What Countries Should be Part of the Lebanon Security Force??

[warrickdll]

Once again, if the hypothetical (and ridiculous) situation arose where Canada committed armed troops to shoot Israelis (as has never existed under any UN mission in the region), I would stick to my guns.

Ahhhhh... Peacekeeping...  :


From http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AMH/XX/MidEast/Lebanon-1982-1984/USMC-Lebanon82/USMC-Lebanon82-4.html:

Captain Johnson didn't think that:

. . . they would actually try to come through a joint Marine-lebanese checkpoint like that. But once it developed, I was very concerned that if the tanks were allowed to move forward, there was a very dangerous situation, because the road they were on . . . went right through the heart of the

--45--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


university . . . divided the Marine company and the Lebanese company.30


Johnson feared that if the tanks attempted to pass, a firefight might erupt between the Lebanese and the Israelis. If a fight ensued, the Marines would have to support the lebanese. He wasn't worried about the Marines' fire discipline, but he was concerned about that of the Lebanese soldiers.

As the Israeli tanks approached the fence, Captain Johnson jumped out of his jeep, ran up to the tanks, and stood in the center of the road. The lead tank stopped about six inches in front of Johnson, would told the Israeli lieutenant colonel in the lead tank, "You will not pass through this position." After a short pause, the Israeli dismounted, spoke with Johnson, and then climbed back aboard the tank, saying that he was going through. Johnson later stated that he replied, "You will have to kill me first."31 He drew his pistol, chambered a round, and held the weapon at the ready position. There was another pause as the Israeli officer apparently spoke over his radio to his headquarters. The lead tank then pulled slowly to the side of the road with Captain Johnson walking alongside and then the two others suddenly revved up their engines and whipped forward toward the fence.

The young Marine captain jumped on the lead tank, grabbed the Israeli officer, and yelled at him to order his tanks halted. The tank commander complied and then purportedly told Johnson, "One thing we don't want to do is kill each other." Johnson answered, "Yes, but if you keep doing things like this, the likelihood is going to occur."32

While the local Arab radio stations were telling and retelling the story of the American who stopped the three Israeli tanks singlehandedly, the Israeli press was accusing Captain Johnson of having liquor on his breath and being drunk. Worse, they called the whole affair a misunderstanding on the part of the Marines. Confronted by evidence, among other things, that Johnson was a teetotaler, the Israelis quickly toned down, and finally stopped such comments when they saw they were not going to be given credence.

.28 Capt Charles B. Johnson intvw, dtd 16mar83, p. 21, hereafter Johnson intvw.

.29 Ibid., p. 23.
.30 Ibid., p. 25.
.33 Johnson intvw, p. 28.
.34 Ibid., p. 30.
.35 Ibid., pp. 34-36.

The high watermark of this topic was here:

 

[tomahawk6]

Infanteer what transgressions are Israel guilty of ?
Anyway the problem we see in Lebanon is a state that does not control its own territory coupled with a strong terror organization with the stated mission of destroying Israel. The Government of Lebanon and Hizbollah are operating at cross purposes. Essentially the terror group has co-opted the elected government of Lebanon.

Ahmadinejad the other day came out in favor of a ceasefire at the same time rejecting an international peacekeeping force. This comment I found to be instructive.

"Although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate cease-fire must be implemented," Ahmadinejad said, according to state-run television in a report posted on its Web site Thursday."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1154525799132

 

[Fishbone Jones]

exsemjingo,

I'm going to suggest you reel in your neck a bit. Cut the loudmouth bravado and keep your discussion intelligent and succinct. If you can't do that, take a breather. Before one is forced on you.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I am posting this in two threads: All eyes on Ignatieff and What Countries Should be Part of the Lebanon Security Force?? (pace, Mods) because, despite the fact that Bob Rae has raised the most money and that some pundits note that Martha Hall Findlay is the dark horse who might be the late vote compromise at a convention, Ignatieff is still the front runner  in the Liberal leadership race and he might be prime minister of Canada in a few years; what he thinks and suggests, therefore, should matter.

Here is what he says, as quoted in today’s Globe and Mail (reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act) (my emphasis added):

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060803.IGNATIEFF03/TPStory/

Ignatieff details ceasefire proposal

BRIAN LAGHI
OTTAWA BUREAU CHIEF

Michael Ignatieff has elaborated on his plan for creating a ceasefire in the Middle East, saying it can probably only happen if Israel continues to apply military pressure to get Hezbollah to the negotiating table.

Mr. Ignatieff wrote in an opinion piece, published earlier this week in The Globe and Mail, of his desire to see a ceasefire.

He said in the interview that a ceasefire could take effect only if Hezbollah agrees to talk, which will happen only after a sustained military action on behalf of Israel. "I'm a realist," said Mr. Ignatieff, considered the front-runner in the race to become the next Liberal leader.

"I understand that a terrorist militia -- and that's what Hezbollah is -- is not going to accept a ceasefire unless it believes it's in its advantage to do so and it will only believe it's in its advantage to do so if it's under severe military duress."

The Ignatieff position surprised at least one senior Liberal this week, who said the former Harvard academic may have realized that it's a good idea to maintain some distance from the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush.

Mr. Ignatieff already supported extending the Canadian mission in Afghanistan and backed the U.S. mission in Iraq when he was in academia.

In his submission, Mr. Ignatieff said after a ceasefire is agreed to, a country such as Canada should propose and take part in an international interdiction force that could prevent missiles and military technology from entering Lebanon, where it would be used to assault Israel. He explained that despite a porous and long border, the heavy artillery that would have to come into Lebanon would do so through the road system, where it could be stopped. Israel has also been successful in intercepting Iranian shipments on the high seas, a process that Canada has helped with in the Persian Gulf in the past.

"None of this is easy," he said.

Mr. Ignatieff said Canada can play a particularly useful role in the current conflict, because the United States is so busy in other areas.

"Canada can play a constructive and useful role, but time is running here and we've got to get moving," he said, noting that an escalation in the region that brought in other countries would be a disaster for the global economy and global security in general.

He added that he hasn't heard any concerns from the Jewish community in Canada, some of whose members are anxious about the Liberal position, which is more nuanced than that of the Conservatives, who have argued that the Israeli response in Lebanon is a measured one.

I think there are three points worthy of note:

• Ignatieff proposes that Canada should join whatever peacekeeping force is authorized;

• Ignatieff does not propose that the aim should be to disband Hezbollah – rather he suggests that it will be sufficient to ” prevent missiles and military technology from entering Lebanon, where it would be used to assault Israel”; and

• Ignatieff proposes that Canada act, in part, as a surrogate for the US.

The views of the politically active (and generous – in money, skill and time) Jewish community are reported to be of concern to the Liberal Party’s brain-trust.  Some fear that important Jewish community leaders/members will, at best sit on their hands (and wallets) in the next election or, worse (for the Liberals) actively support the Conservatives.  The larger and generally loyally Liberal Arab/Islamic communities are, I hear, regarded as less important because they are less politically active, less wealthy/generous and their active support is also seen as a disadvantage.

 

[a_majoor]

Anyway the problem we see in Lebanon is a state that does not control its own territory coupled with a strong terror organization with the stated mission of destroying Israel. The Government of Lebanon and Hizbollah are operating at cross purposes. Essentially the terror group has co-opted the elected government of Lebanon.

And therein lies the problem. Either the "security force" moves in and clears out Hezbollah on their own after the Israelis and Lebanese Army withdraw from southern Lebanon and the Bekka valley, or they essentially take over all of Lebanon except the parts controlled by Hezbollah and seal off those areas (Israel can seal off the southern border). I don't suppose anyone see a problem with either solution? While technically either on is "possible", I don't think we have the political will to take on this problem, nor in fact would it be a long term solution so long as Hezbollah's sponsor state (Iran) remains active and unconstrained.

While taking out Hezbollah and to a lesser extent Hamas would offer a short term solution, in essence it is like arresting Mafia "soldiers" or Hells Angels "prospects" without  going after the Godfather or "Patched" members. Israel is doing this because this is the immediate threat, and because their own resources are probably insufficient to accomplish more.

As a side observation, what we see as objectionable behaviour by Israel is a possible forcast of what our own societies might evolve into under a relentless threat: hard, uncompromising and uncaring of the opinions of others. Going even farther, it may be plausible to see our societies tipping into some sort of autocracy like Francoist Spain in an attempt to stem the spread of home grown terrorist attacks and mobilize the State on a total war footing to deal with the problems in South West Asia (particularly if we are trying an incrimentalist solution but discover the hydra heads are growing exponentially faster than we are able to cut them off).

 

[tomahawk6]

Unless Hizbollah is out of business any international force could be caught between the IDF and Hizbollah in the future. Here's a likely scenario: Hizbollah obtains long range rockets and begin to rocket Israel's cities. Politically the PM can do nothing but order military operations to stop the rocket attacks. Ground and air operations with a peacekeeping force caught in the middle is a recipe for an international incident.

The solution is for NATO to train the Lebanese Army so as to be able to take control of its own territory and prevent its territory from becoming a haven for terrorism. Not easy but its the best solution.

 

[HDE]

I can't really see a scenario where Hezbollah would quietly accede to any demand to disengage from attacking Israel.  As others have pointed out that's their main claim to exist  I think their role as a sort of social service agency, hospitals, housing, etc. is a real farce; they launch attacks from the middle of the population they claim to be helping knowing full well the consequences.  Where's the humanity in that?

 

[Centurian1985]

Mark my words, Israel would have done better to have consulted it's allies before attacking, but that is really overstepping my bounds. 

As a quick aside, countries do not just 'start wars' without their allies knowing about it.  The normal action is to discretely meet with trusted individuals representating 'allied' countries to let them know what they intend to do (although they usually dont say 'how' they intend to do it).  In addition, even if they dont tell certain foreign countries of their intentions, there are observers from many nations present in Israel who can watch a tank compound as easily as teh next person and can tell when something unusual is happening, giving alert notice to their home governments.  Further, in these situations, Israel would have informed their 'allies' discretely that they intended to take action.  The difference is that the people being given 'early warning' are not the type of people who go running to the newspapers with the information in hand trying to make a big political scoop (those type of people are not 'trusted individuals').

 

[exsemjingo]

Could be, but we'll never know directly.
Indirectly, it does not look like any international force will be able to step forward any time soon.  The UN is not coming quickly, and there is not even concensus in NATO as far as support for Israel.  If the United States and Britian, maybe even with Canada, contributed, it would stretch their respective forces to the limit and alienate their European trade partners.
That's what makes this thing so frustrating.

That is, unless Israel does not really want an international force...

 

[time expired]

One thing I have noticed on this thread is the higher the rank the higher the standard of of writing
and as an ex OR I am suitably impressed ,however dumb ideas are still dumb no matter what language
they are couched in.In Canadian military one can do ones time in the sandbox,or not, and come back to
Canada and ponder on the stupidity of the world in general, in other words your fallback position is pretty
secure. Not that I am anyway belittling these efforts, far from it I have nothing but admiration for
your efforts.However consider for a moment the mindset of an Isreali soldier, civilian,politician,6 million
murdered for believing in the humanity of a civilized country and now surrounded by 50 million people
who have sworn to eliminate you as people and a state and let no opputunity go by to prove they mean
it,a fallback position does not exist for them one serious loss would finish them.So what would we do if
Canada was such a position I am sure that most of who read these threads would do just what the
Isrealis are doing right now  smash  any threat as soon as it raises its ugly head and keep smashing
until the threat begins to realize there is no future in armed confrontation with Isreal ,eg Egypt and
Jordan. So Isreal is doing what she must,just as we did in WW2,and all the discusion and rationalizing
is so much B:S:Another point that everyone seems to forget is that since the the rise of radical islam
the West ,that means us, has become the target, after all Isreal is the" cancer of western democracy
in the heart of Isam",and any victory for islam is a defeat for the West, us.Simplistic but there it is.So
where do I stand on who should stand and protect Hisbolla from Isreali retribution certainly not Canada, I say give war a chance,heresy I know,and at least give the Isrealis the chance to write down Hisbolla to
the extent that the Lebonese have at least a small chance of establishing some control in the south.

 

[tomahawk6]

The usual suspects are offering troops Malaysia,Turkey,France and Italy. Maybe Ireland and New Zealand.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060812/ap_on_re_eu/mideast_fighting_un_force

 

[Centurian1985]

Never worked with Malaysians before. Are they competent?

 

[Edward Campbell]

Two weeks ago I offered some thoughts, including, maybe, a naval role for Canadfa.

It appears that support – from the US which is the only support which matters to anyone – is increasing for some sort of an international peacekeeping force to do something (control? patrol and report or monitor/report on goings on) in South Lebanon.

Noting a path where there are few angelic footprints I rush in  : as follows:

• A force which does anything less than control, on behalf of the sovereign government of Lebanon – which, in its turn, must require the force to rid South Lebanon of Hezbollah and fellow travelers, will do more harm than good.  A resurrected, rearmed and emboldened Hezbollah will require Israel to invade again – this time in considerable strength – with potentially dreadful consequences;

• Such a force should be NATO led or, maybe even better, a small coalition of countries might be assembled to ‘lead’ the operation.  Whatever the leadership, the force must be 100% credible to both sides.  It must be and must be seen to be –

...

OK, the question is: who?

...

Canada might have an important exemplary role to play as a force providing nation: to encourage the other smaller and sometimes already heavily committed nations like Australia and the Netherlands to participate.

Canada’s land forces are already over-committed so we should resist any and all efforts to require even one ‘pure green suit’ but we might provide a ship or two, some combat and recce aircraft and/or, perhaps, some SIGINT resources.

Canada might, also, provide some of the political leadership and management for the operation...

This would give our NBP folks some new work.

Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060815.wcanisra0815/BNStory/Front 

Canada asked to patrol coast of Lebanon

JEFF SALLOT

Globe and Mail Update

OTTAWA — Israel wants the Canadian navy to help patrol the Lebanese coast to stop arms shipments to Hezbollah.

Israeli Ambassador Alan Baker hopes to raise this possibility with senior Canadian officials in the next few days as UN member countries work out details of how to police the ceasefire in Southern Lebanon.

Israel understands that Ottawa may not have army troops to contribute to the UN peacekeeping mission on the ground because of the heavy Canadian military commitment in Afghanistan, Mr. Baker said in a conference call Tuesday with reporters.

He said, however, Canadian warships might be able to help patrol the Lebanese coast to make sure Hezbollah does not get new shipments of arms arriving by sea.
Minister Stephen Harper's office was initially noncommittal. Communications Director Sandra Buckler said the government will listen to any Israeli proposal, but the question has not yet come up in any formal talks.

Mr. Baker also said he hopes to arrange a visit to Ottawa by Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to thank Canada for its support.

 

[ab9321]

Great idea having Canadian warships patrol the coast of Lebanon; however, I think most shipments of missiles and such from Syria and Iran would come overland on Lebanon's eastern border.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

I can see this tying in with the now-quiet boarding party thread.  I would love to see the Navy doing weapons interdiction, and I think Canada would be well suited to it, as long as they had decent ROE, and could actually board by force if necessary.

 

[Blackadder1916]

EU To Provide 7,000 Troops To UN Force In Lebanon

European nations pledged up to 7,000 troops to form the core of a beefed-up peacekeeping mission in Lebanon capable of enforcing the fragile truce between Israel and Hezbollah, officials said.

More details at link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060825/wl_mideast_afp/mideastconflict_060825215223

Some of the possible troop contributions are as quoted from the article:

In Brussels though, Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, said the total European contribution would be "something between 5,600 and 6,900" soldiers, as well as air and naval assets.

…France, which currently commands UNIFIL, committed itself late Thursday to a total deployment of 2,000 soldiers

Italy is expected to supply up to 3,000 soldiers, which would make it the biggest contributor to the force.

Spain was said to be ready to send 1,000 to 1,200 soldiers, substantially more than the 800 initially cited in media reports.

Polish Foreign Minister Anna Fotyga said that Poland would boost the number of its troops in the UN force in Lebanon by 300 to a total of around 500.

Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt said his country would provide 300 soldiers by late September or early October, with the possibility of adding nearly 100 more later.

Finland pledged 250 soldiers.

Britain's Europe Minister Geoff Hoon said that while his country's military -- heavily deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan -- was too stretched to send ground troops, it might supply "specialised" units.

Greece is offering a frigate, helicopter and special forces while other countries, notably Portugal and Latvia, have indicated they could send soldiers, but no details were given Friday.

Germany, wary of potential confrontations with Israel because of its Nazi past, is prepared to offer naval units, not troops, as is Sweden.

Russia, which is not an EU member, said Friday it was still considering the possibility of sending troops.

Annan said Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia had offered to participate in UNIFIL -- though Israel has opposed contributions from those Muslim countries because of an absence of diplomatic relations.

 

[a_majoor]

We can already predict the result of the UN's intervention:

http://www.officiallyscrewed.com/blog/?p=435

Prediction: Israel Kills Several UN Soldiers While Targetting Syrian Weapons Shipments Into Lebanon
Filed under: Politics-International, Crystal Ball — TrustOnlyMulder @ 4:56 am

Shortly after Israel announces that it will break the ceasefire to destroy weapons shipments coming into Lebanon from Syria, the UN acts quickly to put itself between Israeli weapons and Syrian weapons (but does nothing to stop the imports themselves)

Annan said that the UN force would be able to deploy along the Lebanese-Syrian border to help prevent weapons shipments to Hezbollah, but only if the Lebanese government asked for such help.

Lebanon, to date, has neither asked for this nor ruled it out - but Syrian President Bashar Assad has strongly objected.

Why in the heck is the UN force being deployed along the Lebanese-Syrian border? Are they not supposed to be deployed between the Lebanese-Israeli border?

Oh wait a minute. If the UN is between Syria and Lebanon, then the terrorists will have plenty of blue UN vehicles to use to cruise the terrorists and their weapons around and now the headline makes sense.

 

[tomahawk6]

UNIFIL will be continuing its tradition of not living up to their mandate. The French and Italians wont be disarming hizbollah, nor will they even try to block arms from flowing back into Lebanon bound for hizbollah. Round 2 is probably less than a year away.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1154526027721

 

[aesop081]

UNIFIL will be continuing its tradition of not living up to their mandate. The French and Italians wont be disarming hizbollah, nor will they even try to block arms from flowing back into Lebanon bound for hizbollah. Round 2 is probably less than a year away.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1154526027721

I think alot of people realized ( maybe others on this board ) that this was just an operational pause in the fighting.

 

[tomahawk6]

Next time there may be 10000 UNIFIL human shields and the Lebanese Army to drive through on their way to hit Hizbollah. What a nightmare for the troops on the ground.