France has now gotten the chance to put up or shut up...Remember Napoleon!!

Where Rome leads
An embarrassed France has been forced to follow in Lebanon




Pique, shame and ridicule often play important roles in shaping foreign policy, even in countries that aspire to principle and responsibility. President Chirac’s announcement that France would, after all, send a further 1,600 troops to Lebanon to join the United Nations force was prompted officially by assurances of a clearer mandate and more robust rules of engagement. In fact, his offer came in reply to the widespread ridicule, within France and abroad, of his Government’s earlier proposal to send a mere 200 troops as part of the 15,000-strong international force that France, together with the United States, en- visaged in its UN ceasefire resolution.
It was not only domestic criticism that prompted a rethink, however. Italy’s offer of 3,000 troops and its suggestion that it should lead the peacekeeping force embarrassed France and underlined the American accusation that the Europeans have neither the stomach nor the means to back their lofty moral positions with anything that demands commitment and cost. Indeed, Romano Prodi, the Italian Prime Minister, was quick to understand that the longer the bickering continued, the more desperate the situation in Lebanon became and precarious the ceasefire. He also saw that, in the face of French funk, Italy had a chance to show that, despite allied misgivings over his centre-left coalition and his Government’s withdrawal from Iraq, Italy remained a staunch Atlanticist and reliable Nato ally.



His example has been wholly benign. M Chirac’s attempt to rescue French credibility — as well as assert French leadership of the UN force — came just in time for yesterday’s meeting of European Union foreign ministers. Kofi Annan was able to use the French and Italian commitments as inducements to smaller EU members. Belgium swiftly announced that it, too, would send troops. Spain is considering deployment, and Greece, Finland, Latvia, Sweden and Poland may follow suit. Germany, wary of any potential confrontation with Israel, is ready to deploy naval forces, and even Moscow said that it might send troops. In the interest of balance and local perception, the force should include Muslim troops. Israel would be well advised to accept offers from Indo-nesia and Malaysia, even if they have no diplomatic relations.

What exactly the troops are to do in Lebanon remains unclear. Despite M Chirac’s assertion, there is still no proper mandate, even if the rules of engagement are somewhat more robust. Israel insists that the force must disarm Hezbollah, and may make this a condition for the lifting of the air and sea blockade of Lebanon, which it says is essential to prevent arms resupplying to Hezbollah. There is, however, little realistic likelihood of any public surrender of weapons and even less of a UN pursuit of Hezbollah to disarm the fighters by force. The mandate, like so much in the Middle East, may have to be improvised on the hoof, the result of local deals and compromises. At least, however, the basis of a force is now assured and an initial fiasco avoided. Italy has made this possible.




[UN]
[Lebanon]
[Israel]
[France]
[Nato]
[Middle East]