The UN Security Council resolution drafted by the United States and France at the weekend calls for Hezbollah to stop all hostile operations and for Israel to stop its military drive into Lebanon. But already being questioned by other Security Council members, the proposal would allow Israel to strike back if Hezbollah were to break a cease-fire.

Other Council members have suggested amendments because they feel the draft doesn't take enough account of Lebanon's concerns. Lebanon has urged the Council to revise the resolution to demand that Israel pull its forces out of the country once hostilities end and hand over its positions to UN peacekeepers. The draft makes no mention of an Israeli withdrawal.

Opinion on the resolution in the German papers on Monday is also divided.

German business daily Financial Times Deutschland writes: "After four weeks of war, the highest UN authority will clearly identify the Lebanese terror militia as the aggressor and instigator of the conflict. It's a good thing if this fact is acknowledged by the international community. "The attackers from Hezbollah can ensure that the Lebanese population they have been using as human shields no longer has to suffer," the paper writes. "If Hezbollah now rejects the text of the resolution and cites Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese territory as a precondition, it's just a transparent maneuver. The extremists are demanding the withdrawal to be able to celebrate a propaganda victory, just as they did six years ago. For that Hezbollah is willing to accept further victims. That too shows the urgent need to disarm this aggressor, with whom there can me no peace in the Middle East."

Left-wing Die Tageszeitung calls the draft resolution a diplomatic victory for the United States and Israel, but adds that it won't do much good. "What hasn't been militarily achieved is being anticipated politically: the defeat and disarming of Hezbollah." The resolution sounds good with its calls on both sides to stop fighting, the paper writes, but adds: "It will remain mere rhetoric because Israel isn't being told to withdraw its troops from southern Lebanon immediately. The presence of Israeli troops on Lebanese soil is something neither the Lebanese state nor Hezbollah can accept.

The newspaper predicts: "The war will continue, despite or because of this resolution. The Shiite militia will nurture its role as resistance army against the invaders and will go on fighting. Even after almost four weeks of fighting it still has enough Katyushas and fighters. And Israel will continue to justify further offensives by saying they are in reaction to these attacks, but is really fighting to decimate the ranks of Hezbollah. "It seems that this is precisely the implicit goal of the resolution. Better that Israel finish the job rather than having UN or NATO troops do the fighting. Only it won't work."

Conservative Die Welt writes that if the Security Council had taken its last Lebanon resolution seriously, Hezbollah wouldn't have any rockets now. "But the UN left it to Israel to put Resolution 1559 into force and disarm Hezbollah. Now it has a war on its hands." The paper adds: "Perhaps the new document will fare better than 1559. It won't do any harm. It might end up bringing a peace force into Lebanon. But caution is warranted here too. The soldiers mustn't operate like the current blue helmets in Lebanon who were smoking and playing cards while Hezbollah fired off rockets and abducted Israelis."