Israel vs Hezbollah: could Lebanon face a new escalation? International overview on Caliber.Az

The issue of disarming Hezbollah remains acute and is far from being removed from the agenda. U.S. presidential advisor Massad Boulos stated that, from the United States’ perspective, progress on Hezbollah’s disarmament is too slow. He emphasised that the organisation needs to disarm more quickly, and that this must happen across all of Lebanon, not just in the area south of the Litani River.

In addition, Boulos noted that Beirut has two more months to complete the first agreed-upon stage of Hezbollah’s disarmament. However, it seems the deadline for Beirut could arrive sooner, as indicated by the increase in Israeli strikes in Lebanon. Tel Aviv is attempting to use these strikes to pressure both Hezbollah and Lebanon itself, demanding that the country make greater efforts to disarm the organisation. Meanwhile, the U.S. is applying pressure through diplomatic channels.

The main problem lies in the fact that a significant portion of the official Lebanese army is made up of Shia Muslims, many of whom are linked to Hezbollah, complicating the disarmament process. Recently, on November 23, Israel carried out a strike on Beirut, specifically targeting the Dahieh district, which is a Hezbollah stronghold. The attack killed Ali Tabatabai, the second most important figure in the organisation’s power hierarchy. This again signals a fundamental shift in Israeli policy in responding to threats, based on a more aggressive military pressure across all fronts.

Lebanon is facing an almost inevitable threat of a new war with Israel. Against this backdrop, the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, which is close to Hezbollah, reports that U.S. envoy Tom Barrack recently delivered a message to the Lebanese, setting out conditions that represent the last chance to prevent a new war with Israel:

1. Beirut must acknowledge that the ceasefire agreement signed last November has failed and is no longer effective;

2. The Lebanese must understand the need for direct negotiations between Lebanon and an Israeli delegation, with U.S. mediation. Lebanon’s representation in these talks must be high-level and carry a public mandate from its government, even if President Aoun personally chooses who will represent the country;

3. Lebanon must reach a consensus that the time has come to dismantle Hezbollah, focusing on the organisation’s military wing. Washington is ready to cooperate with moderate Arab countries to provide Lebanon with significant funding to facilitate an “honourable exit” for Hezbollah, transforming it into a purely political party while preserving its influence through reconstruction programs in the regions where its main electorate resides.

4. Hezbollah must approve the relinquishment of its weapons through a U.S.-controlled program, which would also include a disarmament schedule for the group. The first stage would be a statement from Hezbollah renouncing military action against Israel;

5. Lebanese political parties with influence in the financial sector must comply with the International Monetary Fund’s requirements, enabling Beirut to begin implementing a comprehensive anti-corruption programme.

Unfortunately, all of this sounds like a fantasy. Hezbollah is highly unlikely to voluntarily give up its weapons, making a new Israeli military campaign in Lebanon a matter of time—one that seems likely to unfold soon.

By Riyad Hamidov