Europeans Delay Decision on Role Inside Lebanon

[cal04]

The shaky, United Nations-brokered cease-fire in Lebanon suffered another blow on Sunday when the European countries that had been called upon to provide the backbone of a peacekeeping force delayed a decision on committing troops until the mission is more clearly defined.

Their reservations postponed any action on the force at least until Wednesday, when the European Union will take up the issue.

Haunted by their experiences in Bosnia in the 1990’s, when their forces were unable to stop widespread ethnic killing, European governments are insisting upon clarifying the chain of command and rules of engagement before plunging into the even greater complexities of the Middle East.

“In the past, when peacekeeping missions were not properly defined, we’ve seen major failures,’’ a spokeswoman for the French Foreign Ministry, Agnès Romatet-Espagne, said Sunday. “There are the bad memories of Bosnia. This time we want the answers beforehand, so we don’t come to the problems when they have happened.’’

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/21/world/middleeast/21mideast.html?hp&ex=1156132800&en=843074dbe15a25ba&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[tocqueville]

1. it's mission impossible

and it suits Israel and the US perfectly. Because they will never accept a new chapter 7 resolution which would give the right to shoot at ANYBODY that breaks the cease fire or the agreements of the previous resolution.

[Igel]

2. Do you think anyone would accept a Chapter 7

resolution that required 15k soldiers, with the requirement that they shoot at *everybody* that breaks the provisions of the resolution? And, if they need help or more than 2 soldiers are killed by hostile fire, the force would *automatically* be cranked up to 60k with armored vehicles and a rather large air brigade to engage the source of the hostile fire.

I would. But it ain't gonna happen.

[tocqueville]

4. I know two who would block it ...

UNLESS, UNLESS there is a "Mitterand/Major solution" when France and the UK said "fuck the UN" and went in and without mandate attacked the Serbs in Bosnia. Which of course made the freepers go ballistic at that time, but changed the course of the war. And Big Dog came in with the cavalry mostly in form of Tomahawks.

Aah, those were the days...

The French have obviously that solution in reserve, because the 1700 French elite forces backed up by tanks and attack helicopters are on the BPC Mistral outside the coast. Besides there are two French Frigates with 32 cruise missiles there too. Chirac has said that those would intervene UNDER FRENCH COMMAND if the UNIFIL is under real threat.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

3. It would have to say they can only shoot Lebanese people

And it makes it a touchy subject because they want it to look like it is even handed but at the same time they have to make sure that none of them get the idea that they can shoot at Israelis while they are conducting military operations.

Because their mission is to help Israel with the occupation and protect the Israeli soldiers by killing anybody that fights back. But if they put it like that, there are some of the European countries who will say it is not an even handed resolution and the leaders might want money or something to sign it and that will take more time and I don't think Israel wants to wait around to get troops to help them while we do negotiations with the European leaders.

[tocqueville]

5. the question was asked this very evening on French TV

"if we already had the mandate we ask for... had we shot down the Israeli helicopters doing the recent raid ?" "Kofi considers it as a break of cease-fire... "

answer from the sitting military expert : "hrrrrmmm"