The administration is striving for a resolution that would end the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, now in its fourth week, and also establish conditions for a lasting cease-fire. Many other countries favor an immediate cease-fire.
I put this paragraph in just to show Barry Schweid’s work: no question of the administration’s definition of a “lasting ceasefire,” and a throwaway about what other countries want — the implication being they want an immediate, but not a lasting, ceasefire.
But I digress. It continues:
The military training would be designed to help the Lebanese armed forces “exercise control and sovereignty over all of Lebanese territory once we have an end to the fighting in such a way that is durable,” McCormack said.
So how are we to know that the White House or Pentagon has even discussed this with the Lebanese armed forces? And who exactly is going to disarm Hizbullah? A US-trained Lebanese army? Will they train them like they did many armies and security services across the region — SAVAK in Iran during the 1960s and 1970s for instance? Or just supply them with tools like tear gas (riot-control police in Egypt) and legcuffs or electric batons (Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, used for torture? Is US policy really encouraging the Lebanese army to take on Hizbullah — i.e. start another civil war? I’m not surprised we don’t see a Lebanese general confirming this.
I noted also when I first read this that it says “many” other countries support an immediate ceasefire. Should that not, in the interests of accuracy, read “most”…
I heard from a family member six years ago that the “American military” trained the Lebanese army after the civil war ended. Specifically I was told that Lebanese army units used to be segregated by religion/sect/ethnicity – so there were Melchite units, Shi’ite units, Sunni units, Maronite and Druze units. During the civil war this was a problem because units would take sides with warring factions. Supposedly the Americans helped them integrate so that they are all just Lebanese, and each unit is diverse.
This is a report from a person who lived in Lebanon for years after the civil war but I haven’t verified it elsewhere.
Why did Lebanon have to get kicked to bits to get more American training? But that’s a rhetorical question.
The US did train the Lebanese army post civil war. Lot of good it did them.
Sounds like the US is holding out military “assistance” as a condition for a ceasefire. I sincerely hope these won’t be “military advisors” brought in to keep Lebanon in line…
Where has the Lebanese army been. btw? There had been some question of whether or not they would join HA in the South to take on Israel, Siniora had made some brave noises about all of Lebanon fighting back if the Israelis dared invade, but the Lebanese govt leadership and army seem to be sitting it out and letting HA do the fighting. Has there been a tacit decision to treat southern Lebanon as a de facto separate state?