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
**2. How does the fragmented political landscape in Lebanon affect negotiations on military proposals involving Israel, according to Dr. Elarian?**
**Interview with Security Analyst Dr. Michael Elarian on the Current Tensions Between Israel and Lebanon**
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Elarian. There has been significant tension between Israel and Lebanon recently, particularly highlighted by statements from lawmakers about Israel’s military capabilities. Can you elaborate on the implications of these remarks made by Barrow during his parliamentary session?
**Dr. Elarian:** Certainly. Barrow’s assertion that Israeli officials are eager to retain military options, including strikes and potential invasions of Lebanon, underscores the heightened security concerns within Israel. This reflects a broader strategy where military deterrence plays a central role in Israel’s national security policy. Such sentiment suggests a readiness to respond aggressively to perceived threats, not only from organized groups in Lebanon like Hezbollah but also in alignment with the broader regional dynamics involving Syria.
**Interviewer:** Reuters reported that many diplomats feel it would be nearly impossible to persuade Lebanese factions to accept proposals that include military actions by Israel. Why do you think this is the case?
**Dr. Elarian:** The Lebanese political landscape is highly fragmented, with various factions holding differing views on foreign intervention and military threats. Lebanon has a long history of conflict, and the scars from past invasions and violence are still fresh. Many groups, including Hezbollah, would vehemently oppose any Israeli military actions, making it difficult to broker a peace deal that includes those conditions. The lack of trust and the fear of escalation further complicate the peace initiatives proposed by external powers like France or the U.S.
**Interviewer:** Barrow also mentioned that cooperation between the U.S. and France is essential for addressing the situation in Lebanon. What are the challenges in this diplomatic coordination?
**Dr. Elarian:** The complexities are quite pronounced. France aims to take a leadership role, but without the backing and influence of the United States, it risks being sidelined in negotiations. Conversely, the U.S. must grasp the intricate internal dynamics within Lebanon to effectively engage in dialogue. If U.S. proposals do not resonate with the realities on the ground, they can backfire, further entrenching divisions. This joint effort requires not just political will but an understanding of the local sentiments and power structures at play.
**Interviewer:** do you see a way forward considering the current tensions and the diplomatic hurdles?
**Dr. Elarian:** Progress is possible, but it requires a shift from military threats to a framework centered on dialogue and mutual respect among all Lebanese factions. Both Israel and its Western allies must acknowledge Lebanon’s sovereignty and the internal challenges it faces. A comprehensive peace initiative, possibly involving economic aid and security guarantees, could pave the way for de-escalation. However, this will necessitate patience and genuine engagement from the international community.
**Interviewer:** Thank you for your insights, Dr. Elarian. The complexities of this situation are considerable, and it will be interesting to see how it evolves in the coming months.
**Dr. Elarian:** Thank you for having me. It’s a crucial time, and we must stay attuned to the developments in this region.