The deployment of a force in Lebanon to give effect to a UN resolution to disarm Hizbullah would fit in with US foreign policy, writes Tom Clonan
Responding to overtures from British prime minister Tony Blair and German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Israeli defence minister Amir Peretz has indicated that Israel might accept the deployment of a UN-mandated Nato or EU-led force in southern Lebanon to assist in the disarmament of Hizbullah as part of negotiations towards a ceasefire in the current conflict.
If such a force were mobilised and deployed to Lebanon, it would most likely be configured and mandated so as to give effect to UN Security Council Resolution 1559 - the complete disarmament of Hizbullah and other Lebanese militias along with deployment of the Lebanese army all the way south to the border with Israel.
This would fit neatly with current US foreign policy.
This agenda would include the undermining of Islamic fundamentalism throughout the Middle East and the destruction of its ideologically hard-line armed militias throughout the region - whether they be Sunni resistance groups in Iraq, al-Qaeda and Taliban elements in Afghanistan or Shia Hizbullah fighters in Lebanon.
In terms of configuration, an EU-led force, without direct British or American participation, might be more acceptable to Lebanese and Middle Eastern sensibilities than a Nato formation. Israel, on the other hand, might be more predisposed to accept what it would consider a more robust - and US-controlled - Nato force.
In terms of mandate, such a force - a "stabilisation force" similar to the ones operating in the Balkans, as suggested by Tony Blair in Downing Street yesterday - would have to have a robust and clearly-defined peace-enforcement status as opposed to being a peacekeeping mission.
In other words - similar to EU and Nato-led battlegroups in the Balkans and Afghanistan - such a force, in order to succeed in its mission, would have to enter Lebanon on a war footing and be capable of full combat operations. Such a force would differ significantly from the blue-helmeted peacekeeping battalions of Unifil, to which Ireland contributed troops for more than 20 years.
Indeed, seemingly contradictory statements by President Mary McAleese and Minister for Defence Willie O'Dea over the weekend as to the prospect of the participation of members of the Defence Forces in such a force have led to increased speculation as to the possible involvement of Irish troops in a potential UN- mandated Nato or EU mission to Lebanon.
Sources inside the Defence Forces have indicated to The Irish Times that the Army would be in a position to provide specialist support to such a force, particularly in the area of explosive ordnance disposal - bomb disposal - and engineering specialist search capability.
Irish officers, with their intimate knowledge of the type of tactics and improvised explosive devices used by both Hizbullah and the Israeli Defence Forces, along with their in-depth local knowledge of the contested terrain of south Lebanon, would be an invaluable command asset.
Senior officers within the Defence Forces are also keen to point to the well-established precedent of Irish military personnel serving with UN-mandated EU and Nato battlegroups from the Balkans to Afghanistan. Hundreds of Irish soldiers are currently serving with Nato-led battlegroups in Kosovo and Kabul.
Dozens of Irish soldiers lost their lives in south Lebanon while serving as peacekeepers with Unifil. Islamic resistance groups such as Hizbullah caused approximately half of Ireland's casualties in Lebanon. The Israeli Defence Forces and their proxy forces killed the remainder.
It is estimated that it would require more than 20,000 heavily-armed troops - with full artillery and air support - to stabilise the current exchange of indiscriminate hostilities between Israel and Hizbullah. Whatever its international make-up, it could expect to take significant casualties from both sides in attempting to stabilise this conflict.
If international forces are mobilised to Lebanon in the coming weeks and months, their deployment - in an unprecedented era of uncertainty as to the efficacy of the UN - will sorely try the resolve of the international community to rapidly avert military and humanitarian catastrophes.
Such a deployment would also fully test the capabilities of the newly-constituted "rapid reaction forces" and "battlegroups" of the EU and Nato.
•Dr Tom Clonan is a security analyst. He lectures in the school of media at the DIT.