Photo: IDF
"In view of the diplomatic developments, it would be unwise to pass a resolution on the matter, since past experience has proven that Israel cannot afford restricting its freedom to act against terrorism...
"Sometimes the need to find a compromise in the UN comes at Israel's expense..."
I do not know what Sarkozy said to Olmert, other than offering a vague promise to keep working on the issue with him, but I would not hold my breath with regard to his cooperation in the matter. It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised here.
~~~~~~~~~~
The Security Council is scheduled to meet and discuss the situation in Gaza later today (well after this will have gone out). French Foreign Minister Bernard Koucher (who is no friend to Israel) will be presiding over this meeting. The goal enunciated by some parties is to promote an immediate ceasefire. But it's not going to happen so fast.
Said Zalmay Khalilzad, US Ambassador to the UN, there should not be "false expectations": "Practical arrangements have to be put in place in which everyone has confidence that it will be maintained, it will be respected, it will be observed," and these will take more than "a day or two."
In any event, Israel has no expectations with regard to what the UN might do, and intends to proceed as necessary. "We're fed up with empty gestures," Olmert has said.
~~~~~~~~~~
President George Bush has been a sterling friend during this process. He said:
"I understand Israel's desire to protect itself and that the situation now taking place, in Gaza, was caused by Hamas...I know people are saying, let's have a cease-fire. And those are noble ambitions. But any cease-fire must have the conditions in it so that Hamas does not use Gaza as a place from which to launch rockets."
~~~~~~~~~~
The US is currently working on international channels outside the UN for establishing a "meaningful" ceasefire. The goal is said to be to end rocket fire by Hamas, secure opening of crossings, and insure that no further smuggling of arms is done. In some contexts I have read that Bush wants Hamas held responsible.
Olmert has spoken about disarming Hamas, but I see no mention of this. And, while Shalit is not being mentioned here (and should be!), I have read that Israel will not agree to normalization -- which refers to crossings being opened -- until Gilad Shalit is returned.
~~~~~~~~~~
I would like to examine in some more detail the entire notion of observers or monitors at the Philadelphi Corridor to prevent smuggling of weapons. We have destroyed perhaps the better part of 100 tunnels running under that Corridor, but it is perfectly possible for many to be dug again, and for Hamas to bring in even more weaponry, if not prevented from doing so.
In general, the notion of international monitors is a joke. UNIFIL "supervised" in Lebanon while Hezbollah re-armed under the noses of these troops. Actually, the situation has been so ludicrous that UNIFIL does patrols that deliberately avoid Hezbollah strongholds. Egypt was supposed to be monitoring on its side of the Corridor, but, pleased to allow Hamas to harass Israel, has pretty much turned a blind eye to weapons smuggling.
When we pulled out of Gaza for the "disengagement" in late August 2005, we were supposed to remain at the Philadelphi Corridor (which, technically, is a sort of no-man's land between Gaza and the Sinai). But then along came Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and pressured us to leave the Corridor. We should have said no -- our security people knew it was a bad deal. This was about giving the PA more control, you see.
A deal was worked out in which the PA supervised on its side of the Rafah Crossing between Egypt and Gaza. (The Corridor is the entire length of the Gaza-Sinai border, Rafah is an actual crossing facility.) European observers were stationed there and theoretically information was supposed to be transmitted to us by computer informing us of who was crossing -- there was a desire by Israel to keep out terrorists and the suitcases full of money they sometimes carry. This, too, was a huge joke. All the Europeans did was "observe." And not only did we not reliably receive information in a timely fashion, we had no way to stop someone we objected to from getting through. Then Hamas took over, and it all fell apart.
~~~~~~~~~~
So why should we have the remotest confidence now that any international forces will be effective there? And what will Israel ultimately agree to?
The Reuters report that Olmert was demanding monitors with real enforcement responsibility was encouraging -- forces that were armed and trained and able to take out new tunnels.
Best of all would be our returning to the Corridor.
~~~~~~~~~~
Lastly here now, I want to look at Livni's comments yesterday on the arrival of the European mission. She said some very good things. For example:
"...a necessary war on terror does not end with an agreement. We don't sign agreements with terror; we fight terror."
But she also said, "The region is divided between moderates and extremists. Each person in the region must pick a side to work with. Hamas works with Iran." And she concluded that signing an agreement with a terror organization would prevent Israel from advancing the "peace deal."
The corollary: Allow us to take down Hamas properly, because you all want peace here, and then we'll be able to achieve it.
A very dangerous and erroneous conclusion. But this is the way Livni is headed. She envisions a situation in which Hamas is destroyed, and Gaza is turned over to the PA -- after which she is elected prime minister and manages to negotiate "peace."
No, the Fatah is not Hamas. But it's goals are not so different. It too wants us gone and seeks all of the land. We are not about to have "peace" with the PA. This approach is something that must be monitored, and protested, vigorously, once the war is done.
The catch here is that, Livni's goals not withstanding, there is solid reason to believe that radical forces in Gaza would never accept the PA. That is certainly the opinion of some very savvy analysts.
The question, then, is who will be in power in Gaza at the end of the day. The mistake that fueled this situation was our leaving in 2005. What is certain is that the struggle will not end on the day the fighting stops.
~~~~~~~~~~
Posts
