The magnitude of Israel's failure in Lebanon becomes clearer every day. Hezbollah, stating the obvious, has said it has no intention of disarming (but it may curtail public displays of its weapons). Lebanese officials have made it clear that the "government" has no intention of disarming Hezbollah. Why, asked one leader, should the Lebanese army try to do what the IDF could not accomplish (especially with Hezbollah's popularity now at a new high)?
Meanwhile diplomats are scrambling, without much apparent success, to come up with the members of the new UNIFIL force. If that force arrives, it can hardly be expected to take on Hezbollah. French troops are still expected to take the lead, and the French foreign minister (who has proclaimed Iran a force for stability) slyly promises only to attempt to persuade Hezbollah to disarm. In short, Hezbollah, the Lebanese government, and the international community are already rubbing Israel's nose it it, as well they might. Indeed, it would probably be better for Israel if no enlarged U.N. force appears -- that way the IDF will have more freedom to attack the next time Hezbollah provokes a crisis.
That last is a great point. What Israel is going to be left with is a situation where Hezbollah is still armed and relatively free to launch attacks while hiding from Israeli retaliation in among UN and Lebanese troops, in addition to the women and children they normally hide behind.
Olmert really hamstringed Israel's ability to defend themselves from Hezbollah with this cease fire. It would have been better for Israel to have just ignored the please for a cease fire and finish the job against Hezbollah once and for all.
So where does Israel go from here? With UN and Lebanese forces in the way they can't exactly hit back at Hezbollah if needed. If it were up to me I'd be eyeing Syria. Israel has attacked the puppets Syria and Iran have held out in front of it for long enough. It's time to go after the source of the problem.
It won't happen, but it's what should happen.