| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Belmont Club: IDF is "a knife-thrower at the carnival" in Lebanon |
| 2006-07-26 |
| Kofi Annan has accused Israel of deliberately targeting UN position in southern Lebanon. . . . In order to have some sense of how plausible this accusation is, it would be useful to examine the statements of the UNIFIL itself prior to this incident. Ever since hostilities started UNIFIL has been documenting its activity through a series of press releases. These provide a snapshot into what the UN troops were doing and how they have been faring during the period of combat. Wretchard gives a nice long item-by-item summary at the link. UNIFIL's official mandate is to a) Confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon; b) Restore international peace and security; c) Assist the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area. If each of the press releases is read in their entirety is manifestly clear that UNIFIL is performing none of these authorized missions. Instead it has become a kind of ambulance and relief service for the killed and injured on the Lebanese side of the border. The releases are peppered with accounts of UNIFIL personnel escorting what are described as civilians and villagers to places of safety. This is not really part of its mandate, which is not to say that it is immoral or wrong. Given how some UN peacekeepers have treated civillians in the recent past, UNIFIL should probably be commended for acting with basic decency. All the incidents of IDF fire reported in the press releases are clearly related to some kind of nearby combat with the Hezbollah. In one case the IDF fired on a village into which the UNIFIL had gone, but rockets had originated from the vicinity of the village prior. In another case, an Israeli aerial bombardment detonated mines all around a UNIFIL position. Those mines were presumably not planted by UNIFIL, but they were so close to it that the UN position caught fire. The UN observation post in Maroun al-Ras was hit by artillery, but we know from press reports that Maroun al-Ras was the epicenter of heavy fighting and the location of a Hezbollah bunker complex. The UN even ran a convoy from the Hezbollah "capital" of Bint Jubayl to another area. Bint Jubayl is well known to be the target of an IDF attack. Yet the UN felt that it was possible to move convoys through such areas, albeit at considerable danger. One reason that they could was that UNIFIL was evidently in contact with the IDF. In a sentence which speaks volumes we learn that "One unarmed UN military observer, a member of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL), was seriously wounded by small arms fire in the patrol base in the Marun Al Ras area yesterday afternoon. According to preliminary reports, the fire originated from the Hezbollah side during an exchange with the IDF. He was evacuated by the UN to the Israeli side, from where he was taken by an IDF ambulance helicopter to a hospital in Haifa." This strongly implies that UNFIL was able to coordinate their movements with the IDF and that the IDF was willing to risk men and aircraft to help UNFIL. Now a lot will be made of UN positions being "clearly marked". However nearly all of the fire reported on UN positions with the exception of the July 23 indicident in Kiyam, where the 4 UN observers were killed today, were from artillery, which is an area weapon. Artillery, depending on the angle and range from which it is fired, has a certain dispersion even allowing for crew perfection. (In contrast UNIFIL took small arms fire from the Hezbollah between Kunin and Bint Jubayl and small arms can only be used when visual contact is made). Imperfections in shell manufacture, operator error, barrel wear etc can cause an artillery round to fall off target. It is not called an area weapon for nothing. The one exception was a tank round that landed in a Ghanain position. But the firing was evidently not repeated which it would have had the tank gunner intended to destroy the Ghanaians. The July 23 incident in Kiyam in "seven incidents of firing close to UN positions" involving aerial bombardment strongly suggests that Hezbollah positions were fairly close to the position of Observer Group Lebanon. It should be clear by now that the IDF had certainly not been deliberately targeting UNIFIL from July 17 to 25. How likely is it that the IDF after not aiming at UNIFIL should suddenly change their policy and aim to kill the observers at Kiyam, as categorically stated by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan? One argument that will be heard is that since Israel has "precision weapons" the hit on the UN positions must have been deliberate. Yet it's far more likely that the UNIFIL position was hit by mistake. Even with "precision weapons" the IDF has lost 2 men and 5 wounded to friendly fire so far. . . . Commentary To recapitulate, the UNIFIL is running a kind of ambulance service on the Lebanese side of the border. That is not its official mission; it has failed in its official mission but its men are obviously performing with considerable perseverance and bravery. UNIFIL are able to run convoys in an area where the Hezbollah are shifting squads around while the IDF doing its best to kill the Hezbollah. Yet until July 26 the UNIFIL had not suffered any fatalities from IDF fire. Their sole serious injury to that date had actually been caused by the Hezbollah, and the injured UN trooper was evacuated by the IDF to an Israeli hospital. The IDF has for its part avoided hitting UNIFIL or their civilian convoys despite its widely publicized use of artillery and air. Far from being random, the IDF is apparently able to create safe corridors in active battle zones through which UNIFIL can pass until the recent incident in Kiyam. There are probably very few military organizations in the world which can accomplish this. Nevertheless, the danger of friendly fire naturally remains. The two IDF personnel probably killed and five wounded from friendly fire is proof of that. . . . Considering the fact that UNIFIL peacekeeping mission was a dead-letter it should naturally be asked why Kofi Annan, as their ultimate commander has seen fit to keep them in a position of danger where their only chance of safety actually depends on accurate targeting by the IDF. Their positions are manifestly so close to the Hezbollah; their convoys so at risk at being confused with mobile Hezbollah forces that only by the grace of God and the accuracy of the IDF have fatalities been avoided until now. They were willing to take the risk. Annan was willing to make the hay. You be the judge of Kofi Annan's competence both in the care of his men and with respect to the accusation he has made against the IDF. |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #13 Justrand, It doesn't surprise me you hate vaugeness. You probably hate vagueness, too. ;-) |
| Posted by: mac 2006-07-26 23:26 |
| #12 Kofi needs to be caught between a very large rock and a very hard place, physically as well as officially. What a waste of human protoplasm. The best thing that could happen is for Kofi to continue spouting off, making irrational claims against Israel and the US, and finally drive the US to reduce its funding to the UN to $.01 per year. Listen to the pigs squeal after that! Maybe Japan will join us. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-07-26 19:00 |
| #11 mac: I'd like to see Kofi and his coterie of criminals locked up in Attica state pen too, for the oil-for-food scandal among many other things. They really deserve to be shot. Mac...please try to be more specific in your posts...I hate vaugeness!! :) |
| Posted by: Justrand 2006-07-26 18:55 |
| #10 The Israelis should simply tell UNIFIL that they are in danger in S. Lebanon and they must leave immediately to avoid that danger. Any further UNIFIL presence in the war zone could, and probably will, result in UN casualties. The UN will leave if they're told; they left Sinai when the Egyptians told them to get out and they never even bothered to mention it to Israel. We need out of the UN and to have it thrown out of our country. I'd like to see Kofi and his coterie of criminals locked up in Attica state pen too, for the oil-for-food scandal among many other things. They really deserve to be shot. |
| Posted by: mac 2006-07-26 18:02 |
| #9 Per John Toranto's web site.... ..."The Sun offers some context for Annan's baseless and almost certainly false charge: Mr. Annan, who according to diplomats was accompanied by the U.N. peacekeeping chief, Undersecretary-General Jean Marie Guehenno, as he released the statement, believes he could not promote placing an international force in southern Lebanon if he does not appear to support his troops, according to a source familiar with yesterday's statement. But is he really supporting his troops? IMRA quotes Lewis MacKenzie, a retired Canadian general, who in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. today lamented "the tragic loss of a soldier yesterday who I happen to know and I think probably is from my Regiment." Gen. MacKenzie contineud: We've received e-mails from him a few days ago and he described the fact that he was taking within--in one case--three meters of his position "for tactical necessity--not being targeted." Now that's veiled speech in the military and what he was telling us was Hizbullah fighters were all over his position and the IDF were (sic) targeting them and that's a favorite trick by people who don't have representation in the UN. They use the UN as shields knowing that they can't be punished for it. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-07-26 17:33 |
| #8 Hizbollah has evidently discovered a loophole in internatonalm law (whatever that is) and the UN charter that preempts even mentioning the hostile actions of private religious militias with apopcalyptic visions of grandeur. monumental loophole. Now , we cannot possibnly match the apocalyptic viions of grandeur but surely we should be able to muster up a Knights of Columbus or Rotarian Brigade, to root out terror fiends worldwide. Maybe a Moose battalion and a division of Elks. Then we could fight the WOT without all this pesky interference Like Hizbollah does. |
| Posted by: J. D. Lux 2006-07-26 16:44 |
| #7 Nimble: I did read the whole thing, including the account of the UNIFIL guys being engaged by Hezbollah with small arms. |
| Posted by: Mike 2006-07-26 15:08 |
| #6 Kofi the clown, oil for food $$$$$...all the bunkers and Hizbollah infrastructure was build under the "watchfull eye"of the UNIFIL.... |
| Posted by: Slith Ometch7619 2006-07-26 15:05 |
| #5 Looks like Hez will have to go back to churches and schools for their human shields. Guess UN human shields don't work! |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2006-07-26 14:42 |
| #4 Mike, go to Belmont Club and read the whole thing. I don't know that I'd say they're transporting weapons, but they're clearly on Hezb'Allah's side and assisting them any way they can. Otherwise, why would they still be there? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-07-26 14:34 |
| #3 'Moose, I suspect that if UNIFIL were actively aiding Hezbollah, the IDF wouldn't be being so careful. (Mods: just noticed I categorized this one wrong -- please fix.) |
| Posted by: Mike 2006-07-26 14:31 |
| #2 UNIFIL's official mandate is to a) Confirm the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon; b) Restore international peace and security; c) Assist the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area. Well, one out three ain't bad. Hell, for the UN, it's friggin outstanding... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-07-26 14:23 |
| #1 Of course, no accusation whatsoever that UNIFIL personnel are actively helping Hezbollah by transporting weapons and combatants aboard UNIFIL vehicles, providing intelligence as to Israeli positions and intentions, or even assisting in targetting Israeli positions. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-07-26 14:19 |