The holding of the Lebanese-Israeli military meeting, under American auspices in Florida, between October 20 and 22, constitutes a reliable step forward to bring the implementation of the “Framework Agreement” out of a state of stagnation, even if the date of the meeting still needs to be confirmed by Washington. It has also not yet been decided whether the attendance will be limited to the military, or will be attended by civilians, headed by former Ambassador Simon Karam, and in the presence of Lebanon’s Ambassador to America, Nada Hamada Moawad, along with the Director of Operations at the Army Command, Brigadier General George Rizkallah.
Lebanon has prepared for the military meeting in Florida, and is counting on not keeping the implementation of the “Framework Agreement” suspended until after the Israeli Knesset elections scheduled for October 27. Lebanon fears that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will delay activating the agreement, based on his desire to keep the southern card present in the electoral race, allowing him to inform voters that they need him to ensure the security of the settlements in northern occupied Palestine.
A ministerial source directly concerned with the negotiations revealed that the military delegation carries with it a package of proposals, not limited to consolidating the ceasefire and stopping hostilities, but also going beyond that to releasing the Lebanese prisoners held by Israel, and looking into forming an international force with the cover of the Security Council to replace the International Emergency Forces (UNIFIL) immediately after the end of its mandate at the end of this year.
The ministerial source confirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s leadership of the Lebanese delegation participating in the United Nations General Assembly meetings allowed him, during his traveling meetings between New York and Washington, to mobilize support for Lebanon’s point of view calling for an international force, with cover from the Security Council, to replace “UNIFIL” immediately upon its departure from the south.
He pointed out that Salam, in coordination with the President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, insists that the international force be an alternative to UNIFIL, ensuring the continuation of international witness accompanying the efforts aimed at Israel’s withdrawal from the south, in parallel with the deployment of the army, on the one hand, and the government’s adherence to the exclusivity of weapons in the hands of the state, in confirmation of the decision of the Council of Ministers in this regard, on the other hand. He believes that this puts Hezbollah in the position of making a courageous decision to cooperate with these efforts and give up its weapons.
The source confirmed that the military delegation will propose Israel’s withdrawal from the towns located in the vicinity of Beaufort Castle, allowing the Lebanese army to deploy there, especially since Tel Aviv had previously demanded that these towns be included within the army’s deployment area in the south of the Litani. He explained that this request came before Hezbollah was assigned to Iran, in response to Israel’s assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
He stressed that the Israeli army’s continued bulldozing of the towns located within the “yellow line,” and its systematic destruction of the remaining homes therein, will be on the agenda of the Florida meeting, especially since there is no justification for turning the area south of the Litani into scorched earth, or for continuing to destroy the towns located there, after the Israeli army announced the completion of the destruction of Hezbollah’s infrastructure in this region.
The same source believed that simply enhancing the army's deployment would strengthen the government's position and weaken the arguments used by Hezbollah to retain its weapons. He asked: “Where is the interest in keeping Lebanon on the waiting list, and suspending the implementation of the agreement until after the elections in Israel, and later the midterm elections in the United States?”
The source expressed his fear of “Lebanon being thrust into a deadly vacuum, in which it lacks the minimum requirements that would enable it to withstand.” He wondered: How does Washington reconcile its desire not to link the Lebanese path to Iran, and not to pressure Israel to stop its bulldozing of towns, which is no longer limited to those located within the “yellow line,” but rather extends to the towns surrounding Beaufort Castle, at the front edge of the north of the Litani River overlooking its south?
He stressed that the party cannot obstruct the army’s deployment in these towns, after it evacuated the “Ali al-Tahir” hills and the Israeli army took control of them. He said that the general Shiite mood in support of the state's return to these villages, and its welcome of the army's deployment in some of them, constitute a pressure factor on the party, especially in light of its commitment not to respond to Israeli violations and attacks, which means, in his opinion, that there is no longer justification for it to keep its weapons.
Although the source warned of the worsening living and social crisis, he said, on the other hand, that the government, more than ever, needs a dose of political-economic support, on which it can rely to confront the party and drop its pretexts.
He pointed out the necessity of deploying the army in the towns surrounding Beaufort Castle, with American pressure on Israel to expand the scope of its deployment in the cities and villages that are still occupied. He said that this requires Washington to use its influence to remove the formation of the international “verification mechanism” from the circle of tensions, enabling it to ensure the deployment of military units in these areas and that they are free of the party’s weapons and fighters, in addition to providing American guarantees to Lebanon that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not target the highlands located between Iqlim al-Tuffah and Jabal al-Rayhan, “in case he sees that he needs it to secure a majority in the Knesset for his return to prime ministership.”
Therefore, the attention of the Lebanese remains fixed on the Florida meeting, hoping to achieve a reliable breach to expand the deployment of the army, thus automatically eliminating the arguments that Hezbollah invokes, whether to justify its retention of its weapons, or to disavow the “Framework Agreement” in favor of betting on the American-Iranian “Memorandum of Understanding,” thus keeping Lebanon pending its implementation. This is despite the fact that US President Donald Trump does not miss a political event without stressing “not linking the Lebanese track to Iran,” at a time when the memorandum is still a prisoner of the exchange of threats between Washington and Tehran.
Will Washington take a step in Florida that will pave the way for the implementation of the “Framework Agreement,” or is the military meeting intended (only) to pass an American message regarding the continuation of the Israeli-Lebanese negotiations, even though this provides Hezbollah with pretexts to retain its weapons, whose role in the field sense of the word has declined? Meanwhile, Lebanon confirms, through Aoun, that it is continuing with the negotiations and implementing the exclusivity of weapons in the hands of the state.
