Michael Jansen in Beirut looks at who wants what out of ceasefire talks and resolutions
The Israeli bombing of the south Lebanese village of Qana which killed at least 41 civilians on Sunday prompted US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice to promise a ceasefire by today. But no ceasefire has yet been forthcoming. The UN Security Council may table a ceasefire resolution on Monday night but this is not certain.
Since hostilities began on July 13th, the council has been unable to act because of the US threat to employ its blocking veto. Washington is prepared to use that veto for two purposes. On one hand, the US seeks to ensure that Israel is not defeated - or seen as defeated - in the ongoing battle with the Lebanese Hizbullah movement. So far, most Lebanese and onlookers in the region regard Hizbullah as the victor.
On the other hand, Washington still hopes that the continuation of the Israeli offensive will lead to the transformation of Lebanon into a US protectorate. This is viewed by Washington as a first step in attaining its regional goal of isolating Syria and containing Iran.
Writing in the liberal Israeli daily Haaretz a week ago, the paper's defence correspondent, Ze'ev Schiff, said Dr Rice is "the leading figure in the strategy aimed at changing the situation in Lebanon . . . She is the one who has succeeded until now at standing up to international pressures in favour of a ceasefire." But "in order to be successful, she needs military cards which Israel has not been able to deliver". During the past week, Israel has still not delivered the "military cards" Dr Rice requires.
By postponing the Security Council debate, the US is giving Israel time to create a 2-6km wide security zone north of the Lebanese border. Hizbullah fighters are meant to be excluded from this belt of territory, where Israel plans to deploy troops until an international force is introduced. The no-go zone will prevent Hizbullah from mounting attacks on Israeli patrols on their side of the border but will not prevent Hizbullah from lobbing rockets into Israel.
The US has been trying to provide Israel with a political "victory" to offset its lack of military success. The coming resolution is supposed to end the violence and lay down principles for a ceasefire but the US and France are still dickering over terms.
France and Lebanon insist that the resolution should be placed under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter which deals with threats to world peace and mandates the imposition of sanctions against violators. The US and Israel want it to be under Chapter 6, thereby providing Israel with the possibility of re-entering Lebanon in order to deal with any perceived threat to its security.
Once the first resolution is adopted, a second resolution could come within two weeks. This resolution would define a buffer zone, call for the creation of a new international force to take over this area and elaborate terms for the "sustainable ceasefire" the US and Israel demand. This resolution would call for the disarmament of Hizbullah under resolution 1559 of 2004, the delineation of Lebanon's border with Israel, the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south of the country and the monitoring of Lebanon's border with Syria by the international force to prevent Hizbullah from being rearmed by Iran via Syria.
While such terms are agreeable to the US, Israel and France, these powers cannot ignore the maxim: "You cannot get at the negotiating table what you fail to achieve on the battlefield." The weak Lebanese government, bolstered by a strong, popular Hizbullah, cannot afford to yield on its own demands.
Beirut's plan calls for Israel to pull back to the armistice line of 1949, return 200 sq km of farmland occupied in 1967, repatriate all Lebanese prisoners, hand over maps of Israeli minefields on the Lebanese side of the frontier, terminate hostilities and grant Lebanon its rightful share of the waters of the Litani and Zahrani rivers, which rise in Lebanon. At present Lebanon is taking three million cubic metres of water while its legitimate share is 65 million cubic metres.
Once these conditions are met the government says it will have no problem asking Hizbullah to disarm and will welcome an international force with open arms.