Kofi's War

Israel is being set—up in the world's media to meet an impossible standard. To its critics, if Israel does not instantly destroy all of Hizbullah and its fixed installations (and that 'instant' has now already passed) and do it without taking any casualties itself or inflicting any collateral damage on the other side, then it has failed. 

By this peculiar standard, any country that has ever fought a war has 'lost' it after the first week.  But it should surprise no one that this standard is only applied to Israel and the United States. It is an absurd standard, and a defeatist one.

Having set the rules of the game so as to ensure failure, critics then commence laying blame on the country which is presumed guilty merely by being who and what it is. The victim of unprovoked attacks is thus guilty of 'disproportionate' response. Eliminating military installations hidden among civilians (such hiding being a war crime itself) becomes an attack on civilians.

Such guilt—mongering is not simply wrong, it is also camouflage, designed to divert attention away from the party which bears far greater responsibility.

There is a person responsible for the devastation both in Israel and in Lebanon.  And that person is the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan. 

This is 'Kofi's War.'  Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000 under the guarantee of a UN resolution that the border area would not be remilitarized.  The responsible agent of that guarantee was Kofi Annan.

Defenders might say that the UN did not have the military power to enforce that policy. So why did it not say so? Kofi still had the bully pulpit of the Secretary Generalship. He could have called for a larger force and the will to use it.

Do you remember the conferences called to examine the building of what we are now told are impenetrable underground bunkers?  Neither do I. 

Do you remember the speeches calling attention to the stockpiling of offensive missiles?  Neither do I. 

Do you remember the investigation of the use of civilian domiciles to house weapons launchers and thus endanger the local citizenry?  Neither do I.

This is dereliction of duty on a massive scale.  Kofi Annan should be reprimanded in a way that will get his attention.  He is not Secretary General just to line the pockets of his friends and family and to undermine free countries. His duty, rather, is to maintain the integrity of the commitments of the UN. 

Now people are having their homes destroyed, are being wounded, and are dying in both Lebanon and Israel because this man has utterly failed in his duty.  He should be retired forthwith without pension, which is, I suspect, the only condition that will get his attention.

Israel is being set—up in the world's media to meet an impossible standard. To its critics, if Israel does not instantly destroy all of Hizbullah and its fixed installations (and that 'instant' has now already passed) and do it without taking any casualties itself or inflicting any collateral damage on the other side, then it has failed. 

By this peculiar standard, any country that has ever fought a war has 'lost' it after the first week.  But it should surprise no one that this standard is only applied to Israel and the United States. It is an absurd standard, and a defeatist one.

Having set the rules of the game so as to ensure failure, critics then commence laying blame on the country which is presumed guilty merely by being who and what it is. The victim of unprovoked attacks is thus guilty of 'disproportionate' response. Eliminating military installations hidden among civilians (such hiding being a war crime itself) becomes an attack on civilians.

Such guilt—mongering is not simply wrong, it is also camouflage, designed to divert attention away from the party which bears far greater responsibility.

There is a person responsible for the devastation both in Israel and in Lebanon.  And that person is the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan. 

This is 'Kofi's War.'  Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000 under the guarantee of a UN resolution that the border area would not be remilitarized.  The responsible agent of that guarantee was Kofi Annan.

Defenders might say that the UN did not have the military power to enforce that policy. So why did it not say so? Kofi still had the bully pulpit of the Secretary Generalship. He could have called for a larger force and the will to use it.

Do you remember the conferences called to examine the building of what we are now told are impenetrable underground bunkers?  Neither do I. 

Do you remember the speeches calling attention to the stockpiling of offensive missiles?  Neither do I. 

Do you remember the investigation of the use of civilian domiciles to house weapons launchers and thus endanger the local citizenry?  Neither do I.

This is dereliction of duty on a massive scale.  Kofi Annan should be reprimanded in a way that will get his attention.  He is not Secretary General just to line the pockets of his friends and family and to undermine free countries. His duty, rather, is to maintain the integrity of the commitments of the UN. 

Now people are having their homes destroyed, are being wounded, and are dying in both Lebanon and Israel because this man has utterly failed in his duty.  He should be retired forthwith without pension, which is, I suspect, the only condition that will get his attention.