We (i.e., the West, Christendom) foil a terrorist plot on Thursday, and then on Friday we surrender to Hezbollah. The Shi'ite pawn of the millenialists in Tehran got what it wanted, an immediate cease-fire (or "hudna," for which there is much precedent in Islam). And, as Andy McCarthy explains, Hezbollah wins de facto recognition as a sovereign entity, by being addressed in a UN document. Here's the best line in his Corner post:
Maybe we should vacate Iraq but have the new Iraqi army and the UN guard the country while we call on al Qaeda to disarm. That's apparently a winning formula, right?Israel signing onto this is bizarre. The UN as an organization is corrupt (not that that would benefit Israel, no oil-for-food program to buy off), absolutely feckless, and anti-Israel to the core. No guarantee from it is worth the paper it's printed on. Why does anybody think that the UN would lift a finger (or more precisely, take a hangnail in the finger) for a country that it, as a corporate body, quite patently hates?
Don't the Israelis remember the last time they invaded Lebanon to remove a terrorist state-within-a-state (1982)? To be replaced with a multi-national force. How effectual did that turn out -- almost 250 dead Marines (plus another 50-odd dead French paratroopers), prompting the West to flee and provide another example to the Islamists and Muslims that the West was a paper tiger; Syria wound up becoming the dominant power in Lebanon from a decade and a half; and when Israel withdrew from its southern buffer zone in 2000, Hezbollah both filled the vacuum and intensified its attacks.¹
The UN force in Lebanon that was supposed to, among other things, guarantee the security of northern Israel after the Jewish state withdrew from most of Lebanon in 1985, was an objective enemy of Israel and no incident points that out more undeniably than the 2000 kidnapping of four Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah. It's not simply that the kidnappings happened, but that the UN had complicit in it to some degree, hampered Israel's efforts to get its soldiers while at least enabling Hezbollah.
Then there was The Videotape, which the Israelis thought (rightly or wrongly) could aid them, but that (1) UN officials, up to and including Kofi Annan, lied to Israel for months about whether the tape even existed; and (2) when the UN did turn it over, it did so only in an edited version with the Arab faces on it blurred, and still withheld other information.
Ironically, there's also quite recent precedent for feckless foreign forces under a UN flag being responsible for protecting Muslim civilians -- to the detriment of those Muslims. I'm referring to Srebenica, the worst crime committed against Muslims by Christians in my lifetime.
The reason so many of us on the right admire Israel is its splendid indifference to the United Nations (of "Zionism is racism" fame) and the so-called "court of world opinion."² It was a state that acted like a state. That had no globaloney illusions. I mean -- if (1) a president of the US from the more-conservative party is going to prattle about "Islam means peace" and "we want an effective UN" and (2) if Israel, the one nation in the world that must seriously face the prospect of being wiped out overnight, is going to accept the 582357109th UN
¹ This all began a decade before Bush even became governor of Texas, for the benefit of the born-yesterday, blame-the-neocons-for-why-they-hate-us set.
² Of course, really just meaning the court of the decadent cosmopolitan elites of the West, their deracinated Third World stooges, and the colonized masses they oversee.