The front page of today's New York Times has a story by Steven Erlanger, headlined "Israel, Seeking Rocket Buffer, Sets Expansion."   Four weeks into this punitive expedition, announced with fanfare as an effort to destroy Hezbollah, we hear of a new escalation with the limited objective of pushing rocket launchers a few miles to the north. The lead paragraphs say it all:

JERUSALEM, Aug. 9 — Israel decided Wednesday to move thousands more troops into Lebanon in a major expansion of its ground operation aimed at pushing Hezbollah and its rocket launchers farther away from Israeli cities.

The decision, made at a six-hour security cabinet meeting, approved a plan drawn up by the military and Defense Minister Amir Peretz to move farther and faster into Lebanon.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Mr. Peretz will decide when the new operation begins, and they are expected to wait a bit so a diplomatic solution, currently being negotiated at the United Nations, can be found.

But they are not expected to wait very long, said a senior cabinet minister who was in the meeting. “The army is in full motion,” he said.

He said the decision on the new offensive was intended in part to press diplomats to move faster to establish a robust international force to monitor the border and help the Lebanese government exercise full control over the country.

If Erlanger is right--and there is no good reason to disbelieve him--this latest Israeli démarche merely threatens to widen the conflict, hoping to spur France and the United States to create some mythical "robust international force" that will let Israel off the hook.  The State Department and White House spokesman Tony Snow chime in with the usual expressions of good intentions:

The United States urged Israel "to take the utmost care in avoiding civilian casualties," the State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said.

[snip]

The White House spokesman, Tony Snow, said Wednesday: "Our primary goal is to have an end to violence, but an end that will also ensure that there are not conditions for future violence...That would mean creating a credible force that would allow the government of Lebanon to seize effective control and authority over Southern Lebanon...

He went on to say, "We want an end to violence and we do not want escalations."  Asked whether that was a message to Israel, he said, "It's a message to all parties."

"A message to all parties" is a model of even-handedness. "Listen up, Nasrullah, if you don't play nice we'll get mad at you."  Has the United States promoted this gangster to be a partner for peace, on the Arafat model?

It remains to be seen whether the United States plans to put some muscle behind Tony Snow's "credible force." Is this merely a ploy to buy time for Israel to get cracking?  So far, the only nation that seems willing to participate is France.  We have a precedent for what we might expect of them.  President Mitterrand dispatched a solid contingent of the French Army to Rwanda in June of 1994, ostensibly to pacify the country and to create a zone of security.  Operation Turquoise was in fact highly effective.  It created a huge salient in southern Rwanda, barring entry by the Tutsi forces from neighboring Uganda. Inside the zone, Radio Mille Collines, the principal instigator of the massacre, operated freely, continuing to incite the machete-wielding frenzy of the Hutus. The French provided a safe haven for the killers, many of whom they rearmed, exfiltrated to Zaire and put in charge of refugee camps.  The high-level people responsible for creating the massacre, most notably Madame Agathe Habyarimana, widow of the Rwandan president whose assassination triggered the genocide, were given VIP treatment. They flew to Paris aboard French military transports, and settled in the chic 16th Arrondissement as guests of the Republic.

Is the present French government capable of such perfidy?  Well, yes, when it comes to cocking a snook at Uncle Sam.  The elites, not the people, have never forgiven us for liberating them in1944. No good deed goes unpunished.

One more question, and then I throw up my hands.  Where are Golda Meir, General Dayan, and Colonel Ariel Sharon now that we need them?

Contributed by John Werntz on August 12, 2006 at 01:29 PM in Best of Old War Dogs, Current Affairs, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, John "72nd TCS" Werntz | Permalink

Comments

Posted by: Bill Faith

Excellent, John, and very timely. Looks like I do a double-"Feature" this afternoon.

Posted by: Bill Faith | Aug 10, 2006 9:18:56 AM

Posted by: Second Cousin Once Removed

You are correct, John. We can always count on our good friends, the French elites, to help us out. And thank goodness that such an 'even-handed approach' with radicals has always produced good results...

Posted by: Second Cousin Once Removed | Aug 10, 2006 10:53:40 AM

Posted by: Rurik

Excellent post. Full of completely justified cynicism.
IMHO, pushing the Hezbollocks out of rocket range is a futile idea. The buffer zone will become the substitute target, and then Israel will need to fight again to gain a buffer for the buffer. The only workable buffer needed will be about three feet deep on top of the last Hezbollock.

Posted by: Rurik | Aug 10, 2006 7:07:13 PM