The shooting has stopped. Well... sort of

The ceasefire in Lebanon wasn't more than 4 hours old when shots were fired.

A ceasefire to end a month of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah lasted less than four hours yesterday before shooting broke out in the town of Hadata, in southern Lebanon.

A spokesman for the Israeli Army said soldiers had shot and killed a Hezbollah militant. The spokesman said the soldiers opened fire at a group of militants who approached a patrol about 11am.

"The Israeli Defence Forces identified a cell of armed gunmen a few metres away who were approaching and threatening the force," the spokesman said. "To defend themselves, the soldiers identified the gunmen and shot at them. The soldiers shot first. I stress that we are committed to the UN decision but we will continue to defend our soldiers in southern Lebanon."

An Israeli Army spokeswoman said troops deployed in Faroun, elsewhere in southern Lebanon, shot another Hezbollah guerrilla who had approached them and aimed his gun at them. It was not known whether he survived.

On the surface those two incidents could be called violations of the ceasefire agreement, however, they are no more than what Israel is permitted to do under the truce. A ceasefire in place means just that and if Hezbollah fighters are moving around, approaching IDF positions, the IDF is well within its limits to defend its forces.

So, although the headline in the Sydney Morning Herald suggests that the ceasefire collapsed before it was 4 hours old, that isn't quite accurate.

I received a question about this line in a previous post:

Both sides are still banging away at each other and will continue to do so until at least 0500 GMT, 14 August, 2006.

The question was, "Why would they do that? Why not accept the ceasefire in good faith and just stop fighting?"

There are many reasons, but it could be reduced to two for each side: Neither side would trust the other to stop fighting and attacking until the prescribed hour of the cessation of hostilities.

Hezbollah was intent on maintaining pressure on the IDF. To simplify it, if they could keep fighting, right up to the last minute, they would be able to declare something of a victory. In fact, that is exactly what they did.

The Israelis were behaving strategically. They used the time between accepting the ceasefire conditions and the truce deadline as a means to advance as far into Lebanon as possible. There are a few strange semantics at play here.

Israel has stated that they retain the right to engage in defensive operations in Lebanon. They further stated that "clean up" operations are defensive in nature. That's a little odd. Mopping up operations are still generally viewed as offensive. Calling the rooting out of pockets of resistance "defensive" is a bit of a stretch.

However, having stated that, Israel needed to be as far north to the Litani River as possible. While they would have bypassed many Hezbollah strongholds, those in the Israeli rear could be considered offensive and inside Israeli controlled ground. Despite a ceasefire Israel could claim that cleaning out those pockets is not a violation.

Further, as Israel withdraws, they can fight their way back to the border claiming self-defence.
It's not necessarily honest, but Israel has made it pretty clear that that is their plan.

Kofi Annan obviously doesn't put much faith in Hezbollah's ability to restrain themselves. Concerned that Hezbollah would provoke Israel, he sent a letter to Israel asking them not to respond to Hezbollah provocation.

Anticipating Hizb'allah's failure to comply with a UN-brokered ceasefire, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan sent a letter to Jerusalem at the weekend, insisting Israel not respond militarily to any violations of Security Council Resolution 1701, according to The Jerusalem Post.

[...]

Israeli government sources said Annan's letter was unacceptable, and that a firm response was being drafted.

As critical as I am of Israel's devastation of Lebanon I do not hold with the idea that Israel should be the only party to observe the conditions of the ceasefire.

Now that the ceasefire is in place, both sides are claiming victory. Victorious is hardly a word to describe the state of either side.

Lebanon has suffered enormous destruction and over 1000 deaths, mostly civilian. While those occured at the hands of the IDF in a totally disproportionate response to an incident, Hezbollah must take responsibility for starting the whole event and for allowing large areas of Lebanon to be laid waste.

Israel has another problem.

At the start of this whole mess, IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz stated that he could crush Hezbollah in ten days. That gave Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert an opportunity to consolidate some of his own political power and establish himself as strong on defense. After all, the IDF has a history of being tough, effective and fast. It is the force which crushed whole Arab armies in six days.

Unfortunately for Olmert, Halutz couldn't deliver. An underestimation of Hezbollah's capability and strength combined with some bad decisions left Hezbollah damaged but still standing.

Olmert is now fighting for his political survival.

He has faced a backlash over his decision to accept the UN resolution and for failing to deliver a fatal blow to Hizbollah. Army officers have said they were held back and right-wing rivals have been calling for new elections. The next national ballot is not due until 2010.

Olmert is faced with right-wing Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu who, somehow, despite scandals and previous charges of corruption, (he was acquitted), keeps bouncing back into the Likud leadership role. (When he's not celebrating the anniversary of an act of terrorism committed by the Israeli Irgun).

Olmert is certainly on the ropes with the Israeli right-wing, not only for effectively losing the fight with Hezbollah, but accepting the UN ceasefire resolution. The truth is, Olmert desperately needed this ceasefire to prevent further humiliation by Hezbollah forces.

How this all plays out is anybody's guess. The ceasefire is more than a little fragile and can be equated to gluing together a broken teacup with school paste. If it holds together it will be something of a miracle.