Are more blue helmets the answer?

Posted on by

Things are deteriorating pretty rapidly in Lebanon with the latest horrible incident of civilian casualties:

The UN secretary general has called on Security Council members to take urgent action after 54 Lebanese civilians were killed in an Israeli attack on Sunday.

Kofi Annan asked council members to put aside differences and call for an immediate ceasefire, opposed by the US.

More than 30 children died in the Qana attack – the deadliest Israeli raid since hostilities began on 12 July when two Israeli soldiers were seized.

Israel is suspending air strikes for 48 hours, according to a US official. [Link]

Whatever tactical advantage Israel is hoping to gain with these airstrikes, it is losing strategic and diplomatic points by the day. The best way forward being discussed seems to be to a plan to deploy U.N. soldiers who are well-armed and provided with rules of engagement that would allow them to fight Hizbollah in order to control Lebanon’s southern border. Israel has said they would be okay with this as long as the U.N. soldiers would actively enforce instead of simply monitor. It is well known and openly derided that the U.N. has a very poor track record when it comes to enforcement duties. Nobody seems to want to put their soldiers into this hornet’s nest although they all agree that it’s a good idea in theory. Where do the U.N.’s Blue Helmets typically come from? It may surprise some of you:

The UN Charter stipulates that to assist in maintaining peace and security around the world, all member states of the UN should make available to the Security Council necessary armed forces and facilities. Since 1948, close to 130 nations have contributed military and civilian police personnel to peace operations. While detailed records of all personnel who have served in peacekeeping missions since 1948 are not available, it is estimated that up to one million soldiers, police officers and civilians have served under the UN flag in the last 56 years. As of November 2005, 107 countries were contributing a total of more than 70,000 uniformed personnel–the highest number since 1995.

Despite the large number of contributors, the greatest burden continues to be borne by a core group of developing countries. The 10 main troop-contributing countries to UN peacekeeping operations as of February 2006 were Bangladesh (10,172), Pakistan (9,630), India (8,996), Jordan, Nepal, Ethiopia, Uruguay, Ghana, Nigeria and South Africa.

About 4.5% of the troops and civilian police deployed in UN peacekeeping missions come from the European Union and less than one per cent from the United States (USA). [Link]

Slate’s Explainer series lays out the required qualifications if you want to be an American Peacekeeper:

[Peacekeepers are] soldiers, police officers, and military observers from the United Nations’ member countries. Nations are expected to volunteer the members of their armed forces when asked–in general, the developing world does most of the volunteering. As of last month, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India each had almost 10,000 troops in blue helmets, while American soldiers accounted for just 12…

Most of the Americans who take part in peacekeeping serve as civilian police officers rather than soldiers. (As of last month, 314 Americans were employed in such positions.) The State Department recruits volunteers for “CivPol” jobs through several private firms–DynCorp International, Civilian Police International, and PAE-HSC. These companies invite cops and recent ex-cops to apply online for yearlong stints overseas.

Aspiring peacekeepers must be U.S. citizens with five years of experience in professional law enforcement. (DynCorp won’t take anyone under the age of 26.) Eligible candidates must pass a physical agility test that includes the “low hurdle,” the “12-foot tunnel run,” the “dummy drag,” and the “ladder climb with shotgun.”

Those who make it through peacekeeper training get sent to the United Nations for international deployment. [Link]

<

p>Right now the U.N. soldiers are sitting ducks. A report earlier this week claimed that one of the four U.N. soldiers that died last week had previously reported that Hizbollah was launching rockets from almost on top of U.N. positions in order to trick the IDF into bombing these positions and killing U.N. soldiers. The Indian peacekeepers continue to be in harms way as well:

Two Indian UN peacekeepers were wounded yesterday when an Israeli airstrike hit near their border post in southern Lebanon, a spokesman said.

The two soldiers from the Indian battalion of the United Nations interim force in Lebanon were “moderately wounded as a result of the impact of an aerial bomb that hit in the vicinity” of their position in the border village of Adaisseh, UNIFIL Spokesman Milos Strugar said. [Link]

83 thoughts on “Are more blue helmets the answer?”

  1. The level of generalization here is astounding. What Arabs are you talking about? Presumably not the same ones that led the governments of Jordan and Egypt to make peace with Israel. Apparently you agree with Golda Meir that Palestinians don’t exist as a separate group? Or are they not Arabs? And the government of Syria represents the will of its people? Also, Hizbollah is funded by Iran, and they’re not Arab at all, but they are Muslim. Though the Palestinians are Arab and a mix of many religions (as are the Lebanese).

    If Syria doesn’t represent the will of its people, then how does Egypt or Jordan? The leaders of those countries took incredible risk in the descisions they’ve made. A state apparatus protects them from the decisions.

    Egyptians, Jordanians, Syrians, Saudis, Palestinians, Shia Lebanese etc. isn’t the core point. Fine, I should have stated every group individually rather than lumping them as Arabs. I’m well aware they’re not all the same and Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. It doesn’t matter on the issue of Israel, though. It is a fact that a significant population of these folks have been coopted into the vision of removing Israel. I didn’t mention Palestinians didn’t have legitmate grief, dude. They do. I was just asserting the fact that passive and active events through DECADES and current times shows a steady overt and covert infrastructure that supports fighting Israel.

    Nice way to divert from the core of my post by throwing out diversionary assertions, none of which I concluded to. The point I was getting across was that those attacking Israel have NEVER been playing for peace. Egypt and Jordan took deals we (the US) gave them. Authoritarian figures of those countries decided not to fight Israel. But the support against Israel goes far deeper than the immediate neighbors.

    Those attacking the US and others (Global Salafists) aren’t really looking to destroy us as much as assert their dominance over us via visions of their Caliphate.

    Again, Israel is NOT fighting an insurgency. They’ve always been at war. WE (USA) are fighting that Global Insurgency which can easily coopt overlaping populations of those looking to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, too.

    Tell me, how many countries recongize Israel?

    Guess what? Even India didn’t reconginze Israel till 1992 for fear that it would ‘incite’ India’s large muslim population. The inertia against Israel is very deep and real. Lets see who doesn’t recognize the country (one has to agree to their existence first for ANY concrete step to move forward)

  2. Well, you’re right about one thing, Farouk Engineer. Hezbollah’s grass roots work has been plenty bloody.

  3. Guess what? Even India didn’t reconginze Israel till 1992 for fear that it would ‘incite’ India’s large muslim population.

    Gujudude,

    You have written some interesting comments.

    Some trivia though General Moshe Dayan visited Nepal/ India in late 70s in a disguise, sans his eye-patch and had a fake beard. India and Israel have had long underground relations.

    Also, India has also supported Palestanian cause, and were pretty close to Yasser Arafat.

    Another trivia: Just before 1967 war, the UN peace keeping force in transJordan was headed by an Indian General.

  4. How about American lefty columnist of WaPo saying that “Israel was a mistake”

    “The greatest mistake Israel could make at the moment is to forget that Israel itself is a mistake. It is an honest mistake, a well-intentioned mistake, a mistake for which no one is culpable, but the idea of creating a nation of European Jews in an area of Arab Muslims (and some Christians) has produced a century of warfare and terrorism of the sort we are seeing now. Israel fights Hezbollah in the north and Hamas in the south, but its most formidable enemy is history itself.”

  5. My Dear Mr. Engineer:

    I would suggest you read what I posted again. I said the very opposite of this:

    And there you go again with another grand conflation. A local Lebanese entity fighting to preserve it’s villages and identity is somehow linked with this Osama bin Laden character and his rantings abouts Caliphates and Gardens of Cordoba. DO ME A FAVOUR! How did you work that out?

    The profiles of those fighting Israel is far more diverse and wide. The Salafists (note, I have said Salafists throughout my posts) are the ones with the grand visions. Again, read my verbose posts.

    With regards to reconginzing Palestinians, I find it interesting the first thing everyone jumped on was the fact that I didn’t recognize them independently. Again, I should have been more politically correct I guess in saying “The cooaltion that has been fighting Israel for several years for a myriad of reasons that ends in undermining Israel” Did you also read that I thought the settlement of Isrealis in the occupied Gaza and WestBank was a major mistake? Guess not.

    More often than not, it has become ‘cool’ to decry Israel in the coffee house circles that intellectuals like yourself bring about. Did I link Saddam to this? No. Did I say there aren’t differences between groups looking to undermine Israel in various degrees? No. But at the end of the day, the effective truth remains Israel is something many, many, passively or actively wouldn’t mind seeing ‘brought to its knees’.

    I don’t proclaim any expertise in these matters, however, I won’t hide my bias in fancy talk. By the way, the countries you listed are in the minority and don’t have a real functional representative government.

    You can go on about how Hizbollah in its current manifestation is a force protecting lebanon and those villages (whom they burrow under and use as cover). But it isn’t.

    Anyway, I’ve said all that I’ve really wanted to. My 99 cents.

  6. Maybe more Lebanese should wear military uniforms. At least this way they’ll be seen as soldiers and not guerilla scum, or as is more fashionable to say these days, terrorists. Albeit crap soldiers who fire 140 rocket launchers, as they did yesterday, and injure but six people. Unlike the better dressed Israeli army who managed to wipe out 37 children in one fell swoop. Maybe if the hizbollah wore uniforms, someone might realise that in a war, it’s quite common for both sides to kill each other…

  7. Some trivia though General Moshe Dayan visited Nepal/ India in late 70s in a disguise, sans his eye-patch and had a fake beard. India and Israel have had long underground relations.

    Kush, Then why would India reject the offer of Israeli help during Kargil war?? Well, it could be incompetence of vision-less leaders, or just another reason why India is a soft state.

  8. Kush, That RAW and Mossad link is preety cool. BTW, my presonal view is that I agree with Richard Cohen (WaPo) whose article I linked in comment #54.

  10. Then why would India reject the offer of Israeli help during Kargil war?? Well, it could be incompetence of vision-less leaders, or just another reason why India is a soft state.

    RC,

    My knowledge is only through MSM so I can only guess on this question.

    I think India always treads gingerly with Israel openly but they have been long relatons between them. In Gujarat earthquake, Israel ambulance was one of the first to reach Bhuj.

    Maybe, in Kargil openly accepting Israel’s help would have been seen as full-fledged conflict, I guess.

    Israel is the second largest arms supplier to India.

  11. Ok, I’ll say one more thing.

    Mr. Engineer, I don’t take well to patronizing tones. Had you been a bit more courteous and debunk what I said point by point, I still may not agree, but atleast I’d respect to ‘agree to disagree’.

    RC: I’ve thought about the circumstances of how Israel came about. Interesting stuff, I really don’t have a position on it yet whether it was a mistake or not to create Israel the way the UN did. The US government and Roosevelt prior to Truman had assured the Saudis they wouldn’t vote for the creation of Israel, before changing their position. Also, in its early years, the French were some of the biggest supporters of it.

    Kush: I find India’s involvement on the periphery of some of these global situations interesting. Can anyone find the link of the joint Indo-Pak operations in Africa? Weren’t some Pakistani peacekeeper ambused and called for Indian Helicopter gunship support? It seemed on that battlefield, both fought together. Can anyone validate this?

  12. Can anyone find the link of the joint Indo-Pak operations in Africa?

    Gujudude,

    Are you talking about Somalia after the Americans had left? They both were part of UN peacekeeping forces?

    Or something else.

  13. Are you talking about Somalia after the Americans had left? They both were part of UN peacekeeping forces? Or something else.

    Something else Kush. I believe it was in central Africa somewhere. Congo? Let me do some digging to find out. I remembered reading about it somewhere, though, I’m not too sure. Thats why I’m looking for information on it.

  14. Can anyone find the link of the joint Indo-Pak operations in Africa? Weren’t some Pakistani peacekeeper ambused and called for Indian Helicopter gunship support?

    here it is…

    How an Indian helicopter saved Pak peacekeepers in Congo link

  15. Gujudude,

    The US government and Roosevelt prior to Truman had assured the Saudis they wouldn’t vote for the creation of Israel, before changing their position. Also, in its early years, the French were some of the biggest supporters of it.

    I agree with some of your arguments about the global johadist movement. But I also believe that carving a country out of other people’s land for the European Jews was a mistake. The reason I say it was a mistake, is that, it was all of the European states who persecuted the jews to greater or lesser degree and when the time came to pay for their sins, the europeans paid with someone else’s money (someone else’s land). Inherently wrong.

    Dont get me wrong, I dont have a problem with Israel’s existence. I have a problem with the fact that the Europeans still wont pay for their sins. They should be leading in settling the dispute.

  16. Farouk – “Hezbollah has developed into a major political voice in Lebanon through bloody hard grass roots work.”

    Stick to cricket, dude. really. Or at least speak with some non-shia Lebanese.

    Fact remains, Hezbollah terrorists invaded Israeli territory, killed her soldiers and kidnapped two.

    When Israel asked for the return of the kidnapped soldiers, Nasrallah [read, Iran] refused. Left with no alternate, Israel retaliated.

    p.s. a Lebanese christian friend of mine hopes israel wipes out, not only the hezbollah, but also the entire shia population of lebanon. Of course, as slong as no christian life or property is harmed.

  17. Kritik: “Fact remains, Hezbollah terrorists invaded Israeli territory, killed her soldiers and kidnapped two. When Israel asked for the return of the kidnapped soldiers, Nasrallah [read, Iran] refused”

    Stupid me. There’s me thinking 37 Lebanese (read not Iranian) children (read not terrorists) died for no reason. How shocking to learn that Israeli soldiers were killed, in a war at that…

  18. Thanks Vikram, thats exactly the incident I was thinking about. I didn’t know it was in response to Bangladeshi peacekeepers being killed. Good for the UN troops who were allowed to take a proactive stance.

    RC: I see your point. There is a history of poor judgement when it comes to dividing up land during the tail of the colonial times. Examples are littered all over the place from Asia to Africa.

  19. one of the reasons for high number of south asians is the pay (in $) compared to their regular salary. compared to other developing countries, desis have the best trained armies (what with all the wars fought)…

  20. Egyptians, Jordanians, Syrians, Saudis, Palestinians, Shia Lebanese etc. isn’t the core point. Fine, I should have stated every group individually rather than lumping them as Arabs. I’m well aware they’re not all the same and Iranians are Persians, not Arabs. It doesn’t matter on the issue of Israel, though. It is a fact that a significant population of these folks have been coopted into the vision of removing Israel. I didn’t mention Palestinians didn’t have legitmate grief, dude. They do. I was just asserting the fact that passive and active events through DECADES and current times shows a steady overt and covert infrastructure that supports fighting Israel.

    GujuDude, my sole point was that you can’t just lump all the players in the middle east together who oppose israel–there are politics among them too–just like there are politics within Israel (and Brooklyn) and Zionist settlers and their supporters are not the same as peaceniks. Maybe your thesis would hold up under a more specific understanding of the politics of the region, maybe it won’t–but it’s hard to even consider when you relied on such broad generalities.

    At this point, it seems like the people of Israel adn the people of Lebanon and Gaza and the West Bank have more to gain from collaborating with each other than relying on their respective states or power centers.

  21. meanwhile, columnist richard cohen in the washington post equates the widespread upset with israel’s policies in world public opinion with mel gibson’s anti-semitism. amazing. no wonder we can’t have an intelligent conversation about the middle east in this country.

  22. Saurav, I think I’m not communicating my point clearly. That is my fault.

    Different groups have had different levels of beef with the Israelis over the years. The Saudis are wary of Iran as any other Arab state in the region. They are regional top dog. Saddam was the Arab counterbalance, though when he turned on Kuwait, well, the rest is history. I recognize the political diversity of the region. Palestinians get treated like shit by everyone, including their fellow muslims.

    Whatever the reason (settling occupied land in the West Bank/Gaza, the creation of Israel, because they are Jews, etc.), the country has constantly been assaulted from day one. Like I said, they’ve made some big strategic blunders that hasn’t helped their cause.

    Palestinian organizations, which in the past, had strong leftist/socialist backing and were not very religious are driven by different impulses today. At the end of all these diverse factors, one truth remains: Many different groups attack Israel for their own reasons, but collectively, they are a formidible force that actively/passively rely on each other conducting war. Israel has to confront every facet of this attack, whether it is threats posed by nation states (Syria, Iran or Egypt and Jordan of the past), local groups that want Israel destroyed (Hamas), or propoganda preached across the region that funnels money, arms, and emotional support to continue the fight. One simply cannot deny the confluence of these tributary forces is powerful and very dynamic.

  23. I read but didnt quite fully understand, what Richard Cohen meant with that Op-Ed comparing Mel Gibson thing to the latest conflict. Can anyone explain it to me?

  24. RC:

    I read but didnt quite fully understand, what Richard Cohen meant with that Op-Ed comparing Mel Gibson thing to the latest conflict. Can anyone explain it to me?

    Strangly, someone coming from a very different place from cohen explains it.

    via andrew sullivan:

    “If we peel back the layers of the Gibson fiasco, we see something much darker and more troubling, not about him – he’s just a fool – but about the society which needs to produce a scapegoat in him. Dangerously worded as it was, Gibson’s drunken comment was, it could reasonably be argued, a statement against the arrogance of the Israeli military: “They started all the wars in the world.” Isn’t it that which is making America call for his head? … There’s a problem here. Jews, and by extension Israelis, are un-insultable in ethnic terms, though everybody else is. I know it’s hard to tell a people who saw six million of their number murdered to turn the other cheek, but turn the other cheek they must, unless they want to present themselves as the great unimpeachable race apart.”

    Bill Maher sums it up (again, via andrew sullivan):

    As I watch so much of the world ask Israel for restraint in a way no other country would (Can you imagine what Bush would do if a terrorist organization took over Canada and was lobbing missiles into Montana, Maine and Illinois?) – and, by the way, does anyone ever ask Hezbollah for restraint. you know, like, please stop firing your rockets aimed PURPOSEFULLY at civilians? – it strikes me that the world IS Mel Gibson.

  25. Manju, Thanks for your explanation. What surprised me is that Cohen’s first Op-Ed comes out and calls Israel a “mistake” and then in the next article he says that the whole world is anti-Israel. Then he goes on and says

    The world — the United Nations — created Israel. It ought to safeguard it. It is the only way.

    Well, the UN couldnt wipe its a@@. It cant do #$%@ unless the real powers tell it to do. Isnt it obvious that if the US had put pressure on Israel they would have been ready for a cease-fire. Besides UN is full of nations who dont agree with the existence of Israel on an ideological standpoint.

    I do give him credit for trying to represent the complexity of the situation, but his approach is naive, IMO.

  26. RC:

    I think cohen’s 1st op-ed (israel is a mistake) was misunderstood as anti-israel. if you read it carefully he’s supporing israel while acknowledging that a religious democracy is inherently contradictory and that palestinians have been displaced and finally that it is simply impractical to give a religious minority its own state in a region not known for tolerance on a whole plethora of issues.

    You’re right, he’s acknowledging the complexity of the issue. after all, if israel is a mistake (b/c it’s a religious state) then so is saudi arabia, iran, jordan…

  27. From SM’s strictly desi-only events page ( non-desi-related submissions will be deleted ):

    First it was this:

    Sat Jul. 29, New York Alwan for the Arts Benefit Concert for Lebanon & Palestine tamasha posted on July 25, 2006, 10:31 pm EDT A concert of Lebanese resistance music featuring songs by Fairouz & Marcel Khalifeh. Donations: $20 / $30 / $40. All proceeds will go to humanitarian relief organizations.

    When: Sat, July 29, 2006, 8:00pm Where: Alwan For the Arts, 16 Beaver St, 4th Floor, New York

    then came this :

    I Come in Peace – Dean Obeidallah tamasha posted on August 7, 2006, 5:57 pm EDT 8/11,12,16,19,23.What is it like to be an Arab-American w/a Muslim last name after 9/11? Why did 9/11 transform Dean from a typical white guy to Super Arab? Is the Bush administration listening to his phone calls?Find out the answers to these questions and more in Dean’s comedic one man show “I Come in Peace.”

    When: Mon, August 7, 2006, 9:00pm Where: Flea Theater, 41 White Street, between Broadway and Church Street, New York

    When I had asked about the former no one from SM had explained. I am sure none will now. There are so many great events from which desis might benefit, that don’t get listed here just because they are not desi. But even mediocre Arab acts make it here. Why is that so? So why do I post this here and not take it to the SM interns? That’s because I never hear back from them but the peopleshould know. Sorry for hijacking your thread for a little bit, but couldn’t help it. Tamasha is making a big tamasha of your desi-only events page ( obviously with your tacit approval ).

  28. Missed this one from the news page:

    All-Female Italian Beach: Muslim Women Only tamasha posted on August 7, 2006, 11:09 am EDT The city council of Riccione, a popular resort on Italy’s Adriatic coast about 90 miles east of Florence, has said it is prepared to authorize requests to set up partitions on parts of the shoreline to satisfy requests from the town’s growing numbers of Arab and Muslim tourists.

    If you read the article it’s only about Arab Muslim customers. I don’t think South Asian Muslims are into gender segregated beaches. Not yet.

  30. Some facts to share :

    1. He gets around, from town to town.

    Here’s the Qana “rescue worker” in the green helmet, photographed extensively in Qana by Adnan Hajj for Reuters, now in Tyre, doing what he does best: making sure wire service photographers get close-up pictures of dead bodies.

    2. BEIRUT, Lebanon (CNN) — Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said Monday that one person was killed in an Israeli airstrike on the southern village of Houla, not 40 as he had earlier reported.

    “The massacre in Houla, it turned out that there was one person killed,” Reuters quoted Siniora as saying. “They thought that the whole building smashed on the heads of about 40 people … thank God they have been saved.”

    Siniora had earlier told Arab foreign ministers in Beirut that the attack “was a horrific massacre … in which more than 40 martyrs were victims of deliberate bombing.”

    3.

    LONDON, Aug 7 (Reuters) – Reuters withdrew all 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer ( Adnan Hajj ) from its database on Monday after an urgent review of his work showed he had altered two images from the conflict between Israel and the armed group Hizbollah.

  32. I wish you could tell those who deliberately kill children and then celebrate, from those who go after the child killers and in the process mistakenly kill children but apologize.