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 potential consequences of Israel’s military rhetoric on Lebanese sovereignty?**
### Interview with Political Analyst Dr. Sarah El-Kader on Recent Developments in Israeli-Lebanese Relations
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us, Dr. El-Kader. Let’s dive into recent comments made by Barrow regarding Israeli military strategy and its implications for Lebanon. What are your thoughts on his statement about Israeli officials’ repeated conditions for potential military actions in Lebanon?
**Dr. El-Kader:** It’s a significant remark. Barrow highlights a troubling trend where Israeli officials are openly discussing military options, including strikes and possible invasions of Lebanon. This appears to be an escalation of rhetoric that could intensify regional tensions. Historically, such comments are often a signal of serious intentions or preparations, which could cause alarm among Lebanese factions and the broader international community.
**Interviewer:** Reuters has mentioned that many diplomats believe convincing Lebanon to accept Israel’s military conditions is nearly impossible. What factors contribute to this skepticism among diplomats?
**Dr. El-Kader:** The main issue is the entrenched position of various Lebanese factions regarding sovereignty and resistance against Israel. The scars from past conflicts, especially the Lebanese Civil War and subsequent Israeli invasions, have solidified a national consensus against foreign military interventions. There’s also the internal political dynamics in Lebanon, which are complex and often fractious. Any proposal that undermines Lebanon’s sovereignty is likely to be met with strong opposition both from the government and various armed groups, notably Hezbollah.
**Interviewer:** Barrow emphasized the need for coordination between France and the United States to effectively engage in Lebanese affairs. Why is this coordination crucial, especially now?
**Dr. El-Kader:** Coordination is vital because Lebanon’s political landscape is highly sensitive and requires a nuanced understanding. France has historically had a significant influence in Lebanon, but in today’s geopolitical environment, the U.S. also plays a crucial role, especially concerning security matters and Israel’s military posture. If either country acts unilaterally, they risk alienating key stakeholders in Lebanon and potentially exacerbating the situation. Therefore, a united and informed approach is critical for any diplomatic effort to have a chance of success.
**Interviewer:** Barrow’s comments come alongside statements from Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz. What implications might Katz’s remarks about military readiness have on future negotiations or conflict in the region?
**Dr. El-Kader:** Katz’s remarks indicate that Israel is prepared to use military force if it perceives a threat, which could create a chilling effect on negotiations. This posture may deter some factions from engaging in talks, fearing that military action could be initiated at any moment. If Israel maintains a hardline approach, it risks isolating itself diplomatically while pushing Lebanon closer to conflict. A military-first strategy often undermines diplomatic solutions, and if tensions escalate, this could lead to a cycle of violence that neither side desires.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Dr. El-Kader, for your insights into this crucial matter. It’s clear that the dynamics at play are complex and require careful handling from all parties involved.
**Dr. El-Kader:** Thank you for having me. It’s an important topic, and I hope for a peaceful resolution that respects the sovereignty and security needs of both Israel and Lebanon.
