Let Israel finish the job

At a time of global tension and regional bloodshed, it is easy for governments to retreat behind rhetorical platitudes and uncontroversial diplomatic ‘initiatives’. As Clausewitz observed: ‘Although our intellect always longs for clarity and certainty, our nature often finds uncertainty fascinating.’ In the case of the Middle East conflagration, such lazy fascination would be disastrous. Moshe Kaplinsky, Israel’s deputy army chief, insisted this week that his country’s military forces required sufficient time to achieve ‘very clear goals’ in Lebanon before any notional ceasefire would be countenanced. The international community would do well to emulate Major General Kaplinsky’s focus and clarity.

To take an obvious and worrying example: the British government’s first objective — overriding all else at this stage — must be to evacuate every one of the 12,000 Britons and 10,000 dual Lebanese–British citizens in Lebanon who wish to leave the country. As Tony Blair was urging his fellow heads of government at the G8 to deploy a multinational force in the region, Britons were anxiously awaiting the arrival of the Royal Navy to take them to safety, and wondering, quite legitimately, why countries such as France and Italy seemed so much more efficient in proceeding with evacuation. Mr Blair finds the allure of the geopolitical centre-stage intoxicating. But his only priority now must be to get Britons out of Lebanon.

As for diplomacy, it has a role to play in this crisis, but only — again — if it is carried out as a means to a clear end, rather than as a fuzzy end in itself. Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, has signalled that her visit to the region will not be a desperate exercise in shuttle diplomacy: there will be no repeat of Warren Christopher’s hectic trip to the Middle East ten years ago at Bill Clinton’s behest, no frantic shuttling between capital cities.