Shalom, who served as Foreign Minister under former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for nearly three years until early this year, said that the proposal under consideration by the Security Council "mortgages the country's future" and would be a "weeping for generations."
Lebanon, too, has objections, which may cause another delay in the Council vote. Lebanon feels that the Shab'a Farms area, which it still demands from Israel, is not significantly mentioned, nor does it like the fact that the international peacekeeping force would be empowered to open fire. Lebanon also insists that Israel withdraw entirely from south Lebanese territory before any ceasefire is carried out.
Israel initially objected to the ceasefire proposal for its lack of a clause requiring Hizbullah to disarm prior to a ceasefire. Nonetheless, Jerusalem appears willing to accept the proposal.
Israel has rejected a Russian proposal to hold a 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire. Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Dan Gillerman, says it would only give Hizbullah ”time to regroup and recover. We think this is a bad idea."
Speaking with Voice of Israel Radio on Friday morning, Minister Shalom said if the UN proposal is accepted, "Israel's position would be worse than it was at the beginning of the war: It does not call for a large multi-national force in southern Lebanon, Hizbullah would not be disarmed, and a parallel is made between our abducted soldiers and murderous Lebanese terrorists held by Israel such as Samir Kuntar."
"It could even be," Shalom said, "that Syria might conclude that it can get the Golan Heights back by sending over some missiles to Israel."
Shalom's party colleague, former Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman MK Yuval Shteinitz, took an even stronger stance. If Israel accepts this "shameful" ceasefire, Shteinitz said Friday morning, "the government must resign and new elections must be held."
Shteinitz took issue with the fact that the new proposal would replace Resolution 1559 of two years ago, which calls for the Lebanese Army to take over southern Lebanon from Hizbullah:
"The fact that Israel is willing to significantly erode 1559, and even give Hizbullah a territorial achievement in the form of half of Israel's Mt. Hermon (Shab'a) will be understood as a clear victory for Hizbullah. This will invite a difficult war of rockets and commandos from Syria in the near future."
"If this is an existential war, as [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert said, then the results of it are dangerous to Israel's existence," Shteinitz concluded.
On the other hand, the left-wing peace forces are pleading with the government to accept the ceasefire proposal. Meretz MK Zahava Gal'on said, "It is in Israel's interest to accept this plan and to thus end the warfare. Israel must take advantage of the agreement being formed to call for the inclusion of Syria in the negotiations, and to thus turn it into an entity with which we can reach a diplomatic agreement."
A diplomatic agreement with Syria, almost by definition, would entail ceding the Golan Heights to that country.
Lebanon, too, has objections, which may cause another delay in the Council vote. Lebanon feels that the Shab'a Farms area, which it still demands from Israel, is not significantly mentioned, nor does it like the fact that the international peacekeeping force would be empowered to open fire. Lebanon also insists that Israel withdraw entirely from south Lebanese territory before any ceasefire is carried out.
Israel initially objected to the ceasefire proposal for its lack of a clause requiring Hizbullah to disarm prior to a ceasefire. Nonetheless, Jerusalem appears willing to accept the proposal.
Israel has rejected a Russian proposal to hold a 72-hour humanitarian ceasefire. Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Dan Gillerman, says it would only give Hizbullah ”time to regroup and recover. We think this is a bad idea."
Speaking with Voice of Israel Radio on Friday morning, Minister Shalom said if the UN proposal is accepted, "Israel's position would be worse than it was at the beginning of the war: It does not call for a large multi-national force in southern Lebanon, Hizbullah would not be disarmed, and a parallel is made between our abducted soldiers and murderous Lebanese terrorists held by Israel such as Samir Kuntar."
"It could even be," Shalom said, "that Syria might conclude that it can get the Golan Heights back by sending over some missiles to Israel."
Shalom's party colleague, former Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman MK Yuval Shteinitz, took an even stronger stance. If Israel accepts this "shameful" ceasefire, Shteinitz said Friday morning, "the government must resign and new elections must be held."
Shteinitz took issue with the fact that the new proposal would replace Resolution 1559 of two years ago, which calls for the Lebanese Army to take over southern Lebanon from Hizbullah:
"The fact that Israel is willing to significantly erode 1559, and even give Hizbullah a territorial achievement in the form of half of Israel's Mt. Hermon (Shab'a) will be understood as a clear victory for Hizbullah. This will invite a difficult war of rockets and commandos from Syria in the near future."
"If this is an existential war, as [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert said, then the results of it are dangerous to Israel's existence," Shteinitz concluded.
On the other hand, the left-wing peace forces are pleading with the government to accept the ceasefire proposal. Meretz MK Zahava Gal'on said, "It is in Israel's interest to accept this plan and to thus end the warfare. Israel must take advantage of the agreement being formed to call for the inclusion of Syria in the negotiations, and to thus turn it into an entity with which we can reach a diplomatic agreement."
A diplomatic agreement with Syria, almost by definition, would entail ceding the Golan Heights to that country.