Cease-fire Rambling

Jerusalem, Israel. With regards to the U.N. Resolution 1701, brokering a cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, there are many disgruntled in Israel, and with reason. Israeli Vice Premier Peres voiced a pertinent opinion on the diplomacy of the deal recently when he stated that, if Israel had not agreed to the conditions, the world would have turned against them. And yet the prospect of peace in the region looks as uncetain as ever.

Now nearly a week old, the cease-fire's integral provision that there be a 30,000-man international peace-keeping force deployed in Southern Lebanon is already hitting up against difficulties. Lebanon seems to be holding up their end of the bargain in supplying 15,000 troops for the force, although, as members of Israel's government have pointed out, as much as half of the Lebanese army deployed is Shi'ite. This is not very reassuring, as such a force is very likely going to go to no great lengths to reign in Shi'ite Hezbollah.

And what of the rest of the force? Well, France had agreed before the fact to head up the international force. Interestingly, France waited until after the cease-fire had been agreed upon to decide what their actual troop commitment would be. And, more interesting still, they have now revealed that that commitment will consist of 200 troops, in addition to the 200 they already have on the region. Hmmm. Not to down-play the duty of those 400 men, but 400 out of 15,000 doesn't exactly shout commited leadership. Nor does it set an example for other European nations to follow. Consequently, the numbers for the U.N.'s half of the force are languishing.

Of those nations that have offered troops, several have been objected to by Israel. This is understandable for the fact that volunteering nations Bangladesh, Malaysia, and Indosesia are all Muslims states that have no diplomatic contacts with Israel.
For a state to place its security into the hands of states with which it can not even communicate is unwise diplomacy, at best.

It is becoming apparent that the peace-keeping force has a long way to go before it accomplishes its ultimate role of stability in the region. As things now stand, we see a under-equipped, under-manned force, composed largely of troops which harbor no great love for Israel, and lacking serious support from those nations that have the money and military to truly make a difference. What seems certain is that the disarmament of Hezbollah (a years-old U.N. resolution that has never been enforced) is not going to happen unless the situation changes. A change in the situation was what Israel wanted to accomplish in the first place. A 30,000-man force (if such a contingency materializes) is a step in the right direction, but at the moment, Israel has the right to be less that optimistic.