A resolution that provides for next war

Caroline Glick:

It is hard to know how the current phase of the war will end. If all goes according to Condoleezza Rice's plan, the UN Security Council will vote today on the draft cease-fire resolution negotiated between the US and France.

Whatever marginal diplomatic gains the Olmert government may try to convince the public the draft resolution contains for Israel, the fact is that regardless of the language eventually adopted, and whatever force of French, Egyptian, Turkish, Italian and German soldiers will or will not be deployed to Lebanon, all any cease-fire resolution will do is ensure that there will be another round of war.

This is the case because none of the moves being considered involve the one action that would prevent the next war. That action is an Israeli victory against Hizbullah in Lebanon, and an Israeli and allied strike against Hizbullah's state sponsors Syria and Iran, which promote Hizbullah's wanton aggression against Israel as a central campaign in their global jihad aimed at annihilating the Jewish state and defeating Western civilization.

In the hours that followed Hizbullah's massive missile barrage against Israel Sunday, which left 15 dead and more than 150 wounded, many voices expressed the hope and expectation that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and the IDF General Staff would finally approve a military campaign aimed at destroying Hizbullah's capacity to attack Israel. It was anticipated that they would finally authorize the IDF's plan to advance ground forces to the Litani River and take the necessary measures in Tyre, Sidon and other cities to wipe out Hizbullah's capacity to launch missiles against Israel.

But Olmert would have none of it. In the aftermath of the carnage in Kfar Giladi and Haifa, he continued to maintain that Israel had already won the war, and that the best way to end the conflict was to accept a Security Council resolution that would enable Hizbullah - the advance guard of the Iranian army of jihad - not only to survive as a fighting force, but to declare victory against Israel.

...

Of course this is not unigue to this war. It just makes it like every other war Israel has fought over the last 60 years. The real effect of the resolution will not be measured until Hezballah is disarmed as required. If that happens then Isarel has accomplished much more than Ms. Glick contemplates by this story and it will be hard for Hezballah, Syria, and Iran to claim victory.

Right now the fig leaf these three are looking for is an Israeli withdrawel as part of the cease fires as oppose to when Hezballah is disarmed. Hopefully the Security Counsel will resist this ridiculous request by Lebanon. Lebanon should be given a choice of continued war are acceptance of the terms of the cease fire.

Right now Lebanon continues to be punished for the "benefit" of Hezballah's propaganda objectives. It should be clear to Lebanon at this point that Hezballah's objectives are in conflict with Lebanon's interests. If Lebanon is too weak to stand up to Hezballah to get the cease fire it needs, it is too weak to disarm Hezballah and assert its authority over south Lebanon.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

While blocking pipeline for US , Biden backs one for Taliban

Whistleblower describes Biden's voter fraud operation in Texas