The IDF spent a few hours the other day attacking a UN observation post in Southern Lebanon, killing four UN "peacekeepers", despite a dozen radio'd pleas to stop. The IDF reportedly continued the attack during the effort to retrieve the UN killed and wounded after the post had been hit.
This is known in the modern world as "sending a message". And today's announcement by the UN that they are removing their personnel from the area could well be another "mission accomplished" for Israel and the U.S.
Why did Israel do it?
The "Amen Corner" on the blogosphere asserts that it was because Hezbollah had been cozying up to UN positions in order to launch more rockets at Israel with presumed impunity. Quite possibly so. It sounds thoroughly plausible, even rational, in the modern day terms of making "war" in the media-amplified confluence of the military/political arena. (the "morality" of such tactics is "irrelevant" in such an age, only efficacy matters)
Yet the papers and television have reported dozens of times during the past two weeks that the Israeli's have been using the telephone, as a "humanitarian" act, to warn residents in Lebanon and Gaza that their buildings were about to be attacked, in order to give them time to evacuate, and so minimize the civilian casualties. (subsequent reports are that the tactic has also been used as a psychological weapon in which the warnings are false)
So the IDF will extend such a courtesy to residents of Gaza and Beirut, but not to the Austrian, Finnish, Canadian and Chinese personnel of a UN post with whom they were in almost constant contact?
The IDF is not that incompetent. Casualty-averse perhaps but not stupid. The Olmert government, with complete support of the U.S., was notifying the world, that they will do whatever they want, because they can, and also that there isn't a damn thing that anyone who opposes them can do about it, ... for now.
Thus witness the corollary "messages" sent by the U.S. objections to the language of a proposed UN 'condemnation' of the IDF's action, and the subsequent Israeli declaration that UN forces are not to be a part of any "robust" future 'peace-keeping' force, nor are any UN personnel welcome to join in Israel's "investigation" of the attack.
This week's "message" from Israel is the same as that of the U.S. in March of 2003's invasion of Iraq. Just as in 1938, when the world finally recognized the full intentions of another aggressor and began crash programs to re-arm, the reactions of the nations of the world (Hello SCO?) to this summer's events, will determine whether the aggressions will continue or cease. Only this time around the weapons available are mostly economic and political. Mostly!
The only other force capable of thwarting U.S. and Israeli "policy" are their population's political will. U.S. elections in 100 days and 2008, respectively, will provide the means and the opportunity to do so. (with 8Aug in Connecticut as a harbinger?)
Will the U.S. electorate exercise it's 'veto' power?
The Future depends on it.
stephenhsmith
28July2006
