Israel and Lebanon announced their agreement to renew their original April 14 ceasefire following negotiations held in Washington this week.
Lebanon was drawn into the ongoing war between the U.S., Israel, and Iran on March 2 when Iranian-backed Hezbollah launched a salvo of missiles into Israel after the opening U.S.-Israeli strikes that weekend.
The ceasefire is contingent on “a complete cessation of fire” and the withdrawal of all Hezbollah forces south of the Litani River, according to a joint statement released by the U.S. State Department. The agreement also outlines steps to create pilot zones in which Lebanese Armed Forces will hold exclusive control “to the exclusion of all non-state actors,” including the currently present IDF ground forces.
Delegates also discussed a security framework aimed at the “dismantlement of non-state armed groups” and steps to protect the security and integrity of Lebanon and Israel. Particularly telling was the statement that “All countries … rejected any attempt, by any state or non-state actor, to hold Lebanon’s future hostage.”
The ability and willingness of Lebanon to rein in Hezbollah has always been a murky question, as the group is a dominant political party and a paramilitary social movement deeply embedded within the state itself. The extensive backing of Iran has ensured that Hezbollah holds more of the cards militarily and logistically than the constitutional Lebanese Armed Forces.
The coming days will reveal the extent to which Lebanon is capable of restraining Hezbollah to the agreement’s parameters. Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem issued a response Thursday to the agreement that appears to vehemently reject the deal, calling the negotiations “absurd, humiliating and shameful.” Qassem rejected the terms of the ceasefire, the cessation of Hezbollah’s fire, and withdrawal from the southern front as tantamount to “surrender, defeat and achieving the enemy’s goals.”
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the ceasefire could come into effect within 24 hours of its final approval by all concerned parties. In the meantime, reports of military incidents continue on both sides. Lebanon’s National News Agency has reported continued airstrikes in the region bordering Israel, with four killed in airstrikes on the town of Sohmor. Sirens signaling drone interception efforts continue to ring in border settlements in northern Israel.
For the broader conflict in the Middle East, the timing of the ceasefire has larger implications. U.S.–Iran negotiations are ongoing, but with little to show for them in terms of progress. A Hezbollah rejection of the ceasefire agreement may carry more than just an unwillingness to abide by terms they were not included in. As one of Iran’s favorite proxies, it may also signal that Tehran is not yet prepared to deescalate unless it receives concessions at the negotiating table.
The words of the Lebanese government hold little sway in practice over Hezbollah’s actions. If Hezbollah violates the deal, as it seems poised to do, it should remind American negotiators that Iran’s promises at the table are only as meaningful as Tehran’s willingness to restrain its proxies.
Henry Zavalick is an editorial intern at The American Spectator.
Image licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
