Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

Behind the ‘ceasefire in Lebanon’ claims

Published

on

Given the current stances of Israel and Hezbollah, a ceasefire seems unlikely. A softening of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s terms, perhaps under pressure from the Israeli military and the U.S., could make a ceasefire possible. However, Israel’s history shows a pattern of agreeing to terms only to later withdraw or adjust to new on-ground realities.

Ahead of the November 5 elections, the U.S., eager for a Middle East achievement, has turned to Lebanon after unsuccessful attempts for a Gaza ceasefire and prisoner exchange. Senior adviser to President Biden, Amos Hochstein, is in discussions with Israeli officials today after presenting a ceasefire proposal to Lebanese representatives yesterday.

The U.S. previously proposed a temporary Gaza ceasefire and a partial prisoner exchange, but talks broke down after two days of negotiations in Doha. Hamas maintains its demand for a permanent ceasefire and an end to occupation in exchange for the release of hostages.

With prospects for a pre-election success in Gaza dwindling, the Biden administration shifted focus to Lebanon. Dropping the precondition that “a Gaza ceasefire is necessary for Lebanon’s peace,” the U.S. dispatched Hochstein to negotiate, hoping a Lebanon agreement might indirectly pressure Hamas toward a Gaza ceasefire.

Meanwhile, the Israeli army leaked reports ahead of Hochstein’s meetings suggesting that Israel’s objectives in Lebanon are largely met. Following these leaks, Netanyahu convened a high-level security meeting with officials, including Defense Minister Gallant, Chief of Staff Halevi, Mossad Director Barnea, and Shin Bet Chief Bar.

Israel’s conditions

At the meeting, Gallant reportedly stated that 80% of Hezbollah’s rocket and missile capacity had been neutralized. Halevi advocated for a negotiated end to the conflict, indicating that an agreement with Lebanon is possible outside the ongoing Gaza situation.

Israeli media revealed the terms developed by Dermer’s team with input from security and foreign affairs officials:

-Hezbollah must withdraw north of the Litani River, per an extension of UN Resolution 1701.

-The Lebanese army would be heavily stationed on the border.

-International monitoring mechanisms would oversee compliance.

-The Israeli army would retain rights for future operations in Lebanon should “elimination of threats” be necessary.

-Hezbollah’s future rearmament would be restricted.

-A 60-day ceasefire would be established as part of the agreement.

The proposal to Lebanon

Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri told Sharq al-Awsat that he and Hochstein agreed to halt Israeli attacks. Berri emphasized Lebanon’s commitment to the original UN Resolution 1701 text, adding that Lebanon is ready to implement the agreement as soon as Netanyahu agrees.

Draft of Hochstein’s proposal

Israeli media leaked a draft of Hochstein’s proposed agreement just hours before he arrived in Israel. According to this draft, Israeli forces would be permitted to act in “self-defense against imminent threats” and conduct surveillance over Lebanon. The draft was confirmed by U.S. officials, though National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett noted that it does not represent the current state of negotiations.

Reports suggest Netanyahu might be open to these ceasefire conditions, though reactions within his coalition remain uncertain.

Hochstein has since conveyed the U.S. proposal to Lebanese officials, with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati hinting that a ceasefire could soon be reached. Still, Lebanese sources caution that Israel’s self-defense clauses in the draft could render it unacceptable due to perceived infringements on Lebanese sovereignty.

The United States is expected to oversee the agreement’s implementation, with Lebanon deploying its armed forces in the south alongside UN peacekeepers. The draft stipulates that, within the initial 60 days, Lebanon must dismantle non-state armed groups in the south, while Israel would begin withdrawing troops within a week of the agreement.

Hezbollah’s stance

According to a report in Al-Akbar, Hezbollah rejects any amendments to Resolution 1701 and opposes an increase in international or Lebanese forces in the south. Hezbollah does not expect the U.S. position to shift, believing instead that Israel intends to prolong the conflict.

Hezbollah remains committed to resisting negotiations that might weaken its position, seeing armed resistance as an essential safeguard for Lebanon.

Israel’s ‘ceasefire’ strategy

In essence, there appears little difference between the leaked U.S. draft and Israel’s ceasefire conditions. Hezbollah will likely oppose Israel’s operational rights in southern Lebanon, as well as the proposed aerial surveillance.

Even if an agreement is reached, Israel’s history suggests that implementation may fall short. In September, a U.S.-brokered ceasefire was disrupted when Israel targeted Hezbollah leadership, and similar patterns have been observed in Gaza.

The timing suggests that Netanyahu may be leveraging ceasefire talks to ease U.S. and domestic pressures before the November elections. However, any resulting agreement may prove more symbolic than substantial.

MIDDLE EAST

Hamas: No hostages-for-prisoners swap deal with Israel unless Gaza war ends

Published

on

Khalil al-Hayya, a senior member of the Hamas Political Bureau, announced on Al-Aqsa TV that Hamas had accepted a proposal to form a committee to administer Gaza, with the condition that its operations be entirely local.

In his statement regarding the ongoing Gaza ceasefire talks, al-Hayya said: “An idea has been proposed to establish a committee for the administration of Gaza. This suggestion was made by our Egyptian brothers. We have responded responsibly and positively. We accept this proposal on the condition that the committee will operate in a fully localized manner, overseeing all aspects of daily life in Gaza.”

Earlier this month, representatives from both the Hamas and Fatah movements convened in Cairo, Egypt, to discuss a potential ceasefire and the establishment of this administrative committee.

Commenting on the indirect ceasefire and prisoner exchange negotiations between Hamas and Israel, al-Hayya stated: “There will be no prisoner exchange until the Israeli genocide stops. This is an interconnected equation. We are very clear on this: we want this aggression to end. These attacks must cease before any prisoner exchange can take place.”

Al-Hayya added that Hamas remains ready for a ceasefire agreement but emphasized that Israel must demonstrate genuine willingness to proceed. “We are engaging with mediating countries to advance ceasefire negotiations. However, Netanyahu is hindering progress in these talks for political reasons,” he said.

Since the escalation of violence on October 7, 2023, indirect negotiations between the parties have continued, with countries like Qatar mediating ceasefire and prisoner exchange agreements. Both the United States and Egypt have played supporting roles in these efforts.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has faced criticism domestically and from the international community for failing to secure a prisoner exchange agreement with Hamas. Analysts highlight those additional conditions introduced by Israel, particularly its insistence on maintaining control over the Egypt-Gaza border and the Philadelphi Corridor, have further complicated the negotiations.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Argentina becomes first nation to withdraw troops from UNIFIL

Published

on

As Israeli attacks on the UN peacekeeping force on the Lebanese border persist, Argentina has announced the withdrawal of its personnel from UNIFIL. Despite the UN’s assertion that some attacks are deliberate, sanctions against Israel are not currently on the agenda.

Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the United Nations (UN) Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, reported that attacks on the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) are ongoing, with evidence suggesting that certain incidents were “clearly deliberate.”

Speaking at a press conference at UN Headquarters in New York following a visit to the region, Lacroix expressed concern about continued clashes in southern Lebanon. He revealed that four UN personnel were injured by a bomb that struck the UNIFIL perimeter. Additionally, a UNIFIL patrol came under fire, and five rockets hit a maintenance workshop within the UN compound. While these attacks caused significant structural damage, there were no reported casualties.

Although Lacroix refrained from identifying those responsible, he emphasized the obligation of all parties to ensure the safety of UN personnel and facilities. He stated: “We remind all parties of their obligations to ensure and protect the security of UN personnel and facilities.”

Addressing whether these attacks were intentional, Lacroix clarified: “It is difficult to speak about all cases, but we have some videos that show that some attacks were clearly intentional, even implying something more than intentional.”

Lacroix also highlighted another category of incidents he described as “semi-intentional,” where military operations near UN positions expose peacekeepers to danger. He underscored the responsibility of all parties to safeguard UN peacekeepers.

Responding to inquiries about white phosphorus bombs allegedly used by Israel in southern Lebanon, Lacroix confirmed ongoing investigations by the UN. He reiterated the call for adherence to international law to protect civilians.

Separately, Lacroix announced Argentina’s decision to withdraw its personnel from UNIFIL. UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti later confirmed the withdrawal, noting that Argentina had “asked its personnel to return.” However, Tenenti declined to elaborate on the reasons for this decision.

According to the UN website, Argentina had a total of three personnel in Lebanon. Despite evidence and statements from UN officials suggesting deliberate attacks by Israel, sanctions against Israel remain absent from the agenda.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Hochstein in Beirut, says ‘significant progress’ on Lebanon-Israel cease-fire

Published

on

Amos Hochstein, senior adviser to U.S. President Joe Biden, stated that “there is a serious chance for a ceasefire” in Lebanon, where he arrived to mediate talks between Israel and Hezbollah.

Hochstein landed in Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, to participate in ceasefire negotiations. According to Lebanon’s official news agency, NNA, his belongings underwent a detailed inspection as part of standard procedures at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport.

During his visit, Hochstein met with the Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, Nabih Berri, at the Speaker’s residence in Beirut. After the meeting, he addressed the media, emphasizing:

“We have a real opportunity to end the conflict. We hope to find a solution in the coming days.”

Hochstein described his discussions with Berri as constructive, reiterating that “there is a serious chance for a ceasefire.” He added that the ultimate decision to end hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah rests with the involved parties.

While Hochstein did not take questions from reporters, he later held talks with Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati.

Last week, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Lisa Johnson presented a draft agreement for a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah to Berri. The Lebanese press reported that Hezbollah recently delivered its feedback on the proposal to Berri.

A senior Lebanese official informed Reuters that Lebanon and Hezbollah had accepted the U.S. proposal but expressed certain reservations. This step has been described as the most advanced progress towards a ceasefire to date.

Ali Hassan Khalil, a close aide to Berri, commented to Reuters:

“Lebanon presented its comments on the proposal in a positive atmosphere. All our feedback confirms our full commitment to UN Resolution 1701 and its provisions.”

Khalil stressed that the success of the initiative now depends on Israel’s willingness to engage constructively. “If Israel does not want a solution, it could create 100 different problems,” he remarked.

Following his discussions in Beirut, Hochstein is expected to travel to Tel Aviv. However, Israel’s stance on the proposed ceasefire remains uncertain. Historical patterns, including instances where Israel has added new conditions or undermined agreements at critical moments, suggest a cautious approach. The outcome of Hochstein’s visit to Israel will likely determine whether a sustainable peace agreement can be reached.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey