U.N. draft rules of engagement detailed

AP via Yahoo ^ | 8/22/2006 | EDITH M. LEDERER

[markomalley]

Proposed rules of engagement for an expanded U.N. force in southern Lebanon would allow troops to open fire in self-defense, protect civilians and back up the Lebanese army in preventing foreign forces or arms from crossing the border, according to a U.N. document obtained Tuesday.

The 20-page draft was circulated to potential troop-contributing countries last week by the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which is trying to get an additional 3,500 troops on the ground by the end of next week to strengthen the 2,000 overstretched U.N. peacekeepers already there.

The rules of engagement for the expanded force — which is authorized to grow to 15,000 — have held back some potential troop contributors because of concerns that their soldiers would be required to disarm Hezbollah, which has controlled southern Lebanon.

Some countries have also been concerned that the rules would be overly restrictive, all but preventing commanders from making quick decisions — including using force if needed.

While remaining "predominantly defensive in nature," the draft rules allow for the use of "deadly force" and offensive action, if necessary, to ensure implementation of the Aug. 11 U.N. resolution that led to the fragile cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah fighters after a brutal 34-day war.

Although there is no authorization in the Security Council mandate or the rules of engagement to disarm Hezbollah, the rules are sufficiently robust to put the U.N. potentially in conflict with armed groups violating the cease-fire or the arms embargo — including Hezbollah. The rules would also give the U.N. commander on the ground wide-ranging authority to react.

[markomalley]

Although there is no authorization in the Security Council mandate or the rules of engagement to disarm Hezbollah...

So can we read this to say that the UN troops will be allied with the Hezzies?

[bmwcyle]

Were is the money for the payoffs?

[Izzy Dunne]

So how long is the engagement and will it be a white wedding?

[Ingtar]

The only foreign forces they will try to stop at the border are Israel's as they counterstrike.

[rbg81]

That is my take. They are not there to disarm Hezbollah--only to engage Israel. What a shock.

[Orange1998]

Good point. They will be shooting at IDF instead of terrorist. This plan is unworkable.

[tessalu]

The world does not trust the UN, and rightfully so.

[Snickersnee]

UN RoE in three words: "don't do it!"

[Mariner]

To suggest that a 15,000 man UN force, comprised of 5-8 nations, would even THINK about interfering with the IDF is crazy. They don't want to die.

If the IDF decides it wants to act, it will notify the UN and they will keep their heads down. They are not and will never be a threat to Israel.

The problem is, they don't seem to be a threat to Hizbollah either...

[HeartlandOfAmerica]

Proposed rules of engagement for an expanded U.N. force in southern Lebanon would allow troops to open fire in self-defense, protect civilians and back up the Lebanese army in preventing foreign forces or arms from crossing the border, according to a U.N. document obtained Tuesday.

They'll never get the europussies to contribute troops like this.

Thought enforcement of 1559 was part of 1701? Disarmament of Hez.

Oh well. Negotation = empty words.

[omega4412]

Selective vision. IDF forces are visible to UN observers and Hezbollah forces are not.

[Mo1]

While remaining "predominantly defensive in nature," the draft rules allow for the use of "deadly force" and offensive action, if necessary, to ensure implementation of the Aug. 11 U.N. resolution that led to the fragile cessation of hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah fighters after a brutal 34-day war.

Does that mean they will fire at the Hezzies if it came to that??

I highly doubt it

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

Although there is no authorization in the Security Council mandate or the rules of engagement to disarm Hezbollah, the rules are sufficiently robust to put the U.N. potentially in conflict with armed groups violating the cease-fire or the arms embargo — including Hezbollah.

Well, since the UN has always proven impartial and effective in the past in quashing evil aggressors, let's go ahead and trust them with this too. After all, outsourcing our military is the cool thing for former superpowers to do, knowwhatImean?


/ dripping sarcasm

[wolfcreek]

the draft rules allow for the use of "deadly force" and offensive action, if necessary,


but, only if you can see the whites of their Zionist eyes!