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
What are the key challenges facing diplomatic efforts between the U.S. and France to address the Israel-Lebanon conflict?
**Interview with Political Analyst on Current Middle East Tensions**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today. We want to discuss the latest developments regarding Israel and Lebanon, particularly in light of recent statements made by Barrow following his visit to Israel. What are your initial thoughts on his comments regarding Israel’s military posture?
**Guest:** Thank you for having me. Barrow’s remarks highlight a significant and ongoing shift in Israel’s defense strategy. By expressing that there is a growing sentiment among Israeli officials to maintain the capability for immediate military action against Lebanon, he underscores the heightened tensions in the region. This comes against a backdrop of heavy Israeli military presence in southern Lebanon, which has already resulted in substantial casualties—over 3,400 people in Lebanon, according to reports from the Lebanon Health Ministry [[1](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hezbollah-lebanon-iran-ceasefire-beirut-41d19e05cebf73a66dc320ccad047d4d)].
**Interviewer:** Indeed, the situation is dire. Barrow also mentioned the complexities involved in diplomatic efforts, particularly the coordination between France and the United States. Can you elaborate on that?
**Guest:** Absolutely. Barrow’s assertion indicates that both France and the U.S. must work collaboratively if there’s any hope of de-escalating the conflict. The idea is that neither country can effectively mediate without a clear understanding of the internal dynamics within Lebanon. This is crucial because Lebanon is a patchwork of factional interests, making unilateral proposals from either country potentially ineffective [[1](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hezbollah-lebanon-iran-ceasefire-beirut-41d19e05cebf73a66dc320ccad047d4d)].
**Interviewer:** There seems to be a consensus among diplomats that convincing Lebanese factions to agree to Israel’s demands may be highly challenging. Do you think this presents a significant barrier to any potential peace initiatives?
**Guest:** Yes, it absolutely does. Any proposal that includes Israel’s demand for the ability to strike at will is likely to be met with resistance from Lebanese factions, which fear for their sovereignty and security. The diplomatic landscape is fraught with complexities and distrust, and without a meaningful dialog that acknowledges the rights and concerns of both sides, any peace initiative risks being dead on arrival [[1](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hezbollah-lebanon-iran-ceasefire-beirut-41d19e05cebf73a66dc320ccad047d4d)].
**Interviewer:** Lastly, considering the U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein’s focus on his own proposals, do you think we are facing a fragmented approach to diplomacy in the region?
**Guest:** Yes, fragmentation is a real concern. With different parties pursuing their own strategies and proposals, the potential for a cohesive approach diminishes. If the U.S. and France cannot align their efforts, it may lead to further tension rather than resolution. Coordination is critical, and without it, we may see a continuation of the current violence rather than a pathway to peace [[1](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hezbollah-lebanon-iran-ceasefire-beirut-41d19e05cebf73a66dc320ccad047d4d)].
**Interviewer:** Thank you for your insights. It’s clear that the road ahead in the Israel-Lebanon situation is fraught with challenges that require careful navigation.
**Guest:** Thank you for having me. It will be interesting to see how these dynamics evolve in the coming weeks and what strategies emerge from the involved nations.
