How's that cease-fire working for ya?

The best trained and most technologically advanced army in the Middle East, with a ground strength of around 50,000 troops, got its ass kicked yesterday by a so-called "rag-tag" militia with an estimated strength of 5000 fighters.

24 troops killed in one day. Against an enemy that supposedly lacks sophistication and heavy weapons.

Israel grossly underestimated Hezbollah. The US helped them along in reaching that underestimation. High-tech, precision guided ordnance and maneouvre warfare surely trumps a bandoleer-wearing partisan with an AK-47 and a grenade launcher.

Israel (and the US) committed the first cardinal sin of armed conflict. They failed to respect their enemy. What they were viewing as little more than armed thugs turned out to be well-trained, highly motivated, adept infantrymen with an eye for tactics. And the fighting arm of Hezbollah pulled a tactic out which the IDF may have anticipated but which the political leadership of Israel dismissed - dig in deep, dig in hard, come and get me.

What was supposed to be a rollover turned out to be a hard and costly fight.

And now, we have a ceasefire. Well, sort of. Both sides are still banging away at each other and will continue to do so until at least 0500 GMT, 14 August, 2006. Each side is trying to consolidate a political position. Hezbollah - that it will fight to the last man; Israel - that it will leave no place for Hezbollah to regroup.

The problem is, as always, how to enforce a ceasefire and compel both sides to withdraw. The UN is trying to put together a force of 13,000 troops to bolster the 2000 strong UNIFIL contingent already in southern Lebanon. Supposedly this 15,000 member force will have strong military capabilities and a stronger mandate that will allow immediate action to be taken against anyone threatening the peace. That's easier said than done and how soon that number of troops can be brought together and placed on the ground is as yet an unanswered question.

Even if a UN force of significant size can be deployed quickly, and that isn't terribly likely, it will take several days to sort out interoperability problems and determine who is where on the ground.

The mud in the soup, however, is the Lebanese army. What looks good on paper is, in fact, an under-funded, poorly trained, ill-equipped hollow shell of a force with no experience. Lebanon is expected to put 15,000 troops into southern Lebanon to fill a vacuum left when the Israelis withdraw and then oversee the disarming of Hezbollah.

The problem is, unless Hezbollah voluntarily surrenders their weapons, the Lebanese army is powerless to force them to comply. If, in fact, the Lebanese army even wants to.

The equipment Lebanese soldiers will use to perform their duties is outdated, in some cases even dating back to the 1950s and 60s. Many of the army's 300 tanks are more than 20 years old, and its artillery doesn't pack much of a punch. Military officials concede that they currently lack even a single serviceable combat jet. The navy has been sailing more or less blindly since Israel's air force disabled its radar systems. Besides, the few ships it has stationed in the south are more or less ineffective. Indeed, many doubt that the Lebanese military will have much of an effect at all.

Israel has already made it clear that it will not agree to the deployment of an exclusively Lebanese military force to secure a buffer zone in southern Lebanon. The Olmert government's strongest argument is Israel's experience in the recent past. Despite a 2004 United Nations resolution that calls for the Lebanese army to patrol the south, Hezbollah has been expanding its dominant position since the Israeli withdrawal in 2000. No one expects Lebanese security forces to be capable of controlling or disarming Hezbollah's fighters.

Add to all of that the fact that the Lebanese army is severely factionalized. A majority of its officers are Christian or Sunni Muslim. The enlisted ranks however, are about 70 percent Shi'a Muslim. Despite the fact that the Lebanese armed forces are supposed to be secular, the sympathies of an overwhelming number of the rank and file lies with Hezbollah.

An international force is expected to "support" the Lebanese army in establishing a dominant presence in southern Lebanon. Given the activity of the Lebanese army over the past 6 years, and the last month in particular, that will translate into doing the job for them - if such a force can get there in time. Right now, it still doesn't exist.

If a ceasefire is to hold one of the imperatives would be to give the Lebanese army a boost in equipment and capability. Lebanon cannot afford to outfit their forces any better than they are now. The country's economy was crippled before the Israeli assault - now it is shattered.

Israel, of course, would object to any strengthening of the Lebanese army, a position which places them between a rock and a hard place. A stronger Lebanese army represents a standing military threat to them, but without it Lebanon cannot prevent the growth of militias bent on the destruction of Israel.

This ceasefire is little more than breathing room. Unless the UN can put a force in quickly, and with a mandate strong enough to shoot in either direction should the belligerent parties violate the agreement or threaten civilian lives, the Lebanese army will be unable and unwilling to do the job.

Regrettably, this ceasefire is likely the prelude to the next armed encounter between Hezbollah and Israel.

Update: Steve from farnwide provides this link to BBC which suggests that the whole ceasefire is now in serious jeapordy.

Crucial Lebanese cabinet talks on disarming Hezbollah fighters in southern Lebanon under a UN-brokered ceasefire have been put off.

What that will translate to is a ceasefire in name only. The Lebanese army will not deploy to southern Lebanon and any UN force is weeks away from being able to get established on the ground.