What is behind the American ceasefire plan in Lebanon?
Will the indirect negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, under the aegis of American mediator Amos Hochstein, lead to a truce likely to put an end to the ordeal of hundreds of thousands of Lebanese who fled southern Lebanon, prey to violence? intensive bombings by the Israeli army since September 23?
And what will happen to Lebanon, Palestine and the region if the American plan for a “separate peace”, which has not yet revealed all its undersides, were to be imposed?
According to the latest statements by the American president’s envoy for Lebanon, Amos Hochstein, a ceasefire in Lebanon would be “within reach” and could even see the light of day within two weeks.
The American plan which was presented by the American ambassador in Beirut, Lisa Johnson, to the Lebanese Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, contains 13 points starting with a 60-day truce and the deployment of the Lebanese army in southern waters. country.
The American plan essentially revolves around the application of Security Council Resolution 1701 which ended the 2006 war and which provided for the deployment of the Lebanese army and UNIFIL in southern Lebanon as well as the withdrawal of Hezbollah fighters beyond the Litani River as well as the application of the Taef Agreement which provided for the disarmament of all Lebanese militias (1)
Hezbollah agrees to separate the two files of Lebanon and Gaza
Even if contentious points remain concerning the interpretation that each party makes of certain clauses such as that relating to the possibility for each to respond to what it considers to be a threat to its security, it seems that the Lebanese and Israeli governments have gave their agreement in principle to the essentials of the American plan.
You should know that the main thing for the Israeli government and its American ally is that Hezbollah has finally agreed to decouple the question of the ceasefire in Lebanon from the question of the ceasefire in Gaza. (2)
All observers agree that the major change which now allows us to believe in the possibility of a ceasefire in Lebanon is the fact that Hezbollah has finally agreed to dissociate the two issues of Gaza and Lebanon. .
Contrary to what the former leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, assured before his elimination, the current leadership of Hezbollah no longer demands an end to hostilities in Gaza to discuss a cease-fire in Lebanon.
If the American plan focuses on a ceasefire in Lebanon, it has become clear that the Biden Administration no longer has any illusions about a ceasefire in Gaza as it has just shown by opposing, once again vetoing a Security Council Resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
In the HaaretzIsraeli analyst Amos Harel highlighted the fact that all parties concerned have an interest in a ceasefire in Lebanon. Despite its go-to-war declarations, the Israeli government is faced with the fact that the engagement of Israeli army reservists in southern Lebanon is encountering a serious problem. (3)
The Israeli analyst adds that even if the Israeli government remains cautious and does not rule out the possibility of a continuation of the war on the Lebanese front, it seeks to take advantage of American mediation to put an end to the northern front in sight. to decouple the two issues and concentrate all its forces on Gaza (4)
The obstacle that remains to be overcome
The Israeli government insists on the security guarantees that a possible ceasefire should ensure to prevent Hezbollah from posing a threat to Israel in the future (5)
For its part, the Lebanese government places at the forefront of its concerns the humanitarian question posed by the return of hundreds of thousands of Lebanese forced to leave southern Lebanon and whose care requires significant intervention from the international community (6)
But the main obstacle, of a political nature, which remains to be overcome before the declaration of a ceasefire in Lebanon concerns the intransigence of Hezbollah in the face of Israel’s request to intervene as it wishes if the Lebanese Shiite movement was trying to rearm.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said Wednesday that any ceasefire agreement in Lebanon should allow his country “freedom of action” against Hezbollah.
For his part, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz says nothing else: “the condition of any political settlement in Lebanon is the preservation of the intelligence capacity and the right (of the Israeli army) to act and protect the citizens of Israel against Hezbollah.”
To this, the new leader of Hezbollah, Naïm Kassem, responded on Wednesday that “no ceasefire agreement would be accepted if it violated the “sovereignty” of Lebanon, in response to Israel’s intentions to maintain “freedom of action” against the Shiite group” (7)
Hezbollah’s intransigence on this point could be explained by the desire of the Shiite movement to safeguard a capacity for negotiation within the framework of the inevitable political overhaul in Lebanon which will follow this war. It can also be interpreted as indirect support to the Lebanese government in its difficult negotiation with a view to preserving a minimum of national sovereignty (8)
For its part, Hezbollah’s main ally in the region, Iran, hard hit by international sanctions which risk being strengthened under the Trump Administration, should not oppose the American plan with a view to achieving a separate ceasefire in Lebanon (9)
Of course, Iran’s openness to the plan for a separate ceasefire in Lebanon has limits. If it could accept, if necessary, a decline of Hezbollah on the future Lebanese scene, it is difficult to see Iran willingly accepting the disarmament of its Lebanese ally.
Israel counts on Russia’s role
Failing to be able to impose a total disarmament of Hezbollah, the Israeli government hopes to prevent its rearmament thanks in particular to the incursion of a new unexpected thief on the Lebanese scene: Russia.
Israeli Television Channel 12 revealed that Israeli Strategic Planning Minister Ron Dermer paid a secret visit to Moscow in early November to discuss the role Russia could play in establishing the “peace” in Lebanon (10)
The Israeli minister’s trip to Moscow reignited speculation about a possible role that Moscow could play in the region with the blessing of the Trump Administration (11)
In this new deal, Moscow, which has taken the Syrian regime under its control, would be responsible for preventing the delivery of Iranian weapons to Hezbollah via Syria.
The dangers posed by the American plan to the region
The withdrawal of Hezbollah to the Litani River, which will be followed by the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south of the country, can be interpreted, by its adversaries, as a defeat of the Shiite movement. And in this scenario, the arming of Hezbollah would lose all meaning.
However, it is not said that the total disarmament of Hezbollah, which its political adversaries continue to demand, does not constitute a casus belli for a new civil war that Israel could be tempted to ignite and fuel from a distance.
Is it a coincidence that Haaretz, in its November 18 edition, used this spectacular headline to comment on the tensions generated by the displacement of 1.5 million Lebanese following the war: “ Are we on the verge of a third civil war in Lebanon? » (12)
Apart from the fact that it would constitute a catastrophe for Lebanon, the disastrous prospect of a new civil war should not suit any Lebanese force and this explains why all the Lebanese parties seem to want to avoid it at all costs, including at the cost of substantial concessions from Hezbollah, which would have been unimaginable a few years ago.
A separate ceasefire in Lebanon will only accentuate the terrible loneliness of Gaza. But no sane voice will be able to reproach anything to the Lebanese who paid – practically alone – the price of blood solidarity with their Palestinian brothers in Gaza while the other Arab countries – some powerless and others complicit – assisted to the deadly spectacle without moving a finger.
The Palestinians of Gaza will continue to face their executioner alone, who everything indicates does not intend to stop his genocidal war before completely cleansing the north of the enclave of its population who now have only one choice: die by bombs or die from hunger and disease.
Notes
(1)Le Figaro 11/19/2024
(2)Le Monde 11/20/2024
(3)Haaretz 11/17/2024
(4)Haaretz 11/17/2024
(5)Radio France 11/18/2024
(6)Al Jazeera 11/21/2024
(7)L’Orient-Le-Jour 11/20/2024
(8)Lebanon News, 11/20/2024
(9)Haaretz 11/17/2024
(10)Top War 10/11/2024
(11)L’Orient-Le-Jour 12/11/2024
(12)Haaretz 11/18/2024
