Will the UN resolution on ceasefire in Lebanon work?

Question

Just I noticed a news item quoting UN Security Council about the ceasefire in the current sceanario in Middle East. I request all the viewers to contribute their best opinion in this subject.

Answer 1

We can only hope that it will be successful. It is very difficult because there is so much bad faith. The Israelis are intensifying their attack and they are trying to seize as much territory and the most strategic territory before they agree to a cease-fire.
This will cause problems for the future implementation of a peace plan. The Israelis will only cede small parcels of territory in exchange for the joint Lebanese-UN taking control of those areas, but the presence of the Israelis will be seen as a provocation and the danger for a cycle of Iraq-like violence to occur is very great.
In my estimation the following should have been added as modalities to at least minimise the chance of failure:

1- the immediate and simultaneous cessation of violence on both sides and the simultaneous ratification of the agreement by both sides. This is to avoid the bad optics that the Lebanese government should ratify the agreement (on Saturday August 12th), while Israel continues its offensive until Sunday August 13th. The stated reason the Israelis give is that their cabinet cannot meet on the Jewish sabbath. It makes one wonder why they can cause all sorts of fires and light bombs, bullets, missiles, etc., but they cannot sit and discuss things. I think that this is at best a red herring, and is really about Israel being allowed by the US to seize as much as possible to have greater bargaining power. This is a problem because the cease fire is compromised before it starts by turning it into a bargaining session with Israel perceived to hold the powerful cards. A similar circumstance caused problems with the Oslo land-for-peace agreement in Palestine.This will demoralise the people and will not have good effects;

2- the complete evacuation of the Israeli presence from the disputed farming areas occupied by Israel for about 30 years;

3- the return of all captives from the conflict from both sides;

4- the evacuation of Israeli military from all Lebanese territory beginning with the highest elevation points and other strategic areas defined by the Lebanese-UN force. The Israelis should be made to leave Lebanese territory as soon as possible. In order to ensure that Israeli security is assured this should be done in concert with;

5- the immediate transfer of all Lebanese militia forces along with all their command structure, equipment and weapons to the Lebanese Army. This would integrate Hezbollah into the Lebanese Army. They have proved themselves to all factions the Lebanese people and now could be an opportune moment to integrate them into the fabric of Lebanon. This might work; trying to eliminate Hezbollah is sure to fail and is probably inviting Iraq-like insurgency.

I'm very much afraid that otherwise the situation will drag on and cause more great hardship to all sides concerned, including the UN.

Answer 2

I agree that the muse clarification for the conflict is the deep rooted hatred for a Jewish state. even nevertheless, that hatred is maximum deep rooted contained in the Fascist Islamic Terrorist flow (ie. Hezbollah, Hamas, ect.). i unquestionably think of that there would be an enduring co-existance, in line with possibility even peace between the accepted public of Muslims and Jews residing contained in the area, if given a gamble to be unfastened from the impression of the extremist communities. Hezbollah, subsequently, would desire to be overwhelmed, moved out of how, and then the line to peace can start to be laid down. working with Hezbollah is likened to the prolonged kin. There wasn't going to be any peace for Catholics and Blacks contained in the South until eventually they grew to develop into insignificant in length. a similar holds genuine for Hezbollah.

Answer 3

Hi SheshHadri, … there simply must be a perception change between Israel and Lebanon, or the hope for a “ceasefire” by diplomats in UN would be effective AT ALL.

It's quite obvious that Isreal is backed by the world’s superpower, US, and Hezbollah is backed by both Iran and Syria (of course, started by Lebanon).

This is surely NOT a clash between two countries in the Middle East, instead, it represents the clash between ideologies, governance, as well as religion.

Why?

In fact, it was more of Hezbollah who first started launching a small-scale invasion of Israel’s border, and then it gradually evolved to become Israel’s all-out, total attack on Lebanon, by launching missiles and streaming rows of tanks for these purposes. Hence, before this “war” even started, a cold ceasefire was merely an official name. The moment Lebanon captured 2 of Israel’s soldiers and invaded Israel’s borders, the barriers of international peace that had been supposedly put up came down like Jericho’s city walls.

Therefore it is not the 2 soldiers that really mattered. It was Israel’s way of getting back at the nations that had “ignored its existence”, as written by an author in the TODAY newspapers. Remember the Iran’s presidents’ statement?

The solutions are few, and highly limited.

While diplomats do suggest that the only way out would be exchanging friendly ties — but I ask, isn’t that so superficial? It’s like patting an enemy on the back for doing a great job, yes, in defeating you. Then we identify who really are the parties behind the war.

I’m believe strongly that the citizens WERE neutral (or perhaps a little inclined to their own country’s side, but only a little), but the governments were at war, and a few other organizations.

Yet, the people want peace, not war, not Hezbollah’s kidnap, not Israel’s missiles - they don’t want anything but peace and national stability! They already have their own problems to worry about, so why would someone add death to their already overflowing “Anxiety List 101″? To put it simply, this is illogical.

Yes, of course, if you read Sun Zi’s “Art of War”, then you realise in his Chapter 6, Weakness and Strengths, the quote:

“Military tactics are like water. The tendency of water is to run away from high places and hasten downward. Likewise, the law in battle is to avoid engaging the enemy at his strong points, and to attack his weak points.”

Because Israel attacks at Lebanon’s citizen residential areas, they exploit the natural disadvantage these places hold due to their utter lack of defence, despite some bomb shelters. Hence, countries of the world can condemn Lebanon for attacking and killing innocent lives - but does Israel really have a choice?

To quote what SM Goh Chok Tong (Singapore) says from TODAY Newspaper,

“For a long-term solution, he (SM Goh) called on Palestinians and Hezbollah to recognize Israel’s right to exist.”

“That’s important because if others don’t recognise Israel’s existence, then what is there for Israel to do other than fight and destroy you?”

How terribly true.

Not only this, following Sun Zi's quote (he was a famous Chinese philosopher)

“The place where one intends to attack must not be made known…”

Yet we all know that Israel did leave “pamphlets” in Lebanon citizen’s letterboxes to warn them of the imminent missiles that would comet down from the skies, and there were numerous escapes from various areas that were about to be hit.

However, a majority of them have decided to ignore this, causing death to their families and loved ones. Again, if one were to still criticise Israel’s act of not allowing innocent lives to live, then one should ask,

Was Israel’s sovereignty as a nation first observed?

(remember again the Iran President's comment on Isreal)

If this question cannot be answered, then there should be absolutely no dispute about Israel’s attack on Lebanon, nor criticisms about their actions, because what triggered this concatenation is far more important.

Hope this helps. :)

Answer 4

UN are bloody softies and will only follow the lead of the USA. UN has shamed itself many a times by becoming an international farce, and not a force.

*spits*

Answer 5

As long a Hizbollah grows up and decides to stop spending Lebanese infrastructure for their own purposes.

BTW, that doesn't seem like good odds to me.

Answer 6

No, the UN has never solved anything!