Much controversy is being generated as to Minister Tzipi Livni´s
ability to lead Israel. She advocates honesty and accountability, but
when it came to handling United Nations Security Council Resolution
1701 those principles may have left the room.
She insisted that the outcome of the resolution was in Israel´s
favor, but anyone who reads the fine print can clearly see its
Is it ignorance, or blatant lies? You decide.
1. Livni: "Security Council Resolution 1701 is an Israeli
Facts: Adopting UN Resolution 1701 under Chapter 7 of the Charter of
the United Nations, would require the aggressor to comply with its
provisions. This was a clear goal of Israel that did not materialize.
Under international law, UN Resolution 1701 which was adapted under
Chapter 6, is at best a declarative statement that lacks the legal
authority or enforcement power whatsoever. All the rest is wishful
thinking, and the results on the ground will attest to it.
Hesham Youssef, chief of the cabinet of the Arab League Secretary-
General speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly simply stated: "The resolution is
issued under Chapter 6 rather than Chapter 7 of the UN Charter ...
[This] is a diplomatic achievement" of the Arab League. In other
words, the Arab League welcomes the weakness of the resolution which
lacks enforcement power to "ensure implementation" of Resolution
Unable to have the resolution adopted under Chapter 7, Livni invents
a new Chapter when she claims: "We got 7 minus" a statement which is
injudicious and fundamentally wrong. There is no room in
international law for a loose interpretation of the Charter, and "7
minus" is not a recognized provision in international law.
Livni and Olmerts claim that the cease-fire that brought the
fighting to a halt, is somehow indicative of a success, either
militarily or diplomatically, is erroneous. The Government of Israel
failed to protect its citizens - unable to stop the daily barrage of
Katyushas landing on northern and central Israel. With nearly a
million Israelis displaced, Israel´s urgent need for a cease-fire was
obvious. If the war would have kept going at its pace, Israel would
have suffered the greatest military humiliation in its history. And
as the Wall Street Journal noted: "Israel has nothing to show for its
2. Livni: "A decision was reached by the Prime Minister and the
Minister of Defense to approve the start of a military operation and
just as it was starting to go into action late Friday [ August 11
2006 ] we began to strengthen the resolution and return it to the
level at which we felt it should originally be."
Facts: John Bolton, who was U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
during the Second Lebanon War, rejected Livni and Olmert´s version of
the failed ground offensive during the war´s final days: "The Israeli
military operation did not play a role in the talks on drafting the
UN Security Council Resolution 1701."
It appears that Prime Minster Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, and
Defense Minister Peretz - all in concert - failed to this day "to
come clean" and with clarity, explain to the nations´ families and
soldiers what precisely was the "improvement" attained as a direct
result of the IDF expansion into Lebanon on August 11, 2006 - a move
that cost the lives of 33 Israeli soldiers, and many more wounded.
3. Livni: "We wanted to ensure that this embargo would be enforceable
and substantive, preventing the transfer of arms ... to
Hizbollah. ... Now the embargo is part of the UN resolution and the
terms and formulation of this article are acceptable to Israel and
express our opinion - a proper embargo."
Facts: Resolution 1701 never even mentions the word embargo and does
not set forth an enforcement mechanism or any enforcement power. It
seems as though the Minister did not read the resolution.
4. Livni: Israel "Will be getting UNIFIL with a completely different
mandate, which includes the right, the option and the authority to
use force when required."
Facts: UNIFIL - a Paper Tiger - is not authorized to use armed force
or to impose in any forceful manner the implementation of the
recommendations of UN Resolution 1701. UNIFIL´s right to use force is
strictly limited to self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
Major-General Alain Pelligrini [France] then the Force Commander of
UNIFIL made it clear: "The disarmament of Hezbollah is not the
business of UNIFIL."
Tzipi Livni cannot escape her shared responsibility for the outcome
of the Second Lebanon War, and in particular the failed UN Security
Council Resolution 1701.
Leadership is all about responsibilityCLICK HERE: Is Security Council
Resolution 1701 Good for Israel?