The eyes of the Lebanese are turned towards Washington where a new chapter in history may be unfolding. However, Lebanese officials closely following the negotiations between Beirut and Tel Aviv remain cautious. According to them, while a process has been initiated, it may be lengthy as it involves a profound change that impacts not only Lebanon but the entire region, while the American mediator may not be truly impartial.
President Trump is indeed keenly interested in the Lebanese dossier and has taken personal charge, believing it would be easy to manage. However, this underestimates the complexities of the Lebanese reality. Donald Trump aims to quickly secure an agreement between Lebanon and Israel, featuring the much-anticipated handshake between President Joseph Aoun and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. To expedite the process, Trump has even sent one of his close aides, Michel Issa, as the US ambassador to Lebanon. In his meetings with Lebanese officials, Issa has surprised them with his blunt and unique diplomatic style. Among his striking remarks, Issa allegedly asked, “Between Israel and Hezbollah, where do you stand?” and when unsatisfied with the responses, he reportedly retorted, “You still cannot distinguish between the enemy and the friend.” Issa also questioned a Lebanese interlocutor, “Have you noticed that the southern suburbs of Beirut are currently spared from Israeli bombardments? We have yet to hear any gratitude on this matter.” While this direct language may be unconventional in diplomacy, many Lebanese are getting accustomed to this new approach, appreciating its clarity and straightforwardness.
However, in the current circumstances with the raging war in the South, Lebanon may not be ready to progress as swiftly and extensively as desired by President Trump and his administration. Therefore, Lebanon has set a crucial condition for continuing negotiations: the announcement of a total ceasefire to pave the way for concrete talks on security arrangements along the border and in the South, leading towards a potential armistice agreement. This logical approach is hindered by Israel’s demand to retain the right to strike Hezbollah where they see fit. If Lebanon accepts this condition, it may complicate its position in future negotiations.
Lebanon faces the challenge of earning American and Israeli trust in its commitment to disarming Hezbollah and its military assets, especially after what the US and Israel view as a bluff regarding disarmament in the southern zone. The official Lebanese stance seeks to distance itself from being seen in alignment with Israel against Hezbollah, despite shared goals in some aspects. The fundamental difference lies in the Lebanese view of Hezbollah as a local entity, even if receiving support from Iran. Thus, avoiding friction between the army and Hezbollah is crucial for Lebanese officials, while Israel insists on such tensions to prove Lebanon’s seriousness. This dynamic makes it challenging to implement the US proposal to establish a special military unit within the army to disarm Hezbollah effectively, potentially threatening the army’s united mission serving the state and its citizens.
After analyzing these complexities, it is evident that the negotiation process launched on Thursday remains highly intricate due to internal Lebanese issues and regional developments. Some officials predict this process could take one or two years or even longer before Lebanon can reach a minimal agreement with Israel. However, Donald Trump’s impatience contrasts with Lebanon’s urgent need to address the situation in the South and the increasing displacement issue, affecting internal cohesion. Therefore, Lebanon is striving to convince the Americans to understand the Lebanese reality better, while also banking on positive interactions with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and other regional states, all while keeping a watchful eye on the Iran-US developments.
