That UN Military Observer post at Khiyam has been in that same place for decades. Its position was well known to the IDF. It was well marked. There had been continual liaison wth the IDF in the past and in the hours leading up to the fatal attack.
"Why would the IDF attack a UN observer post? Who, in their right mind would think such a thing," says Gellerman, Israel's UN ambassador." An Irish Army captain assigned to UNDOF or UNIFIL answered the question succinctly in a television interview this morning. "We are the Secretary General's eyes and ears," he said.
Pat Lang
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-mideast-ireland-warning.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Pat, seems like the Irish captain was succinct. IDF does not want the UN to see what is going on nearby or is distracting attention from what is going on elsewhere. Also avoids any chance of a ceasefire for a week or two.
Posted by: Fred | 26 July 2006 at 09:51 AM
Did you have an opportunity to catch Wolf Blitzer's thinly disguised sputterings of outrage at Kofi Annan's remarks regarding the Israeli missle attack on the UN observation post? Blitzer said, among other things, that Kofi Annan had judged the Israelis guilty before there was even as investigation. PUHlease! I'm glad that it doesn't cost me anything to watch CNN because it means that bullshit is still a bargain.
Why would anyone with sense enough to come in out of the rain expect folks to believe that the Israelis did not know where that observation post was located and who was inside of it?
Posted by: ptcruiser | 26 July 2006 at 09:56 AM
Thank you Colonel Lang for this site where the military illiterate can read analysis reflecting your depth of experience and scholorship. In contrast, the MSM seems to be saying "The Owl and the Pussycat went to sea in a beautiful pea green boat..They took some honey and plenty of money wrapped up in a five pound note"
Posted by: jang | 26 July 2006 at 11:03 AM
Jerusalem Post says precison missiles hit the post.
Posted by: b | 26 July 2006 at 12:01 PM
Amazing Israel will brook no possible interference from the UN to their ability to continue their attack in Lebanon and a possible pay back for the June http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2006/06/16/idf-admits-official-report-of-gaza-massacre-shelling-erred/>UN report on the shelling of the family in Gaza
Colonel Lang,
Not sure, but is this the article at the http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-mideast-ireland-warning.html>New York Times you intended to link? “Irish Officer Warned Israel on Threat to U.N. Staff”
Posted by: canuck | 26 July 2006 at 01:27 PM
"UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon contacted Israeli troops 10 times before an Israeli bomb killed four of them, an initial UN report says."
Israel ignored UN post plea
This will not play well. The problem with this "deliberate" attack on the UN post is that it will feed the meme of indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks by Israel. Now even the US "aligned" Arab regimes like Saudi and Jordan calling it "Israeli aggression". And the US "liberated" Iraqi's are also critical of the actions by Israel.
Posted by: zanzibar | 26 July 2006 at 01:29 PM
I would also advance the notion that a deliberate strike would also delay diplomatic efforts to resolve this crisis.
Countries would be even further hesitant to commit troops to be deployed to the region as a peacekeeping force when they are going to sustain losses. This is hard to justify as this point, especially after the Iraq Quagmire.
A peacekeeping force was part of the package on the table before USA would put it's weight behind a cease-fire. It had a hard way to go before this incident, but post-un observer deaths, it's almost impossible.
China, a potential future superpower, seemed less than amused at the incident.
Posted by: david frost | 26 July 2006 at 03:20 PM
Who or what is going to stop Israel now that they have made so many impossible demands which delays any type of ceasefile from the UN? Koffi can no longer see and report what is happening at the border that would have an effect on world opinion.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1830397,00.html>Many weeks of wars to come says Israeli General. Perhaps the headline more accurately should have been, "Gleeful Israeli General""
Posted by: canuck | 26 July 2006 at 03:32 PM
all
Had lunch today with a former UN officer who served at Khiyam aming other places as an observer.
He observes that the post was site to look down the Hula Valley to the south and up the corridor leading north to the Bekaa Valley so that a flanking maneuver would be seen by the UN.
Does anyone remember USS Liberty - 1967? pl
Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 26 July 2006 at 03:49 PM
I remember it like it was yesterday.
Posted by: jonst | 26 July 2006 at 03:53 PM
Jonst
As it happens, one of my college classmates was in the ship's company and was killed. pl
Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 26 July 2006 at 04:24 PM
I was a little preoccupied with basic training to remember the USS Liberty attack when it actually happened, but I have read a good bit about it since. Here is a website: www.ussliberty.org After reading about that, intentional bombing no longer sounds far fetched.
Posted by: Larry Mitchell | 26 July 2006 at 05:06 PM
When I was at the United Nations in the early 1990s, Israel was carrying out a punitive raid against Hizbullah.
They began shelling the UN compound then -- to the left, to the right, fore and aft -- then they obliterated the post. And dozens of Shia civilians hidden within.
The animosity of the IDF to UNIFIL and etc. is very well known.
Posted by: john in Los Angeles | 26 July 2006 at 07:40 PM
I read this web log all the time, but have never posted here before.
The remark about being the "eyes and ears of the Secretary General" made me think of LIBERTY, too. Read "Assault on the Liberty" by James M. Ennes, Jr. (one of LIBERTY's officers).
Years ago, I was having a hard time figuring out the ribbons of one of the recruiters at the reserve center that I was drilling at. He had a Bronze Star with "V", PUC, and Combat Action ribbon but none of the standard Vietnam campaign ribbons that you would expect at that time for someone with those kinds of combat medals. I thought that maybe he just wanted to wear his highest order ribbons, but he also wore his Good Conduct, National Defense and Armed Forces Reserve ribbon. I just couldn't figure it out, but didn't want to pry and ask him about it. Then one day I had to go into his office for some reason or other and saw the framed LIBERTY ship's patch on the wall along with a framed memorial to his dead shipmates. End of mystery.
Posted by: LG | 26 July 2006 at 11:06 PM
The United States bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade during the Kosovo war. Therefore, episodes of this sort do happen during wartime.
Perhaps somebody with a great deal more technical sophistication than I have could distinguish these two episodes, but right now the random screw up / fog of war hypothesis looks viable to me.
There is quite a lot of evidence of - let us say - remarkable and very violent Israeli action. Eliminating the UN post would not be much of a cover-up given all the other materials that are available.
So I'm going to have to wait for a clearer, more detailed analysis - the sort of thing that's not likely to be available for awhile - before I draw any conclusions.
Posted by: Duncan Kinder | 27 July 2006 at 12:28 AM
The simple answer to why they bomb civilians, try to sink US ships--remember the Liberty, shoot down airliners (Libyan 727 with Air France Crew). shoot journalits and assorted other mayhem is because they can. What amazes me is why any nation's lightly armed soldiers would volunteer to observe the IDF at work.
Posted by: Francis Egan | 27 July 2006 at 05:30 AM
Duncan
US Air bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade in ONE mission.
US Air bombed the French embassies in Tripoli. Libya and Hanoi long ago. All of these involved ONE strike.
This did not. pl
Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 27 July 2006 at 08:05 AM
The Liberty Incident, along with my brother's return from Vietnam, and hearing the story he told, led me to doubt the mainstream media. The conventional wisdom, if you will. This was a 'first' for me and a fairly profound first. From my vantage point anyway.
I came to realize there was a 'story' out there that I was not hearing.
I decided I wanted to find what else, if anything, I was not hearing. Boy did I learn. But for me it all started with the Vietnam War, as seen through my brother's eyes. And the Liberty Incident.
Posted by: jonst | 27 July 2006 at 08:25 AM
Perhaps the Israeli's are subtlely "saying" the UN should resize its forces in Lebanon UPWARDS (for safety in numbers) but not yet.
Posted by: Spooky Pete | 27 July 2006 at 09:58 AM
John in LA is right, the IDF and its proxies in the South Lebanese Army regularly attacked UNIFIL. I know that several Irish soldiers were killed.
Posted by: Green Zone Cafe | 27 July 2006 at 01:41 PM
Forgive me if this sound uniformed, but wasn't the Libery incident recently resolved as an accident? Didn't M. Oren write a consensus history about that in his recent book? Is this still debated? Or is it just a matter of interpretation?
Posted by: Question | 27 July 2006 at 05:42 PM
Q
There are many who do not accept Oren's explanation of the attack. pl
Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 27 July 2006 at 05:49 PM
This may never be decided then - on an true mutual level, because if it was not an accident then it would be too hard to admit that. But wouldn't LBJ and McNamara be the ones to hold to account. If anyone knew the truth, it would be them. McNamara probably has a rather long list of things he feels guilty about. Thanks.
Posted by: Question | 27 July 2006 at 06:45 PM
Q
The deadly duo did not bomb Liberty. pl
Posted by: W. Patrick Lang | 27 July 2006 at 07:32 PM
Yes, but didn't McNamara pull back the rescue mission? Clearly he must know the truth and can clear up the contention = a bit. He should bear witness to what he knows and knew. He's directly accountable - and his testimony would have legal meaning. When I first read about this in school, it just seemed so shocking that it puzzled why it was not resolved by people like McNamara. He is still making documentaries, talking about his past. Once he clears things up, then that will help to start to clarify things for vets. Thanks.
Posted by: Question | 27 July 2006 at 08:00 PM