Playing favourites

By Lorne Gunter
August 21, 2006
The National Post
Original Source: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=b41ee28f-bc28-4869-8c62-dd35ec5682f3&k=60983

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.