Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play
Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play
Last August, during a time when Lebanon was once again plunged into conflict, I met with President Joseph Aoun at the Baabda Palace. Nestled atop a hill overlooking Beirut, the modernist building symbolized a fragile hope in a nation torn by strife. Aoun, a retired military leader, assumed office after a brutal war between Israel and Hezbollah, a militia and political party backed by Iran. At that moment, Hezbollah had suffered significant setbacks, with its influence waning both domestically and internationally. Aoun pledged to dismantle the group’s arsenal, aiming to restore stability to the country.
A Divided Nation’s Persistent Struggle
The issue of Hezbollah’s weapons has long been a source of division in Lebanon. While Aoun remained optimistic, he acknowledged the complexity of the situation. “I was born an optimist,” he remarked during our conversation. Yet, even as a fragile ceasefire held, Israel continued launching frequent airstrikes against targets it claimed were linked to Hezbollah. In some regions, the fighting never ceased, with the hum of Israeli drones audible from the user’s home in east Beirut.
For Hezbollah’s supporters, the group serves as their primary defense against Israeli aggression. They view Israel as a force determined to seize Lebanese territory. Conversely, critics accuse Hezbollah of prioritizing Iran’s interests, dragging Lebanon into conflicts it does not need. This dynamic intensified when Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, was killed in a strike during the US-Israeli attack on Tehran in February. In response, Hezbollah launched rockets into Israel, framing the action as retaliation for his death and the ongoing Israeli bombardment during the ceasefire.
A Proposal for Peace Amidst Tension
President Aoun, seeking to halt the violence, proposed direct negotiations with Israel—a bold move between nations that do not formally recognize each other. Israel initially dismissed the offer, but the initiative gained traction after the US brokered a ceasefire with Iran. This came following a day of intense Israeli air strikes that claimed over 300 lives in Lebanon. A scheduled meeting between ambassadors from both countries is set for Tuesday in Washington, focusing on a potential end to hostilities.
Despite Aoun’s efforts, the Lebanese government faces constraints in influencing Hezbollah. The group, known as the “Party of God,” has evolved beyond a mere militia. It operates as a political party with parliamentary representation and a social movement managing schools and hospitals in areas where the state’s presence is weak. Hezbollah’s control over regions like Dahieh and the Bekaa Valley underscores its entrenched power. Naim Qassem, the group’s secretary-general, has refused to discuss comprehensive disarmament, leaving Aoun to warn of potential violence if weapons are removed without consent.
Hezbollah’s resistance against Israeli occupation has been central to its identity since its founding in the 1980s. The Taif Agreement of 1989 aimed to disband all militias and establish a power-sharing system, but Hezbollah retained its arms, positioning itself as a key player in Lebanon’s political landscape. The UN Resolution 1701, enacted in 2006, demanded Hezbollah’s disarmament, yet the requirement remains unfulfilled. While designated a terrorist organization by the UK and US, Hezbollah holds a unique status in Lebanon, where it is both a political and military force.
Aoun’s commitment to maintaining the “state monopoly on arms” highlights his struggle to balance national security with the need for peace. With Hezbollah’s weapons still scattered across southern Lebanon, the path to lasting stability remains uncertain. As Israeli attacks continue and negotiations proceed, the question looms: can Lebanon emerge from this crisis without descending into another civil war?
