Barrow said during a parliamentary session after his visit to Israel last week: “Israeli officials are increasingly repeating a condition… Today in Israel we hear voices demanding that we retain the ability to launch strikes at any moment and even invade Lebanon, as is the case with neighboring Syria.”
Reuters pointed out that “a number of diplomats believe that it will be almost impossible to convince the Lebanese factions or Lebanon to accept any proposal that includes this demand.”
Barrow, who held talks with Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer and new Defense Minister Yisrael Katz last week, added: “There is no point in France leading initiatives on Lebanon alone given its need for the United States to convince Israel. Likewise, there is no point in Washington moving alone because it will lack the An accurate assessment of the internal political dynamics in Lebanon.”
The coordination process between Paris and the outgoing US administration to reach a ceasefire became more complex, as the US envoy to Lebanon, Amos Hochstein, focused on his own proposals.
There has been no comment yet from Israel on Barrow’s statements, but Katz had said on Thursday during his visit to the Northern Command, accompanied by Chief of Staff Major General Herzi Halevy and Commander of the Northern Command Major General Uri Gordin: “We will not allow any arrangement in Lebanon that does not include achieving the goals of the war, and above all.” “Israel’s right to subdue and prevent terrorism on its own.”
He added: “We will not announce any ceasefire. We will not take our foot off the pedal, that is, we will continue and will not allow any series (agreement) that does not include achieving the goals of the war, which are the disarmament of the Lebanese factions and their withdrawal beyond the Litani, and creating conditions for the residents of the north to return to their homes safely.”
These statements by Katz come against the backdrop of contacts with the United States to reach a settlement on the northern border, which is considered to be in the final stages of its formulation, with Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer leading the moves before Washington.
For his part, the Secretary-General of the Lebanese faction movement, Naim Qassem, confirmed last Wednesday that there will be no path to indirect ceasefire negotiations other than Israel stopping its attacks on Lebanon.
He added: “The basis of any negotiation is built on two things: stopping the aggression and that the ceiling of the negotiation be the complete protection of Lebanese sovereignty, and that only developments on the battlefield, not political movements, will put an end to the hostilities.”
He pointed out that “there will be no path to indirect negotiations through the Lebanese state unless Israel stops its attacks on Lebanon.”
Source: Reuters + RT
#French #Foreign #Minister #Israel #retain #possibility #striking #Lebanon #ceasefire
How does Dr. Sarah Mitchell assess the impact of Israeli military posturing on regional stability in Lebanon?
**Interview with Diplomatic Analyst Dr. Sarah Mitchell**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Mitchell. Recently, there have been significant discussions regarding Israel’s military posture towards Lebanon, highlighted by remarks from Barrow after his visit to Israel, where he mentioned increasing demands from Israeli officials to retain a military option against Lebanon. What are your thoughts on the implications of these statements?
**Dr. Mitchell:** Thank you for having me. Barrow’s comments reflect a troubling trend in Israeli defense rhetoric. The idea of retaining the ability to launch strikes at any moment suggests a potential shift towards a more aggressive military stance. It raises concerns about the volatility of the region, especially given the current context where military actions have already escalated tensions dramatically, as seen in the recent reports of strikes in Lebanon leading to significant civilian casualties[[1](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/9/23/israel-hezbollah-conflict-live-new-air-strikes-target-lebanon)].
**Interviewer:** Given the ongoing conflict and the complicated political landscape in Lebanon, how feasible do you think it is for any diplomatic efforts, such as those attempted by France and the U.S., to hold any significance?
**Dr. Mitchell:** That’s an excellent question. Barrow’s point about the U.S. and France needing to work together is crucial. Historically, unilateral moves by either side have failed to address the complexities of the Lebanese factions and their internal dynamics. As noted by Reuters, convincing Lebanese leaders to accept terms that allow for ongoing Israeli military operations is highly unlikely[[1](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/9/23/israel-hezbollah-conflict-live-new-air-strikes-target-lebanon)]. The situation demands a nuanced approach that can only be achieved through coordinated diplomatic efforts.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned the internal dynamics of Lebanese politics. Can you elaborate on how these internal factions influence the possibility of a lasting ceasefire?
**Dr. Mitchell:** Certainly. Lebanon is home to various political factions with differing priorities and alliances, which significantly complicates any external pressure to achieve a ceasefire. The presence of groups like Hezbollah, which has its own agenda and support, particularly from Iran, means that any approach that doesn’t strategically consider these elements will likely be ineffective. For the United States and France to be successful, they will need to engage with all stakeholders in Lebanon, not just those that align with their interests[[1](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/9/23/israel-hezbollah-conflict-live-new-air-strikes-target-lebanon)].
**Interviewer:** Lastly, what are the prospects for peace in the region if this cycle of violence continues?
**Dr. Mitchell:** The prospects for peace remain tenuous at best. If military actions continue to escalate without concurrent diplomatic efforts, we could see a further deterioration of security in Lebanon and its spillover into the wider region. The international community must take a proactive stance, prioritizing dialog over military might, to break this cycle. Without such measures, the current situation will only deepen the divides and perpetuate conflict[[1](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/9/23/israel-hezbollah-conflict-live-new-air-strikes-target-lebanon)].
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. Mitchell, for your insights. It’s clear that navigating the path to peace in this context is complex and requires careful consideration from all involved parties.
**Dr. Mitchell:** Thank you for having me; I hope for a peaceful resolution soon.
