LCCC ENGLISH NEWS BULLETIN
August 23/2006

Latest New from the Daily Star for August 23/06
Lebanese Army expands new presence in South
UN envoy warns of 'security vacuum for the next 2 to 3 months'
Harb demands full implementation of 1701
Cabinet divided over audacious plan to challenge blockade
Germans hunt second Lebanese in failed bombing
World must come to defense of Lebanon's message of unity
Petition seeks to exclude major EU countries from UN force in South
Hizbullah's new spokeswoman breaks the mould
War wiped out 15 years of Lebanese recovery - UNDP
Souk al-Tayeb makes its way back to Beirut
Hariri family funds reconstruction of 9 ruined bridges
Haniyya, Abbas jockey for position on formation of unity government
Don't expect a 'new Europe' to show signs of life in Lebanon -By Dominique Moisi
Latest New from miscellaneous sources for August 23/06
Israel and Hezbollah Are Losers in an Incomplete WarDar Al-Hayat
Olmert rejects Syria talks, deflects soldiers' criticism-Seattle Times
Peretz reneges on proposal for talks with Syria-Ha'aretz
Hezbollah is smuggling hundreds of rockets into south Lebanon -IsraPundit
Turkish FM heads to Syria to discuss Lebanon-Jerusalem Post
War Lingers in the South of Lebanon-New York Times
Lebanon Expands Deployment; Italy to Lead UN Force Bloomberg
Indonesia insists on sending troops to Lebanon-People's Daily Online
U.S. wants U.N. Lebanon force to deploy quickly-AP
Bush pledges $230m in Lebanon aid-BBC News
Need for international force in Lebanon 'urgent', Bush says-Globe and Mail
Lebanon War II - questions and answers-Ha'aretz
World Bank to give $52m to rebuild Lebanon-Daily Telegraph
Lebanon sees two-year reconstruction effort-ABC Online
aeli force clashes with Hezbollah in Lebanon-International Herald Tribune
Hezbollah won't be dropped from terror list, Day says-Globe Mail
Flights to and from Lebanon required to first stop in Jordan-People's Daily Online
Lebanon begins mammoth re-building task-ABC Online
Iran ready for 'serious' talks on nuclear program-AP
US presses for swift action on boosting buffer force in Lebanon AFP
Egypt steps up Suez Canal security as warships head to Lebanon AFP
Hezbollah fighter's zeal undiminished AP
Three Gaza militants killed, Israel conducts new incursions AFP
Hezbollah official discusses blockade AP

Hezbollah to stay on banned list
Government reacts to opposition MPs who say ban hurts Canada's mediator role
JEFF SALLOT -From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
OTTAWA — The Conservative government says it will keep Hezbollah on the list of banned terrorist organizations even though some opposition MPs suggest this makes it difficult for Canada to play a role as mediator in the Middle East.
"To suggest we delist a group that has as its stated goal the genocide of the Jewish people and the annihilation of Israel would be a 180-degree turn for Canada and it hurts Canada's credibility," Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said yesterday.
Such a move would be "appeasement in the face of one of the most murderous groups in the world," Mr. Day said in an interview.
He was reacting on behalf of the government to suggestions by two opposition MPs that Ottawa should not shut the door to contact with Hezbollah. The Lebanese Shia group is officially designated a terrorist organization by Canada, the United States and a number of other countries.
On a tour of war-shattered sites in southern Lebanon, Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj and Bloc Québécois MP Maria Mourani said on the weekend that Canada needs to be able to talk to all sides in the Middle East conflict, including Hezbollah. But this could be illegal under the Canadian Anti-Terrorism Act that was used to ban Hezbollah, they suggested. Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said the law needs to be amended to permit diplomatic and political contact with the group, but that Hezbollah should still be considered a terrorist organization banned from fundraising and other types of activities in Canada.
The legislation, which is being reviewed by Parliament, also makes it a crime to knowingly participate in, contribute to, or "facilitate" the activities of a listed terrorist group. Some critics say this provision is so broad it could leave people vulnerable to prosecution if they are even in contact with Hezbollah.
The government sees no need to amend the Anti-Terrorism Act's provisions banning the aiding and abetting of listed terrorist groups, Mr. Day said.
The law does not prohibit innocent communications with Hezbollah, Mr. Day said. Canadian journalists, for example, could interview Hezbollah figures.
However, having backbench opposition MPs travelling in the region and making statements "sure does muddy the waters," Mr. Day said.
The Conservative government's position is clear, he added. "We've communicated it to Hezbollah." The group must recognize Israel's right to exist and abandon its deadly attacks. Until Hezbollah does these things "there's nothing more to talk about," he said. Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, Ms. Mourani and NDP MP Peggy Nash were travelling in Lebanon and Syria on a visit organized by the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations. The Canada-Israel Committee also sponsors periodic visits to Israel by Canadian parliamentarians. Ms. Mourani said on the weekend the delegation decided not to request a meeting with Hezbollah because it is officially called a terrorist organization by the Canadian government. However, she said, isolating the Shia militia forever is not an option.
In a statement released by his office in Ottawa, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said the CanWest News service, part of a Winnipeg-based newspaper chain, had misrepresented his views about Hezbollah. He denied he wants Hezbollah taken off the terrorism black list. "On the contrary, Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, and I stated that it must remain on Canada's list because it has committed war crimes by sending rockets into civilian areas."

Israel and Hezbollah Are 'Losers' in an Incomplete War!
Raghida Dergham Al-Hayat - 22/08/06//
New York - The war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon is not over yet. This is just a temporary, not permanent, phase of ceasefire. Thus, all the talk about the victory of any party is just propaganda, and is premature. What may be said now is that there are two losers in this war, if it is in fact complete, but if it resumes it will make Lebanon the big loser, because the war will double the devastation of Lebanon and its people. The road to ceasefire and permanent solutions are clear to the direct belligerents and the sponsoring parties, the foremost of which are the US, Iran and Syria. However, there is also a burden on the Lebanese government, as well as the international community, because there is no room at this juncture to escape or disregard commitments. The implementation of Resolution 1701 is the key to victory for all players if it is implemented with courage and transparency so as to make use of the available opportunities in this Resolution. The alternative, however, is an Israeli war on Lebanon - not only on Hezbollah, as the Israelis threaten. This will result in the victory of Iran, Israel and Syria over the dead bodies of the Lebanese.
There is no victor in this war so far, because victory is supposed to defeat another party to the degree of subjugation. Neither Israel nor Hezbollah has subjugated each other. Hostilities have ceased because both needed salvation. This means that both of them are losers in an incomplete war.
Israel is a big loser, because this war exposed it and depicted it as a weak country begging the international community to rescue it from the pawns of an organization. Most important, Israel did not dare go to war with Iran, which provided Hezbollah with missiles and funds, or with Syria, which facilitated Hezbollah's access to the missiles and weapons. Israel lost because this war exposed its cowardice and fear of opening war fronts with the countries sponsoring Hezbollah's war, even though it challenges them explicitly.
Some consider the description of the situation as 'raring to go', referring to potential surprises, different from what happened in the first round of the war, if resumed. These people believe that the deduction that Syria would be exempt from accountability and confrontation is completely erroneous, as there are influential bodies in the US which are trying to push Israel into resolving the issue militarily with Syria, as it is the weakest link politically and militarily.
The lessons of this war are many. Israel should give up policies that are abysmal and devastating for it and the region. Its threats to wage war on Lebanon - rather than what it called the war on Hezbollah in Lebanon - prove that it flexes its muscles at the weak when it is unable to confront the strong or afraid to open several fronts. Intransigence of the Israeli government with regard to the Shebaa Farms has blinded it. It is now completely rejecting the proposals of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in the Lebanese Seven-point Plan, which was met with unanimity. This plan provides for Israel's withdrawal from the Shebaa Farms to put them under the auspices of the UN, pending demarcating the borders between Syria and Lebanon and determining whether they are Lebanese or Syrian.
Israel refuses on the grounds that the waiver in Shebaa is a reward for Hezbollah and sends a wrong message to Iran and Syria. This proposal is extremely unwise and myopic, and requires challenging the US administration and the UN.
The refusal to respond to Siniora's plan actually means that Israel wants to strengthen the position of Hezbollah, which justifies resistance since Israel still occupies the Shebaa Farms. As for its argument that the question of the Shebaa Farms is a Lebanese-Syrian issue that can be settled by demarcating borders between the two countries, Israel intentionally gives Syria a 'veto' right and authority to manipulate Lebanon, as it can continue to reject the demarcation of borders in order to keep the Shebaa Farms as a 'pretext' for the continuation of resistance.
Even if this war ended in clarifying Lebanon's ownership of Shebaa Farms and an Israeli withdrawal from the area, this will not be a victory for Hezbollah, as it is also a loser in this war. This is because the Shebaa Farms is just a pretext fabricated by Syria, which refused to hand over documents and maps to prove Lebanon's ownership. Damascus may discover, after Israel withdrawals, that the maps and documents prove that the Farms are in fact Syrian. Then, Hezbollah would discover that it launched a war that destroyed the infrastructure of Lebanon, displaced over one million and killed more than 1000 people (half of them children), for the liberation of the Syrian Sheba. Even if the Farms are Lebanese, the price was very exorbitant.
Hezbollah is also a loser, because this war has shown its willingness to sacrifice Lebanon and its people for bankrupt Arab-Islamic readiness for resistance. There is no such readiness. Had there really been an urgent Arab desire for resistance, volunteers would have been rallied on the Syrian-Israeli border and they would have called on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to open the Syrian-Israeli front for resistance, which he likes to place above the State, but only when it applies to Lebanon. If the resistance is not in need of 'permission from the State', according to al-Assad, then there is no need to ask his permission in his country. So peoples can head for Syria and cross its borders, because they do not need to ask 'permission' from al-Assad and his government. Here we will see the view of the Syrian President in the role of the Arab 'resistance' in his country without the permission of the Syrian State or government.
President Bashar al-Assad is confident that the Arab peoples cannot be included in the resistance ranks. He also knows well that his military establishment is weak and completely incapable of going to war and resisting. As for the 'victories' that the Syrian President alleges Hezbollah has achieved, they expose Syria's incompetence, no more.
The exaggerations made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad, and the leader of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah were mixed with flavors of exploitation and threat, not to Israel, but rather to Lebanon. Al-Assad attacked the figures of the March 14 Forces, which is considered another violation of Resolution 1559, which asked him to desist from interfering in Lebanese affairs. Moreover, his threats to witnesses interrogated in the investigations into Rafiq al-Hariri's assassination would definitely result in accountability.
The two regimes in Iran and Syria may be in the forefront of those who seek to spoil Resolution 1701, since the cessation of hostilities in Lebanon does not satisfy them, and because they consider that a permanent ceasefire in the region would spoil their project in the region. The other reason for their opposition to the Resolution is the fact that it calls on them in particular to comply with it.
Paragraph 15 of Resolution 1701 is similar to Chapter 7 of the UN Charter as per which the Security Council 'decides' that all States should take measures to prevent "the sale or supply to any entity or individual in Lebanon of arms and related materiel of all types", as well as "any technical training or assistance", except for what is authorized by the government of Lebanon or by the UNIFIL.
Also, paragraph 14 "calls upon the government of Lebanon to secure its borders and other entry points to prevent the entry in Lebanon without its consent of arms or related materiel". Paragraph 11 "assists the government of Lebanon, at its request, to implement Paragraph 14".
It delights some to interpret the phrase 'at its request' as if the whole matter is left to the Lebanese government without accountability or control of the international community. Of course, this is not true. The phrase is meant to respect the sovereignty of the Lebanese government as a means of supporting this sovereignty, but it does not absolutely mean that the Lebanese government is free to determine whether to implement the Resolution or not, or that it will not be brought to account. This is the Security Council's decision. When talking about the military embargo, it uses the term 'decides', which is generally used under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. The same is applied to the 'disarmament' of Hezbollah. Resolution 1701 does not leave the matter to Siniora's government or to himself, but it simply gives him the opportunity to guarantee Hezbollah's co-operation to disarm, upon a pre-consent from Hezbollah and before it backtracks on supporting the government's plan.
Currently, Siniora's government gives a time off to redress the issue of Hezbollah's arms with political means, realizing the results of confronting it by force, and admitting that neither the Lebanese army nor the international force could disarm Hezbollah by the force of arms. This, however, does not mean that there is international readiness to accept the notion of Hezbollah's withholding of its arms. The fact is that Israel is using the period of time available as an opportunity for a political treatment of Hezbollah's arms issue as a means to re-equip itself militarily to wage a war that it will not lose. Israeli officials say in closed-door forums that the response to the failure of the Lebanese government and the international community to disarm Hezbollah will be on Lebanon, the sense that it will be a war against Lebanon and not a mere war on Hezbollah.
This Israeli government will not take revenge on Iran or Syria because of their roles in enabling Hezbollah militarily, but rather it wants to rely on the international community and international forces to secure the Lebanese border with the Lebanese army to prevent the flow of weapons and materiel to Hezbollah. It believes that the isolation of Syria by the international community is an effective tool. It also thinks that Syria can be deprived of the reward by containing it diplomatically and involving it in the circle of negotiations and talks. As for Iran, it is outside the circle of retaliation and confrontation of the Ehud Olmert-led Israeli government.
This does not mean that there is a cause for satisfaction in Damascus and Tehran, particularly as there are signs indicating that Olmert's government would be overthrown to be succeeded by a violent figure like Benjamin Netanyahu to lead the country during the next stage. If the Olmert's government is weeping, lamenting and avoiding firmness and decisiveness, Netanyahu's government would opt for war.
Now, the Israeli government is putting all its eggs in one basket of the implementation of Resolution 1701, as if it suddenly realized the importance of the international community. In fact, it has concluded that dismantling Hezbollah is a task that it could not carry out through the war it waged on Hezbollah in Lebanon, and that no choice other than a conventional war between the two countries - Lebanon and Israel - in case Hezbollah refuses to disarm.
There is a significant common denominator between Hezbollah and Israel. Both use the Lebanese government to justify their options and stances. Hezbollah holds the government responsible for its insistence on disarmament using direct threat. Israel also holds it responsible for the consequences of its inability to reach an understanding with Hezbollah to disarm.
Both sacrifice Lebanon and its people, and make it a ransom and price for their strategic ambitions and their failure to achieve a definite victory in their wretched war. Both are intending to overthrow Fouad Siniora's government, each in its own way, purpose and well studied calculations or miscalculations. The interests of Iran and Syria require the achievement of the goal of overthrowing Siniora and his government. The responsibility of George W. Bush and UN Secretary General Kofi Annan requires forestalling the common goal between Damascus and Tehran and between Israel and Hezbollah.
This requires enabling Siniora's government with more than passing resolutions, dispatching international forces, raising funds, and commitments of rebuilding Lebanon, despite the importance of these stances and measures. The matter requires that the US administration inform Israel that its arrogant and dictating acts do not suit it, as it is the country that failed to make war or peace: it has not won the war with Hezbollah and, at the same time, it fears a weak country like Syria. Accordingly, Washington has a rare opportunity to dictate Israel for the sake of US national, as well as Israeli, interests in the end.
Resolution 1701 has many life jackets for many that are drowning, including Israel and Hezbollah. It also authorizes UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to work with the parties toward permanent solutions. The Israeli intransigence in refusing to deal with the Shebaa Farms issue requires that Washington take a firm position and stop Israel from considering its occupation as a right. The cost of withdrawal from the Shebaa Farms is less than the cost of insisting on remaining in it strategically, practically, regionally and internationally.
The Shebaa Farms have become a banner raised by Hezbollah to move Arab and Islamic emotions to back the Resistance and to belittle Israel and its military prestige in the face of the Resistance. Israel's retention of the Shebaa Farms will make Hassan Nasrallah a great protagonist in the minds of the Arab and Islamic masses. This is because the liberation of Shebaa will turn into a cry of anger and hatred and a means of mobilization against the US and Israel: a determination to conquer and force them to retreat. It should not take much consideration to lead the US administration into putting pressure on the Israeli government to realize the urgent need for new policies regarding the Shebaa Farms and Palestine, especially the Palestinian Authority.
Otherwise, disaster will befall Lebanon. Disaster in Palestine will remain in the foreground. Syria may not survive the disaster. Hezbollah will certainly be a devastating part of the disaster that will befall Lebanon. Iran may be the only 'victor' in the end. Hezbollah may receive a 'thank you' note in Persian for destroying Lebanon.

Hezbollah won't be dropped from terror list, Day says
SCOTT DEVEAU
Globe and Mail Update
Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day rejected the notion that dropping Hezbollah from the terror list would aid in negotiating peace in the Middle East.
“I can't think of anything more damaging for the hope of peace than to encourage the very group, Hezbollah, that is intent on the genocide of the Jewish people and the annihilation of Israel,” Mr. Day said Monday.
Mr. Day was reacting to the reports Monday that a bipartisan committee currently on fact-finding mission in Lebanon suggested that dropping Hezbollah from Canada's list of terrorist organizations would help in negotiating peace.
“To preserve Canada's credibility, there is no way we will delist Hezbollah and I hope these MPs deny these remarks outright or claim they were taken out of context,” Mr. Day said.
Latest Comments
Start a conversation on this story
The bipartisan committee includes members of the three opposition parties, but no Tory delegates, after Conservative MP Dean del Mastro backed out at the last moment. Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj denied reports that he called for Hezbollah to be dropped from the terror list, but said the mission to Lebanon would have been aided if the delegates were able to have met with Hezbollah officials.
“I maintain my position that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization,” Mr. Wrzesnewskyj said, in a telephone interview from Damascus, Syria, where he and the other delegates will fly out from later. “I believe that having a list like that is a useful tool. What I have a problem with is the legislation around that list which says you cannot sit down and negotiate.”Hezbollah was added to Canada's terror list in 2002 by the then Liberal government, which noted at the time that Hezbollah had participated in car bombings, hijackings and kidnappings in Israel and the West. Under the criminal code, the Government of Canada will not negotiate with a known terrorist organization. “Well, that's exactly what we want Hezbollah to do. We do not want to paint them into a corner because then the only option is violence and the type of outbreak of hostilities that we just recently saw the horrible consequences of,” he said.
NDP MP Peggy Nash, who is also travelling with the fact-finding mission in Lebanon, was contacted Monday en route to Syria. She said she and the other delegates had met with the Lebanese Prime Minister, members of the government and opposition parties, but no elected Hezbollah officials.
“Let me make it as clear as I can,” Ms. Nash said. “We spoke to leaders of the [Lebanon's] oppositions parties who said they felt it was important that Hezbollah be drawn into the democratic process and they supported continuing that process. I think that's important. I'm not here to say whether Hezbollah should or shouldn't be a terrorist organization; our government has made that decision. It's not the point of the mission.”

City man was guard in Nazi death camp
Judge rules that 87-year-old Josef Furman was member of a notorious SS Death's Head unit
By Gordon Kent
The Edmonton Journal, Saturday, August 19, 2006
Montreal Gazette, Sunday, August 20, 2006
EDMONTON - An elderly Edmonton man who claims he was a German farm labourer during the Second World War was actually a concentration camp guard, a judge ruled Friday.
Federal Court Justice Judith Snider concluded 87-year-old Josef Furman is the same man as SS guardsman Josef Furmantschuk, a Soviet prisoner of war who worked at the concentration camp in Flossenburg, Germany, for at least six months in 1943-44.
Integrated into the SS Death's Head guard units, he was also deployed to help clear the Jewish ghettos in Warsaw and Bialystok, the judge decided.
She said the Ukrainian-born Furman likely fabricated a story for Canadian immigration officials that he performed forced farm labour as a German prisoner in 1942-45 and obtained citizenship in 1957 by false representation or fraud.
Furman's lawyer denounced Snider's findings, saying she based her verdict on photocopies of Russian documents and other unreliable evidence.
"It's disgusting, it really is," said Eric Hafemann of Waterloo, Ont. "But this has happened before in other cases and she just followed the line."
Two historians testified, but there were no witnesses to identify Furmantschuk as Furman. He suffers from Alzheimer's disease and is unable to take part.
Another man represented by Hafemann, Jura Skomatchuk of St. Catharines, Ont., had a hearing at the same time as Furman over accusations he also hid his work with the German SS when he moved to Canada.
Snider found the 85-year-old retired mining worker had been a guard at German concentration camps and at a Nazi labour camp in his birth country of Poland.
While David Matas, legal counsel for B'nai Brith Canada, welcomed the decisions, he called on the federal government to move faster to strip these people of their citizenship and deport them.
Four people in similar cases have been waiting as much as seven years for this next step, and another eight have died during the proceedings against them, he said from Winnipeg."To get a judgment that they lied on entry, and then do nothing about it, it's pointless," he said.
"It's maybe a lack of political priorities. It's maybe that (each one) has his member of Parliament, and there are some people who will just lobby on behalf of them."Immigration Minister Monte Solberg must now decide whether to recommend that cabinet revoke the citizenship of both men.
A spokeswoman for Solberg couldn't be reached for comment. Hafemann said further action would be "purely political."
Furman lives in a long-term care facility, while Skomatchuk can't walk and is nearly deaf, he said.
"Any minister who has any backbone in terms of fairness would look at this and say, 'Wait a minute, (these guys) got railroaded.' "
He expects that, more than 60 years since the end of the Second World War, they will be among the last Canadians to face such a hearing.
Marco Levytsky, a member of the National Justice Committee of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, described the verdicts as "a travesty of justice."
Although federal policy only allows the government to try to revoke citizenship in such cases for people who were complicit in war crimes, there's no evidence like that against either man, he said. But Matas said the country has attracted a "rogue's gallery" from numerous wars since the Second World War, and should be able to send them home. "Canada has been a haven for mass murderers for decades because of our failure to do anything about Nazi war criminals ... We have to cease being a magnet for mass murderers around the world, and this is an effective way of doing it," he said. "If people know that once they get here, they're home-free, they will keep on coming."David Matas is a Winnipeg lawyer and senior counsel to B'nai Brith Canada. He is the author of Bloody Words: Hate and Free Speech. 

Hezbollah official discusses blockade
By ZEINA KARAM, Associated Press Writer
BEIRUT, Lebanon - A Hezbollah Cabinet minister on Tuesday said the government may try to break the Israeli naval and air blockade of Lebanon by calling on ships and aircraft to travel to Lebanese ports without prior Israeli approval. In Jerusalem, Israel's Defense Ministry suspended a review of the military's performance during the war against Hezbollah until the government decides whether to order a broader inquiry, officials said. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is under growing public pressure to approve an independent investigation with the power to dismiss top officials. Some reserve soldiers and bereaved parents already have demanded that Olmert and other wartime leaders step down. Meanwhile, the cease-fire that ended the war has proven to be as fragile as its detractors forecast, with European nations balking at sending large numbers of peacekeepers, and Israel objecting to the inclusion of troops from nations that don't recognize it. EU officials in Brussels were to meet Wednesday to discuss troop contributions. The top United Nations envoy to the Middle East, Terje Roed-Larsen, said Tuesday there are "huge vulnerabilities in Lebanon" for the next two to three months.
Roed-Larsen also told CNN "we have hopes in the short foreseeable future that we will have the significant number of troops on top of 2,000 which already are there." But "violations of the truce, also very effectively, undermines the motivation of troop contributors to come forward with the necessary troops on the ground," he said. Italy, which had signaled willingness to take on a major role in the peacekeeping mission, threatened Tuesday to withhold troops if Israel doesn't respect the cease-fire. Israel has clashed with Hezbollah several times since the truce was declared, claiming it was acting in self-defense. Israeli aircraft also have flown over Lebanon. A French newspaper reported that U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon likely will have the right to open fire to defend themselves and to protect civilians, but will be barred from actively searching for Hezbollah weapons.
Le Monde said it had obtained a copy of a 21-page document laying out the provisional rules of engagement for the force, newly strengthened under a U.N. Security Council resolution. The document, not yet approved, was stamped "U.N. Restricted," the newspaper said. The Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to calls seeking confirmation. Three predominantly Muslim nations — Indonesia, Malaysia and Bangladesh — have volunteered to send peacekeepers, and on Tuesday, Indonesia insisted on its right to participate in the mission, despite Israel's objections. The U.N. cease-fire resolution does not explicitly give Israel authority to block countries from joining the peacekeeping mission, but it does say the force should coordinate with the governments of Lebanon and Israel.
The Lebanese government has condemned the Israeli blockade, saying it violates the U.N. cease-fire resolution, and the Lebanese foreign minister Tuesday called on the international community to force Israel to end it. The Cabinet met Monday and called the siege one of Israel's "terrorist practices."
"Entry to Lebanon by sea and from air is a matter of sovereignty," Labor Minister Tarrad Hamadeh said on Hezbollah television. Hamadeh, one of two Hezbollah Cabinet ministers, said the Lebanese "must have be free to enter their country at will. We cannot accept the siege and blackmail."
Israel imposed a sea, land and air blockade of Lebanon shortly after its offensive against Hezbollah began on July 12. Israeli warplanes have attacked seaports and intercepted ships during the war, allowing the arrival of only those that apply for and are granted permission. Jets also have struck major highways and Lebanon's land routes to Syria, as well as runways at Beirut's international airport. Since the cease-fire took hold Aug. 14, the only land routes in and out of the country — to Syria — have reopened after temporary repairs. Commercial flights to Beirut have been allowed only to and from Amman, Jordan, an Arab state with a peace treaty with Israel.  The Israelis have said they would continue to enforce the blockade as a way of preventing Hezbollah from rearming.
Lebanon's government has promised to take measures to improve security screening at Beirut's airport and has deployed troops on the border with Syria. Hamadeh said that when Lebanon completes those measures, the Cabinet could decide "on its own to open its areas and rid itself of the siege."
Meanwhile, Palestinian parliament speaker Abdel Aziz Duaik was led in shackles into an Israeli military court Tuesday and charged with membership in an outlawed organization — becoming the most senior of three dozen top Hamas officials rounded up by Israel to be indicted so far.
Duaik said he does not recognize the court's authority, adding: "I am an elected official." Israel has arrested 30 Hamas lawmakers and five Cabinet ministers, including Deputy Prime Minister Nasser Shaer, in recent weeks. In Jerusalem, Olmert's efforts to deflect responsibility for Israel's much-maligned handling of the war haven't dispelled mounting calls for the establishment of an independent inquiry with the power to dismiss government officials. A senior Labor Party legislator and member of the ruling coalition said such an investigation was inevitable. "I think that in this war, there were many blunders, from the decision-making process at the highest levels of government, to the fighting itself, and all these things need to be investigated," lawmaker Danny Yatom said. The war, launched hours after Hezbollah guerrillas killed three Israeli soldiers and captured two in a cross-border raid, initially enjoyed broad public support, but lost favor after Olmert accepted a U.N.-brokered truce without crushing Hezbollah or winning the captives' release.
The deaths of 34 soldiers in battles just before the truce took hold only deepened the outrage, as have reports that the military was so ill-prepared that it didn't have enough food, water or bullets for its fighters. Olmert, in office just two months when the war broke out, has pinned some of the blame on his predecessors, saying they had ignored the Lebanese guerrilla group's arms buildup. On Monday, he said he wouldn't be party to "self-flagellation" and that Israel doesn't have the luxury to conduct such a drawn-out investigation. Instead, he's asked Israel's attorney general to draw up a list of alternative reviews that could be conducted. That list was to be ready within a day or two, the Justice Ministry said. One such alternative would be the much-criticized review that Defense Minister Amir Peretz ordered shortly after last week's cease-fire took hold. Security officials said that review, which was not to include Peretz's own performance, was suspended after just a day's work until Olmert and his Cabinet decide which way to go. Growing public calls for an independent investigation might force Olmert's hand. A majority of parliament's powerful Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee supports such an inquiry because of the many failings during the war, said Yatom, a member of the moderate Labor Party, which is part of the ruling coalition.
Fighters themselves also have demanded a reckoning. Some reservists were camped outside parliament Tuesday, calling for the government to quit.
"I left my wife and my 10-year-old son and risked my life to get the kidnapped soldiers back, to push back Hezbollah and to stop Katyushas (rockets)," said one of the protesters, 32-year-old reserve infantry soldier Reuven Sharon. "Nothing of that happened. Now I want the government to take responsibility for it. They need to say, 'We're sorry, we didn't succeed, we're going home.'"

Playing favourites
National Post -Mon 21 Aug 2006
Page: A11
Section: Issues & Ideas
Byline: Lorne Gunter
So Kofi Annan, the United Nations Secretary-General, is accusing Israel of breaking the Mideast ceasefire by sending commandos deep into eastern Lebanon.
In a statement over the weekend, Mr. Annan declared himself "deeply concerned" about the "violation" of the truce. He also accused the Israeli air force of committing several "air violations" of the accord.
"All such violations of Security Council resolution 1701 endanger the fragile calm that was reached," Mr. Annan scolded.
Granted. But apparently not all violations of 1701 provoke the Secretary-General's equal condemnation.
Mr. Annan is playing favourites. His anti-Israel bias is showing -- again.
There is no denying the raid by Israeli special forces breached last week's Security Council peace motion. But the commandos were inserted because, since the cessation of hostilities, Iran and Syria have reopened their supply routes through the Bekaa Valley to Hezbollah.
Admittedly, Resolution 1701 calls for Israel to stop overflying Lebanese airspace and sending ground troops on the kind of lightening raids carried out over the weekend. But it also calls for the disarmament of Hezbollah, not its rearmament.
Israel sent highly trained soldiers into the region to stop Tehran and Damascus from rearming terrorists. Iran and Syria have been shipping Katushyas, AK-47s, mortars, anti-tank guns and RPGs to southern Lebanon for use against the civilians of northern Israel.
Yet the Lebanese army will not disarm the terrorists and the UN itself has no troops in position to do so.
The UN hasn't even enough armed forces in the area to patrol Lebanon's borders and prevent the topping up of Hezbollah's arsenal. What's more, it is fair to doubt whether the muddled, bureaucratic, politically correct international body would permit its troops to undertake the dangerous and dirty work of taking away Hezbollah's existing firepower, even if, at some future date, the UN manages to get enough peacekeepers in place.
So what would Mr. Annan have Israel do, sit idly by while a vicious enemy replenishes the venom in its fangs and recoils for another strike?
Apparently. While the Secretary-General was quick to rebuke Israel for its raid, he was deafeningly silent about Iran and Syria running roughshod over 1701. Yet their violations provoked Israel's. Israel did not attack eastern Lebanon for the practice. Israel would not have felt the need to raid had Iran and Syria not broken the ceasefire first. By sending arms convoys into the region and reopening the depots from which they supply Hezbollah with the weapons it uses to attack Israeli women, children, farmers, shoppers and hospitals, Iran and Syria shattered the ceasefire.
Blame them.
And blame the UN.
If the UN were doing its job enforcing 1701, Israel would not have to violate 1701.
Put another way, Mr. Annan is really criticizing Israel for taking the actions his organization should be taking, but for which it lacks the troops or the nerve, or both. But, let's say for a moment that Mr. Annan's criticisms of Israel are justified. Where are his corresponding condemnations of Lebanon for not authorizing its army to take away Hezbollah's weapons? Where are his stinging rebukes of Iran and Syria for continuing their deadly proxy war with Israel through Hezbollah? Where are his complaints about Hezbollah for rushing back into south Lebanon?
Hezbollah's ability to run a state-within-a-state south of the Litani River, funded and armed by Iran and Syria and maintained by Lebanese acquiescence and fecklessness, is the reason this whole mess began in the first place. They are the reason it simmers still.
Surely, if Mr. Annan were impartial and truly interested in peace, he would be just as outraged, just as vocal about violations by all sides that "endanger the fragile calm that was reached." Instead, as he has done so often in this war, Mr. Annan is showing himself interested only in Israel's actions and oblivious to those of its enemies.
Throughout this conflict, Mr. Annan has carefully avoided all criticism of Hezbollah and its enablers and sponsors, while frequently chastising Israel. It is likely his naive hope that by so doing he might be seen as an honest broker between Israel and its foes.
Rather, he is merely encouraging terrorists and the governments that back them to press on. For they can see that there are no consequences for them, not even a stinging rebuke.
___________________
Lorne Gunter
Columnist/Editorial Writer,
National Post
Columnist, Edmonton Journal
Tele: (780) 916-0719
E-mail: lgunter@shaw.ca
Fax: (780) 481-4735
Address: 132 Quesnell Cres NW
Edmonton AB T5R 5P2