Maybe West needs its own Hezbollah

Is this the way of the future?

With United Nations signaling that nationhood is passé, other countries will need proxy militias.

U.N. Resolution 1701 calls for a cease-fire between a nation-state, Israel, that was responding to an attack, and a terrorist group, Hezbollah, that crossed an internationally recognized border to kill and kidnap Israeli soldiers.

But here are the main messages to Israel from 1701:

Defend yourself against the terrorists of Hezbollah and the world will blame you for the violence.

Strike too hard - disproportionately - and the world will urge a cease-fire, expecting you to honor it although your enemy pledged in the 1980s, "Our struggle will end only when [Israel] is obliterated. We recognize no treaty with it, no cease-fire, and no peace agreements, whether separate or consolidated."

Expect to be condemned if you threaten Hezbollah's sponsors, Syria and Iran - that would be widening the war, after all - but don't expect the world to rebuke them for arming and financing the militia-for-hire they use against the "Benefit, Honour and Advantage" of another nation-state. Neither nation is even mentioned in 1701.

Maybe the U.N. is right. Perhaps the nation-state is passé, and non-state actors such as Hezbollah are on the rise. If so, don't expect the West to remain unarmed. Soon, enough Western nations will understand that it is conventional militaries that draw the world's scorn; you can win on the battlefield but still lose in the media and the Security Council. Western nations will cultivate their own militias. Quietly. After all, one must ensure the veneer of grassroots populism U.N. members find so endearing about the current crop.

Read the whole thing.

Is this too far fetched an idea? Maybe not if the U.N. continues to be an entity of such gigantic ineptitude.