Tread lightly, Condi\nJacob Stewart\nRice is correct in her assessment of the situation in Lebanon. It is absolutely necessary that the United Nations accomplish the task of maintaining peace and order in the Middle East, and the mandate is wide enough for Unifil to do so effectively. Setting up security checkpoints and detaining suspects -- activities Unifil has not initiated -- might be necessary as a means to that end. \nThat said, Rice might have erred slightly in the expounding of her analysis, which is in opposition to those "on the ground" in Lebanon. The United Nations is the institution through which the United States can affect Middle East tensions without dispatching its own military forces in the area. Perhaps there is a good reason why Unifil needs Lebanese authorization to get involved in the aforementioned kind of peacekeeping. Rice might be right, but there is still time to operate in Unifil's manner and see if it is successful.
Do your job, Unifil\nBrian J. McFillen\nPerhaps if the United Nations could be counted upon to do its job effectively and honestly, U.S. criticism of its activities would be unnecessary. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world. While it is unlikely that Unifil will succeed, it's certain to fail without U.S. scrutiny. Why? Because a peacekeeping force must stand neutral between two forces, serving as a barrier crossed only at the cost of severe political consequences to give the opponents time to negotiate a conclusion. And frankly, a scan of decades of General Assembly resolutions condemning Israel casts serious doubt as to whether the United Nations can be trusted to prevent Hezbollah attacks. By merely hunkering down in their bunkers, Unifil forces are just another target -- like schools, mosques and hospitals -- for Hezbollah to hide behind. If we are serious about ending this conflict, we can't keep the peace for only one side.
