EU to commit biggest force in its history to keep the peace

The European Union have pledged to mount the biggest military operation in it's history by agreeing to commit 7,000 troops to Lebanon.

Its willingness to commit troops demonstrates that the EU is capable of military deployments independent of the US. It also answers criticism from Washington that Europe is happy to engage in diplomacy but unwilling to put boots on the ground. As well as the 2,000 troops promised by the French president, Jacques Chirac, on Thursday, Italy committed 3,000, Spain up to 1,200, including a mechanised battalion, Belgium 400, Poland 500 and Finland 250.

Britain, Germany, Greece and Denmark offered to contribute to the 2,000 specialist forces. Britain, which was represented at the meeting by the Europe minister, Geoff Hoon, will provide six Jaguar aircraft, two AWACS reconnaissance planes and a frigate or destroyer, and offer the use of its air and naval base on Cyprus.

This will form the backbone of the UN peacekeeping force hoping to enforce the Israeli-Hizbullah ceasefire.

The Israelis are reported to be unhappy with the fact that the European forces have no intention of disarming Hizbullah, instead they are leaving that task to the Lebanese army who we all know have made it clear that they will not be carrying out this part of resolution 1701. There are many, myself included, who feel that asking the UN to carry out a task that Israel was unable to carry out itself is unrealistic.

This will no doubt increase the pressure on Ehud Olmert, Israel's beleaguered Prime Minister, who is already facing calls from a majority of the Israeli population to resign according to a poll in Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper.

63% wanted Mr Olmert to go. The defence minister, Amir Peretz, appears even more vulnerable after 74% called for his resignation, and 54% want Lieutenant General Dan Halutz, the chief of staff, to resign as well.

The poll reflects the growing disillusionment within Israel about the 34-day conflict with Hizbullah and the fact that the country emerged without a clear victory over the Lebanese militia. The two Israeli soldiers whose capture triggered the conflict are still not free. The war claimed the lives of more than 1,100 people in Lebanon, and 157 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

These figures appear impossible to ignore and one must wonder how long Olmert can continue with this sizeable part of the population opposing him remaining in office.

"Ladies and gentleman: an upheaval," the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper wrote in a report about its poll. "Upheaval is not the word. Earthquake would be more suitable to describe the condition of the Olmert government 110 days after its term of office began."

Meanwhile, just to compound Olmert's problems, the US state department is to conduct an investigation into whether Israel used cluster bombs against the civilian population of Lebanon contravening secret agreements with the US over the use of such weapons which limit their deployment strictly to military targets.

The investigation should be able to establish Israel's guilt as a matter of course according to United Nations:

"There are about 285 locations across southern Lebanon, and our teams are finding 30 new ones every day," a UN spokeswoman said. "A lot of them are in civilian areas."

Since the 14 August ceasefire between Israel and Hizbollah, eight Lebanese - including two children - have been killed by cluster bombs, and 38 injured.

Israel, however, insists it has done nothing wrong. All the weapons used in the war were legal under international law, "and their use conforms with international standards," an army spokesman said. Israeli commanders have frequently accused Hizbollah of deliberately operating out of civilian villages.

Israel's defence seems to me an admission that they used cluster bombs in civilian areas, albeit with an attempt to move the blame on to Hizbullah for sheltering in these areas. No matter what one thinks of Hizbullah's tactics, international law does not make an exception for such a circumstance. Cluster bombs are not to be used in civilian areas. Period.

Olmert appears to be on his last legs. There is still a way for him to reinvigorate his Premiership, but that would require him realising the significance of his defeat and opening talks across the Middle East requiring Arab nations to recognise Israel in return for Israel handing back all the land seized in 1967.

However, despite being elected to remove Israel's presence in the West Bank, Olmert has now gone in the exact opposite direction declaring this evacuation dead for the time being.

If he falls, it will be deserved. He seems to lack the imagination to realise the significance of what has happened in Lebanon. The danger is that he could be replaced by Netanyahu, destroying any chance of peace in the Middle East for another decade.

Israel should have learned that it's days of ensuring it's survival through force alone are over. It is a time for negotiation and compromise and a return to international law as demanded by UN resolution 242.

It appears no-one in Israel is yet ready to accept that new reality.

Tags: UN, EU, peacekeeping, force, deployment, Israel, Lebanon, Olmert, Netanyahu, Hizbullah, Hamas