Friday, August 4. 2006
include_once ("../JavaScripts/google_iris-blog_top.inc"); ?>
By Gal Beckerman And Herb Keinon
Efforts are under way at the United Nations to set up a mechanism that would facilitate "direct or indirect" Israeli-Lebanese discussions, senior Israeli diplomatic officials said Thursday.
According to the officials, under this proposal "everything would be discussed: a cease-fire, the Shaba Farms issue, the prisoner exchange, and deployment of the multinational force."
Informal talks between the United States, France and Britain over the past few days have led to a compromise position bridging the divide over timing and sequence that split the American and French proposals. Although one substantial obstacle remains, officials believe a vote on the first of two resolutions will most probably occur early next week.
The French, and most of the rest of the world, have demanded an immediate cease-fire before any talk of a longer-term solution....
The American and Israeli position, on the other hand, has been that in order to attain what President George W. Bush is calling a "sustainable" cease-fire, the issue of a multinational force must be resolved before the fighting ends.
The solution to these divergent positions has come in the form of two resolutions. The first, to be voted on in the coming days, will establish a "cessation of hostilities" and articulate a political framework for the future.
Israeli officials said that this document would likely be similar to a statement issued by the G-8 soon after the crisis began last month, and include a call to release the captive Israeli soldiers, for a cessation of hostilities, and for beefing up the Lebanese army.
The US is also interested in inserting a clause in this resolution calling for an economic boycott of any country that supplies weaponry to Hizbullah or any Lebanese militia.
The second resolution, which would follow after an as yet determined amount of time, would set the composition and mandate of a multinational force and the contours of a new buffer zone in southern Lebanon. It would also assert the authority of the Lebanese government and propose help to the Lebanese Army to gain control of its borders.
Israel's position is that the IDF first needs to clear the buffer zone, one currently being carved out by the IDF, in order for the multinational force to move in. Israel wants this force to be "an international army," not an observer force like UNIFIL, but rather one strong enough that it can impose its will.
One major issue still unresolved, however, is who will watch over southern Lebanon in the interim, between the cessation of hostilities and the arrival of a multinational force. The fear is that if Israel cedes control of the territory in this period, Hizbullah will simply reconstitute its forces, rearm, and return the area to where it was before the hostilities began.
The IDF could maintain its position until the arrival of an international force, a position clearly favored by the Israeli government and opposed by Lebanon, among other countries. The other option is for the current UNIFIL mission to be beefed up. Its troops could then be integrated into whatever larger, more robust force arrives. Israel, considering UNIFIL to be weak, opposes this solution.
Click here to subscribe to our email list and receive a daily summary of our top blog stories.
|