Well, it’s a start anyway.

President Bush and Prime Minister Blair have bowed to international pressure and called for a mutual cease fire between Israel and Hizbullah. I’m sure if both men had their druthers, they would have continued commiserating on the sidelines with the suffering of Lebanese civilians all the while urging the Israelis to move faster in their campaign to systematically take the terrorists apart. But the time has arrived where the law of diminishing returns for this strategy has been reached and at least the appearance of peace overtures be given.

President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced agreement today to seek a United Nations resolution next week that would send a multinational force to southern Lebanon and end hostilities between Israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah militia.

Speaking to reporters after a meeting with Blair at the White House, Bush said he is sending Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice back to the Middle East from a conference in Malaysia to try to obtain agreement from the governments of Lebanon and Israel on the U.S.-British plan.

Blair, appearing with Bush at the news conference, said a meeting at the United Nations is being moved forward to Monday to work on the “international stabilization force” for southern Lebanon.

Bush and Blair said their plan, which calls for the disarming of Hezbollah in accordance with a 2004 U.N. Security Council resolution, will ensure a durable peace, rather than a temporary cease-fire.

And the way the two men have carefully crafted their appeal, they are still giving Israel some time to further the destruction of Hizbullah – although it is apparent that there is also a clock at work now that will tick down to a point where Israel must stop.

Bush said the United States and Britain seek a new Security Council resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N. charter, which deals with threats to international peace and provides for the use of military force under U.N. auspices. He said the resolution would set out “a clear framework for cessation of hostilities on an urgent basis” and would mandate the multinational force.

He declined to specify which countries should be included in the multinational force or who should lead it, saying these issues would be addressed at the meeting Monday. Bush also would not say whether Hezbollah’s agreement to accept the force should be a “precondition” for deploying it. But he noted that “Hezbollah is not a state,” and he said the key is to get the governments of Lebanon and Israel to agree to the force, which he said would “serve as a complement” to the Lebanese army and would “help the Lebanese army succeed.”

Bush said the approach he and Blair agreed upon would make possible “the end of Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel, the return of Israeli soldiers taken hostage by the terrorists, the suspension of Israel’s operations in Lebanon and the withdrawal of Israeli forces.”

All of this will take time to organize – especially the multinational force. My own estimate, based on Israel’s timetable for destroying Hizbullah, is 3-4 weeks. I can’t believe the President would have agreed to this move unless it allowed Israel the freedom to carry out their military plans to their completion.

And then there will be the insoluble problem of what countries will send troops that will make up the MNF. Unless Hizbullah agrees to give up its guns peaceably, the MNF will be engaged in combat and suffer casualties. There are only a handful of nations that would be willing to send its troops into harms way under an international command structure where the rules of engagement are bound to be extraordinarily restrictive.

No numbers were mentioned at the press conference for the MNF but if Hizbullah has at least 20,000 fighters, one would think that any UN force would have to at least be double that number in order to carry out the additional mandates planned under the cease fire proposal:

Bush said the top priorities of the U.S.-British plan for Lebanon are “providing immediate humanitarian relief, achieving an end to the violence, ensuring the return of displaced persons and assisting with reconstruction.” He added, “Our goal is to achieve a lasting peace, which requires that a free, democratic and independent Lebanese government be empowered to exercise full authority over its territory. We want a Lebanon free of militias and foreign interference, and a Lebanon that governs its own destiny” as called for in U.N. Security Council Resolutions.

“We agree that a multinational force must be dispatched to Lebanon quickly to augment a Lebanese army as it moves to the south of that country,” Bush said. He said the multinational force would “help speed delivery of humanitarian relief, facilitate the return of displaced persons, and support the Lebanese government as it asserts full sovereignty over its territory and guards its borders.”

That’s a heavy load for a group that will be expected to “augment” the Lebanese army. In reality, it will be the MNF that will do most of the heavy lifting in any combat situation with Hizbullah. The Lebanese army could not be counted on to fight the terrorists given their questionable loyalties as well as fitness for combat.

The real question is will Lebanese Prime Minister Siniora be able to get Hizbullah to accept any deal that involves their disarmament. Conventional wisdom says no, that Siniora is not in charge anyway. If that is the case, there is little any international force can do to make them give up their guns and the MNF would be operating in a combat zone.

Then there is the question if there would be any international force at all if Hizbullah refuses to disarm. If that happens, Israel would have little choice but to occupy their buffer zone in Lebanon and endure years of guerrilla attacks at the hands of Hizbullah terrorists. There just isn’t the international will to take on Hizbullah except in the United States and perhaps Great Britain. And it is doubtful that either of those two countries would contribute the numbers of men to an MNF that would make the force viable.

The key here is that Hizbullah would have to agree to give up there guns before there is a cease fire. I expect the UN to water down that part of the proposal since Hizbullah will not agree in advance to such a deal. This means that the US will probably be placed in a position of having to pressure Israel to accept a cease fire without that very important goal being reached. Will Olmert go along? He will probably have little choice.

The MNF won’t be there forever. And once they leave, a fully armed Hizbullah will be free to move back into the positions they had to abandon. So in the end, everyone will ask, “What was it we were fighting about?”