France send 2,000 troops, but it's too late for Olmert.
President Chirac has at last agreed to send 2,000 French troops to Lebanon, paving the way for an international peacekeeping force of up to 15,000 soldiers to be placed on the Israeli-Lebanese border, although he has only agreed to do so after receiving a reassurance that his forces will not be asked to disarm Hizbullah as the Israelis have been insisting.
Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema, speaking as Italy prepare to send 3,000 soldiers to the region, said that America and Israel's aggressive stance towards the Middle East had failed and said that Europe now had to prove to Israel that only international intervention can bring security to Israel. He also insisted that the international forces were not being deployed to disarm Hizbullah by force. However, he went further by questioning America's insistence that Hizbullah are a terrorist organisation - a view that is not shared by the EU or the UN.It would be "simplistic" to describe Hezbollah solely as a terrorist organization. "Were Hezbollah merely a small terrorist group, it would not enjoy the support of so many Lebanese," he said. "Even Tzipi Livni says that if Hezbollah becomes a political organization, this will be a success, and I agree with her."
The US and Israel have found their views on Hizbullah increasingly isolated and challenged as a result of the Israeli war against Hizbullah, with Europeans far more willing to express their disagreements publicly than ever before.
Meanwhile in Israel the pressure on Olmert to resign is increasing with the bereaved families of soldiers killed in the recent dispute marching to the grave of Golda Meir calling on Olmert to resign as Meir did after the Yom Kippur war.
The march will begin at the grave of Staff Sergeant Refanael Moskal who was killed in the recent war.
Moskal's mother said "we will demand that Olmert resign within four days, and if he doesn't then we will open a strike before his office."Olmert has so far resisted all calls for a state commission of enquiry, no doubt because after such enquiries in the past Israeli Prime Ministers have had to resign.
On Thursday, dozens of reservists staged a protest in Jerusalem to demand the establishment of a state commission of inquiry into events during the war in Lebanon.
The demonstrators said that they did not want "heads to roll or to settle the score," but rather a serious and thorough examination of events. The protesters also called for a representative of the reserve soldiers to serve on the commission.
The most senior officer to join the protest was Colonel Amnon Nahmias.
In response to the rising wave of protest, Minister of Culture, Science and Sport Ophir Pines-Paz (Labor) said Thursday that he expects Olmert to hold a cabinet vote on Sunday on a proposal for a state commission of inquiry into the failures revealed by the war.
Pines-Paz said that there was no choice but to establish such a commission, which should submit its findings in a matter of months and be headed by an outstanding public figure such as Supreme Court President Aharon Barak or his recently retired deputy, Mishael Cheshin. Only a serious commission of this type could restore the public's faith in the government, Pines-Paz said.
However, one has to wonder what the Olmert government is for anymore as he has already dumped the plan to evacuate West Bank Jewish settlements, the very task that he was elected to perform.
Whilst attempting to appear decisive by launching his ill advised war in Lebanon, he now appears to be trying to govern in a vacuum, having abandoned any sense of direction that his government ever had.
This has not gone unnoticed in the Israeli press:
Olmert has no answers. The response to calls to dismiss him is the threat of Benjamin Netanyahu at the helm. But what, exactly, is the difference? Both now propose preservation of the status quo in the territories, rehabilitation of the North and grappling with Iran.What, one has to wonder, has Olmert gained by his rash decision to wage war against Lebanon for the crimes of Hizbullah? What has he gained for the hundreds of civilians he has killed and the billions of dollars worth of damage he has inflicted upon the Lebanese infrastructure?
At this point, what advantage does the head of state have over the head of the opposition? Olmert aides credit him with an advantage in demeanor; his office is better run than Netanyahu's. Even if true, this is questionably sufficient cause to leave Olmert in the government.
Doubts regarding his ability to implement the convergence plan arose before the war. But removing this issue from the agenda negates the reason for having the Kadima party and its government. Olmert merely offers the public and the international community efforts to survive ("rehabilitation of the North") and a political holding action ("Bashar Assad is contemptible"). If the government is too weak to embark on new political initiatives to replace unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank, it should end its term quickly.
Hizbullah has never been more popular and, although the UN peacekeeping force is now arriving, it is making clear that it has no intention of disarming Hizbullah as Olmert as always insisted it will.
And now, as a result of the war, he has abandoned the very reason for which his government was voted into office. It is fair to say that he has had a very bad war.
The UN Cavalry may be arriving, but they are arriving far too late to save the skin of Ehud Olmert.
Click title for source.
No comments:
Post a Comment