Maryland Conservatarian

At U.N., France Presses Pullback Of Israeli Troops…after which you probably expect to read: Of course, Israel immediately complied because everyone respects the French in these matters. Instead:

“France on Wednesday introduced elements of a draft resolution urging Israel to begin withdrawing thousands of troops from southern Lebanon "at the earliest" possible date, as the United States warned that the next 24 hours are crucial because of Israel's threat to launch a ground invasion of Lebanon.”

To anyone paying attention, this comes as no surprise. France is showing once again that they are out of their league when they try to be a player on the world stage. Clearly, Hezbollah has to be secured before Israel can begin to think about scaling back. France seems to understand that Hezbollah isn’t going to realistically budge which means Lebanon won’t either (Prime Minister Siniora’s ridiculous rant from yesterday (End This Tragedy Now)) pretty much tells you he’s a bit player in all this). So that leaves Israel as the only possibility for a rational discussion. The U.S. is wisely not pressuring Israel to forego what’s best for Israel, much to France’s chagrin:

“In Paris, President Jacques Chirac suggested that France would pursue its own diplomatic initiative to end the conflict if the United States refused to budge.”

Also in today’s Post, Richard Holbrooke, a Democratic favorite in foreign matters, weighs in predictably:

“On the diplomatic front, the United States cannot abandon the field to other nations (not even France!) or the United Nations. Every secretary of state from Henry Kissinger to Warren Christopher and Madeleine Albright negotiated with Syria, including those Republican icons George Shultz and James Baker. Why won't this administration follow suit, in full consultation with Israel at every step? This would clearly be in Israel's interest. Instead, administration officials refuse direct talks and say publicly, "Syria knows what it must do" -- a statement that denies the very point of diplomacy.”

To paraphrase an old saying: when you’re a diplomat, every problem seems to cry out for diplomacy. But we can’t negotiate beyond what’s right. He can mock it as simplistic but the Administration is correct: "Syria knows what it must do". To begin diplomatic talks without Syria first behaving responsibly is simply a waste of time.

Israel has been fairly consistent in what they minimally expect before they can agree to a ceasefire: Return the two soldiers and disarm Hezbollah. It is insulting to ask Israel to accept anything less. On the other side, Hezbollah, as a terrorist organization, should have no standing to demand anything and Lebanon shouldn’t be able to piggyback on Hezbollah’s demands all the while disclaiming responsibility for their actions.

The trouble with France’s and much of the world’s Realpolitik approach to this mess is that it becomes self-fulfilling; treating both sides as legitimate claimants to concessions. No. Syria is part of the problem and should not be rewarded for that. Lebanon has to act as a nation-state before we can treat her like one. A good start would be for her to take care of Hezbollah. She doesn’t have to ask for permission first. Asking Israel to compromise because Hezbollah’s won't is an appeasement of the worst kind and this Administration should continue to resist such calls.