
 
Sidhe said:
His signature is funny but only in that it has no sense of the reality of the situaiton and is obviously racist.:rolleyes:

It is obviously racist, because it is obviously anti-anti-semitic, right.

It's propoganda for those who have devoided themselves form the issue to a great extent, it's clearly false and thus clearly a waste of a signature, by the look of it. Quote an educated man not a comedian, at least they know something about the realities behind the lies.

Thomas Mann was certainly a great comedian :lol:
 
Leha said:
Winner, nice signature BTW.
I bet you would like that someone would make similar list of these: Anti-Israelis, Jews, Anti-Semitist, IDF. :shake:

What comes to the links provided to The Weekly Standard, I have one word for you: Al-Reuters.

EDIT:
Elrohir said:
What, no actual comment on the article, or the situation at hand?
Currently we're just speculating greatly about what might happen.
Those who want to continue to punch UN will do so and then there are those that wait results before judgement.
 
Winner, I guess I shouldn't be suprised that the UN is screwing things up so badly - but I am. At this point, the US, UK, Israel, and whoever else we can get to support us should go to the UN and demand that the new international force be given a clear mandate to disarm Hezbollah, and that be their #1 priority. If the UN won't give them that within 3 days, Israel should go in again, and this time not leave until every member of Hezbollah is dead, captured, or run out of Lebanon.

Sidhe said:
His signature is funny but only in that it has no sense of the reality of the situaiton and is obviously racist.:rolleyes:

It's propoganda for those who have devoided themselves form the issue to a great extent, it's clearly false and thus clearly a waste of a signature, by the look of it. Quote an educated man not a comedian, at least they know something about the realities behind the lies.
What, no actual comment on the article, or the situation at hand?
 
Elrohir said:
Winner, I guess I shouldn't be suprised that the UN is screwing things up so badly - but I am. At this point, the US, UK, Israel, and whoever else we can get to support us should go to the UN and demand that the new international force be given a clear mandate to disarm Hezbollah, and that be their #1 priority. If the UN won't give them that within 3 days, Israel should go in again, and this time not leave until every member of Hezbollah is dead, captured, or run out of Lebanon.

Well, the fact is UN wouldn't be willing to forcibly disarm Hezbollah even if it had few mechanised divisions equipped with hi-tech weaponry at hand. You don't understand how UN peacekeeping forces work - they wait until the fighting cease, they come in, hang around for a while and when problems arise, they either cut and run or surrender to the enemy.

I remember reading about the European UN soldiers in Bosnia - they were totally frustrated by their powerlessness. Few of them even commited suicide because their conscience couldn't handle watching how civilians are massacred with blessing of their UN commanders.

I just hope they'll be given enough time to get the hell out of there once Israel decides to end Hezbollahs activites once and for all.
 
Elrohir said:
What, no actual comment on the article, or the situation at hand?

That's a valid question, but at the moment It's too early to be criticising IMO, so I'm not going to wax philosophical on it until I know more; just being conservative with my opinion, like with Iraq, I know wierd:D

There's too much ins and outs to get a grip on the situation, so, untill I know more about what is and isn't going to happen and the ins and outs, I'm reserving judgement.

As it stands it looks better than an overtly agressive solution, even in the early stages of political back and forth .
 
Winner said:
I remember reading about the European UN soldiers in Bosnia - they were totally frustrated by their powerlessness. Few of them even commited suicide because their conscience couldn't handle watching how civilians are massacred with blessing of their UN commanders.
That's the official version. Unofficial, they were not always passive. The serb (or bosnian or other) snipers who killed civilians were not always shoot by other bosnian (or serb or other) snipers.
 
Steph said:
That's the official version. Unofficial, they were not always passive. The serb (or bosnian or other) snipers who killed civilians were not always shoot by other bosnian (or serb or other) snipers.

Yeah, I am sure they attempted to do something, in fact they did so often, but how is that saying? Every good deed calls for a punishment?
 
The point is folks, why is the head of the UN saying they wont disarm hezbollah, when the resolution that passed the UN does say the mission is to disarm militias?

Is Kofi now overriding voted UN resolutions on his sole authority?
 
Back
Top Bottom