We Knew They Would Not Hold Up Their End Of The Cease-Fire
That is correct. Lebanon has refused to disarm Hezbollah, according to a news report from BBC. And based on that, it would seem Nasrallah has more control over Lebanon than what the West was keenly aware of. Let me just state, for the record, that we have believed for quite some time that it is not Siniora that is in charge, but Nasrallah.
(Hat-Tip: Captain Ed)
Crucial Lebanese cabinet talks on disarming Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon under a UN-brokered ceasefire have been put off.
A truce between Israel and Hezbollah is due to come into force at 0500 GMT.
The postponement, amid reported divisions, seriously complicates the establishment of a stable ceasefire, the BBC's Nick Childs in Beirut says. ...
[T]he issue of Hezbollah's disarmament and its military presence in southern Lebanon continues to cause major tensions within the fragile government, our correspondent reports.
He says that without a meeting and an agreed plan, it seems that the deployment of 15,000 Lebanese army troops to the south is unlikely to go ahead.
And why is it unlikely that the plan will go forward? The Times Online knows why, and unlike Reuters, they are not afraid to tell the truth:
TODAY was supposed to be the day when the muchmaligned army of Lebanon took control of its borders and policed the UN ceasefire.
Instead, its military commanders were left humiliated and its troops stranded as Hezbollah told them not to try to disarm its fighters.
The first infantry units were preparing to head south yesterday when Hezbollah demonstrated who exercised the real control by announcing that it had no intention of surrendering a single weapon. General Michel Sleiman, the commander-in-chief of the Lebanese Army, and his lieutenants had been invited to join in Cabinet meetings to finalise plans to deploy their 15,000-strong force in a buffer zone south of the Litani river. However, they ended up being lectured by Hezbollah’s two Cabinet ministers in the coalition Government on what the army could and could not do.
In Beirut, Western diplomats said that it raised serious concerns about the army’s ability and appetite to deal with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Government was left struggling to maintain a united front after unanimously backing the UN resolution on Saturday.
Sami Haddad, the Economics Minister, said: “The Government can’t force Hezbollah to abide by the ceasefire. It’s unnatural to have an armed political party that is in Cabinet and does not abide by what the Government of Lebanon wants.”
This also comes from Captain Ed and confirms the suspicions that Lebanon is literally held hostage by Hezbollah. Who do they think they are dictating to the government what they will and will not do, especially after the government of Lebanon has agreed to the cease-fire agreement? Well, to put it bluntly, they know they are Hezbollah, and their ideology of hate seems to supercede whatever the duly elected officials in the Lebanese government think.
The much vaunted and much talked about Cedar Revolution seems to have come crashing down around the Lebanese people. And while the bulk of Syria's military has withdrawn, there are still intelligence officers in Lebanon, and of course, there is Hezbollah; a de facto army under Iran and Syria's control. But, now we have this from the Jerusalem Post which states that Lebanese troops will begin moving into the region within the next seventy-two hours:
Lebanon's communications minister told French radio Monday that the Lebanese army was preparing to cross the Litani River into the troubled south within two or three days, despite uncertainty about a future UN force for the region.
"The Lebanese army is readying itself along the Litani to cross the river in 48 or 72 hours," Marwan Hamade said on Europe-1 radio.
It will then be flanked by "the first contingents of an international force," he added, likely from France, Turkey, Spain and Italy. He did not give a timeframe.
He spoke shortly after a UN-imposed cease-fire went into effect across the region, halting a month of fighting.
But implementation of the resolution was in question after the Lebanese Cabinet on Sunday indefinitely postponed a crucial meeting dealing with plans for the deployment. Lebanese media reported that the Cabinet was sharply divided over demands that Hizbullah surrender its weapons in the south.
Hamade said the Lebanese government would try Monday to find a "formula" for implementing the resolution.
Lebanon's industry minister, Pierre Jemayel, a member of a majority anti-Syrian bloc in parliament, told Al-Siyassah daily, "Hizbullah has to deliver its weapons to the Lebanese army, and its light weapons to the police."
"Its fighters are welcome to join the military force and the state will then quickly regain control of all Lebanese territories."
"I'm not telling Hizbullah to surrender its weapons to Israel, or to the international community," Jemayel told the daily. "(I am telling it) to surrender them to the Lebanese army."
Jemayel blamed the guerrilla group for starting the war with its July 12 cross-border raid "without consulting with anyone."
Jemayel also took a jab at the sway of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
"If the secretary-general of Hizbullah has become the president of Lebanon, he has to let us know," Jemayel said.
Lebanon's ambassador to the UN said that his government would not use force to ensure the dismantling of Hizbullah, sources said early Monday morning.
He claimed that Hizbullah would independently be responsible for leaving south Lebanon. "We could have completed a cease-fire by Sunday morning, but Israel insisted on destroying the essence of Lebanon," the ambassador commented while being interviewed by CNN.
Ah yes, blame it on the Jews. Blame it on Israel for the continued violence. Do not let the unfortunate fact of rockets raining down on Israel from Hezbollah launchers be let out into the public so they can see that Lebanese ambassador is lying through his teeth. And what better example to set for the world of who is really in charge in Lebanon by stating, for the record, that the government will not abide by the accords agreed to. It is right there in the above passage that the government refuses to disarm Hezbollah. The call has been issued that Hezbollah will do this on their own. Now, does anybody believe that a terrorist group would be willing to hand over their weapons?
Neither do I.
And what is this farcical nonsense about Hezbollah joining the Lebanese army? Why even offer such a thing. If the Lebanese government blames Hezbollah for starting the war in the first place, why allow the thugs to join the military? that mistake will bring about two conclusions. Either Hezbollah's admission into the army will allow them to recruit more people for their own ranks (we all know that Hezbollah itself is going nowhere), or it will give Hezbollah greater control over the Lebanese forces; the same military that was rumored to have joined Hezbollah's side in the fighting if they went into the region before the cease-fire agreement.
Furthermore, without a disarmed Hezbollah in the region, the United Nations will not send a peacekeeping force into southern Lebanon. That was made abundantly clear yesterday in the Financial Times:
Resolution 1701 does not make the disarming of Hizbollah a prerequisite for a ceasefire. In 2004’s resolution 1559, the international community had called for all militias in Lebanon to be disarmed. Peacekeepers have said they will only enter southern Lebanon if they and the Lebanese army are the only armed groups.
So if Hezbollah is still armed, then the United Nations' forces do not go in. The Lebanese army will be there, all alone, trying to mop up this mess. But how does one accomplsih such a feat when the government and the military are unwilling to forcefully disarm the people causing the problems? And if they refuse to disarm them, and Hezbollah refuses to disarm itself, then what good is the cease-fire in the first place? I must concur with Captain Ed: This cease-fire will be short-lived.
Marcie
That is correct. Lebanon has refused to disarm Hezbollah, according to a news report from BBC. And based on that, it would seem Nasrallah has more control over Lebanon than what the West was keenly aware of. Let me just state, for the record, that we have believed for quite some time that it is not Siniora that is in charge, but Nasrallah.
(Hat-Tip: Captain Ed)
Crucial Lebanese cabinet talks on disarming Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon under a UN-brokered ceasefire have been put off.
A truce between Israel and Hezbollah is due to come into force at 0500 GMT.
The postponement, amid reported divisions, seriously complicates the establishment of a stable ceasefire, the BBC's Nick Childs in Beirut says. ...
[T]he issue of Hezbollah's disarmament and its military presence in southern Lebanon continues to cause major tensions within the fragile government, our correspondent reports.
He says that without a meeting and an agreed plan, it seems that the deployment of 15,000 Lebanese army troops to the south is unlikely to go ahead.
And why is it unlikely that the plan will go forward? The Times Online knows why, and unlike Reuters, they are not afraid to tell the truth:
TODAY was supposed to be the day when the muchmaligned army of Lebanon took control of its borders and policed the UN ceasefire.
Instead, its military commanders were left humiliated and its troops stranded as Hezbollah told them not to try to disarm its fighters.
The first infantry units were preparing to head south yesterday when Hezbollah demonstrated who exercised the real control by announcing that it had no intention of surrendering a single weapon. General Michel Sleiman, the commander-in-chief of the Lebanese Army, and his lieutenants had been invited to join in Cabinet meetings to finalise plans to deploy their 15,000-strong force in a buffer zone south of the Litani river. However, they ended up being lectured by Hezbollah’s two Cabinet ministers in the coalition Government on what the army could and could not do.
In Beirut, Western diplomats said that it raised serious concerns about the army’s ability and appetite to deal with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Government was left struggling to maintain a united front after unanimously backing the UN resolution on Saturday.
Sami Haddad, the Economics Minister, said: “The Government can’t force Hezbollah to abide by the ceasefire. It’s unnatural to have an armed political party that is in Cabinet and does not abide by what the Government of Lebanon wants.”
This also comes from Captain Ed and confirms the suspicions that Lebanon is literally held hostage by Hezbollah. Who do they think they are dictating to the government what they will and will not do, especially after the government of Lebanon has agreed to the cease-fire agreement? Well, to put it bluntly, they know they are Hezbollah, and their ideology of hate seems to supercede whatever the duly elected officials in the Lebanese government think.
The much vaunted and much talked about Cedar Revolution seems to have come crashing down around the Lebanese people. And while the bulk of Syria's military has withdrawn, there are still intelligence officers in Lebanon, and of course, there is Hezbollah; a de facto army under Iran and Syria's control. But, now we have this from the Jerusalem Post which states that Lebanese troops will begin moving into the region within the next seventy-two hours:
Lebanon's communications minister told French radio Monday that the Lebanese army was preparing to cross the Litani River into the troubled south within two or three days, despite uncertainty about a future UN force for the region.
"The Lebanese army is readying itself along the Litani to cross the river in 48 or 72 hours," Marwan Hamade said on Europe-1 radio.
It will then be flanked by "the first contingents of an international force," he added, likely from France, Turkey, Spain and Italy. He did not give a timeframe.
He spoke shortly after a UN-imposed cease-fire went into effect across the region, halting a month of fighting.
But implementation of the resolution was in question after the Lebanese Cabinet on Sunday indefinitely postponed a crucial meeting dealing with plans for the deployment. Lebanese media reported that the Cabinet was sharply divided over demands that Hizbullah surrender its weapons in the south.
Hamade said the Lebanese government would try Monday to find a "formula" for implementing the resolution.
Lebanon's industry minister, Pierre Jemayel, a member of a majority anti-Syrian bloc in parliament, told Al-Siyassah daily, "Hizbullah has to deliver its weapons to the Lebanese army, and its light weapons to the police."
"Its fighters are welcome to join the military force and the state will then quickly regain control of all Lebanese territories."
"I'm not telling Hizbullah to surrender its weapons to Israel, or to the international community," Jemayel told the daily. "(I am telling it) to surrender them to the Lebanese army."
Jemayel blamed the guerrilla group for starting the war with its July 12 cross-border raid "without consulting with anyone."
Jemayel also took a jab at the sway of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
"If the secretary-general of Hizbullah has become the president of Lebanon, he has to let us know," Jemayel said.
Lebanon's ambassador to the UN said that his government would not use force to ensure the dismantling of Hizbullah, sources said early Monday morning.
He claimed that Hizbullah would independently be responsible for leaving south Lebanon. "We could have completed a cease-fire by Sunday morning, but Israel insisted on destroying the essence of Lebanon," the ambassador commented while being interviewed by CNN.
Ah yes, blame it on the Jews. Blame it on Israel for the continued violence. Do not let the unfortunate fact of rockets raining down on Israel from Hezbollah launchers be let out into the public so they can see that Lebanese ambassador is lying through his teeth. And what better example to set for the world of who is really in charge in Lebanon by stating, for the record, that the government will not abide by the accords agreed to. It is right there in the above passage that the government refuses to disarm Hezbollah. The call has been issued that Hezbollah will do this on their own. Now, does anybody believe that a terrorist group would be willing to hand over their weapons?
Neither do I.
And what is this farcical nonsense about Hezbollah joining the Lebanese army? Why even offer such a thing. If the Lebanese government blames Hezbollah for starting the war in the first place, why allow the thugs to join the military? that mistake will bring about two conclusions. Either Hezbollah's admission into the army will allow them to recruit more people for their own ranks (we all know that Hezbollah itself is going nowhere), or it will give Hezbollah greater control over the Lebanese forces; the same military that was rumored to have joined Hezbollah's side in the fighting if they went into the region before the cease-fire agreement.
Furthermore, without a disarmed Hezbollah in the region, the United Nations will not send a peacekeeping force into southern Lebanon. That was made abundantly clear yesterday in the Financial Times:
Resolution 1701 does not make the disarming of Hizbollah a prerequisite for a ceasefire. In 2004’s resolution 1559, the international community had called for all militias in Lebanon to be disarmed. Peacekeepers have said they will only enter southern Lebanon if they and the Lebanese army are the only armed groups.
So if Hezbollah is still armed, then the United Nations' forces do not go in. The Lebanese army will be there, all alone, trying to mop up this mess. But how does one accomplsih such a feat when the government and the military are unwilling to forcefully disarm the people causing the problems? And if they refuse to disarm them, and Hezbollah refuses to disarm itself, then what good is the cease-fire in the first place? I must concur with Captain Ed: This cease-fire will be short-lived.
Marcie
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 10:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home