On Thursday, the Vatican expressed its concern about “difficulties” facing the implementation of the “Framework Agreement” between Israel and Lebanon, which was reached last June, with the mediation of the United States, during Pope Leo
The Lebanese presidency announced that on the first day of his visit to Italy, Aoun held a “half-hour retreat” with the Pope. The Vatican said, in a statement: “The Holy See, which welcomed the signing of this document, expressed its deep concern about the difficulties facing its implementation, and affirmed its support for the efforts made in this direction.”
The “Framework Agreement,” which was concluded between Lebanon and Israel after five rounds of negotiations under American sponsorship, stipulates the disarmament of Hezbollah, the gradual withdrawal of the Hebrew state from the lands it occupies in southern Lebanon, and the deployment of the Lebanese army, starting from “experimental” areas.
The Lebanese presidency said that President Aoun renewed his thanks to Pope Leo XIV for all the efforts he is making to support Lebanon to achieve its demands to remove the occupation and stop the Israeli attacks on its land.
President Aoun called on the Pope and Vatican officials to “continue their diplomatic efforts in all international forums to achieve Lebanese demands, most notably obligating Israel to implement the terms of the framework agreement, which was signed under the auspices of the United States of America on June 26, and to stop its daily attacks that especially target civilians, civilian facilities, infrastructure, and villages in the south.”
President Aoun also called on the Pope to “support Lebanon to achieve complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese territories, in preparation for the reconstruction of what Israel destroyed, and the return of the displaced to their land and villages.”
The President of the Lebanese Republic stressed that “these steps must coincide with extending the authority of the Lebanese state over its entire territory and restricting the decision of war and peace to its hands, as the only way to achieve security and stability on the borders.”
Despite the ceasefire announcement, Israel continues to launch bloody raids in southern Lebanon, where it has established what it calls a “security zone,” a strip about ten kilometers deep inside Lebanese territory along the border where Israeli forces operate.
During his visit, Aoun is scheduled to meet with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni on Friday to discuss the future of the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon, whose mandate expires at the end of 2026.
UNIFIL forces, stationed near the Lebanese Army center in the Khardali-Litani area, handed over their position to the 7th Brigade of the Lebanese Army.
The handover comes as part of a plan to transfer a number of UNIFIL sites to the Lebanese Army, in light of the UN Security Council’s decision to end the mission of international forces in Lebanon by the end of this year.
Israel is trying to implement a gradual annexation of the strategic “Ali al-Taher” heights, located east of the city of Nabatieh in southern Lebanon, in parallel with diplomatic pressure on the Lebanese state and Hezbollah, which absolutely rejects any discussion about evacuating the facility, according to sources familiar with its position, which threatens Israel to resort to the “third option,” which is the resumption of fighting in the south.
Hezbollah’s rejection of any proposals related to the evacuation of Ali Al-Taher is based on the fact that the facility is located “north of the Litani River,” according to what sources familiar with the party’s position told Asharq Al-Awsat, at a time when “the party is adhering to the implementation of the November 27, 2024 agreement, which is based on UN Resolution No. 1701, which includes a cessation of aggression, Israeli withdrawal, and the exclusivity of weapons in the area south of the Litani,” indicating that “the party’s understanding of the resolution The agreement is that the exclusivity of weapons is limited to the south of the Litani, while the resistance weapons in the north of the Litani are a Lebanese matter subject to the national security strategy.”
The party says that “the Islamabad agreement is what produced the de-escalation and war in Lebanon,” while Tel Aviv entered the path of direct negotiations with Lebanon in Washington, to escape the American-Iranian negotiation path, and to separate the two files.
Sources familiar with the party’s position believe that this reality “gave Israel freedom of movement and attacks, as it rendered the non-occupied areas near the yellow line lifeless, including Ali Al-Taher.” However, “this paper did not satisfy a section of the Israeli public that supports the war, and this reality did not provide a return of confidence to the residents of the north.” Accordingly, “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his political speech, produced an exaggerated reality for Ali Al-Taher Hill, and gave it symbols and security dimensions with the aim of magnifying the achievement.” “If he is able to control it,” even though “the supposed facility on this hill is smaller than other facilities that (Hezbollah) handed over to the Lebanese army in the south of the Litani.”
For about 10 weeks, Israel has been seeking to control the strategic height, with war remaining the last option. The source says that the American side “demands that the Lebanese army receive it, and the Israeli side verify it,” adding that this offer “was received by the party, which sees this demand as a maneuver to make everyone realize that the party rejects it in advance.” The party also sees this request as “a censure raised by the Lebanese authorities before Washington that Lebanon did what it had to do, but the party refused.” The source adds: “This request basically does not include any guarantees that it will not be handed over to Israel in the event that the Lebanese army is asked to withdraw from the heights, or the army retreats under Israeli fire pressure,” in addition to seeing it as “a lure from outside the agreement that the party adheres to, which is the agreement to stop hostilities in November 2024.” The source says that the United States “informed Lebanon that it allows Israeli control of the height without escalation.”
But in light of the party’s rejection of any proposals to evacuate it, Israel is left with nothing but the military option, which ranges from “gradual annihilation attempts” through “taking life, cutting off supplies, and preventing the replacement of fighters in it, paving the way for its downfall and entry into it in a quasi-battle,” which is what Israel has been doing for 10 weeks, according to what Lebanese sources familiar with Israeli movements in the heights say. The sources believe that the failure of this strategy before the Israeli elections “could lead to an open battle similar to what was the case before the ceasefire agreement entered into force on June 14 last year.”
Hezbollah is betting on Iranian intervention if Israel tends to expand the fighting and evade the rules of engagement that have been in place since the ceasefire, in compliance with what it said that it will not allow any deduction of any new geographical area in southern Lebanon under fire. The party is basing its bet on a statement by the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Muhammad Baqir Qalibaf, hours after Israeli targeting of party leaders deep in southern Lebanon last Saturday, during which Qalibaf said that he is in contact with the party’s fighters on the front, and is checking their conditions daily to assess the front and readiness for any new support order.
Although similar developments entail the caveats of renewed war between Israel and Iran, which may contribute to a new security deterioration in the region, the possibilities of renewed war on the Lebanese scene “remain present,” according to the source. He added: “Ali Al-Taher’s height is a complex that could reproduce the war,” adding: “The Israeli is seeking to achieve a security achievement before the elections. On the other hand, the party will not back down from its firm position that it is concerned with the exclusivity of weapons south of the Litani, not its north.”
Regarding proposals requiring Hezbollah to evacuate the Ali Al-Taher facility, in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal from the occupied city of Bint Jbeil or the town of Khiam, which are located within the “yellow line” that Israel created at a depth extending about 10 kilometers, and called it a “security zone,” the source says that Hezbollah denies similar proposals, considers them “baseless,” and sees them as “within the framework of deception, and seeks to hold (Hezbollah) responsible for not withdrawing.” In the event of renewed war. The party accuses the Lebanese state of “misleading itself, because Israel does not accept discussion of a new region, and whenever it is given something, it demands more without making any concession.”
The Israeli government is pursuing a policy that is called in Tel Aviv “hot front hysteria.” As military tension escalated despite the ceasefire agreements; Whether that was on the Syrian front, Gaza, or the West Bank. Although the government and the army justify the escalation with security arguments, the Hebrew media publish analyzes of senior strategists and former generals who believe that this is an attempt to save the extreme right-wing government from falling in the elections that will be held on October 27, 2026, with which the army is in agreement.
In the past two weeks, the Israeli army carried out 27 air strikes on Syria, 36 ground invasions, and arrested 11 Syrian citizens. This was accompanied by threats from political and military officials against Turkey, which they accuse of establishing military bases on the territory of Syria, something that both Ankara and Damascus officially deny.
At the same time, Tel Aviv is carrying out deadly raids on the Gaza Strip under the pretext of eliminating Hamas field leaders who had participated in the October 7, 2023 attack, and has so far claimed more than 50 deaths. Including 10 children and other civilians, military escalation operations were carried out in the West Bank, including attacks on several towns and camps, criminal attacks by settlers, and a new expansion of settlement in the northern West Bank and in the area known as “E-1” near Jerusalem. To divide the West Bank in half with the aim of preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state.
At a time when this wave is arousing widespread criticism in the world, to the extent that Germany, Britain, France, and others have threatened to impose political and economic sanctions, the leaders of the Israeli right are proud of it and consider it “part of the developments in the new Middle East, in which Israel is running a decisive and decisive policy.” Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz published a video showing the effects of the Israeli bombing and wrote under it: “We are the sweetest people. Boom...boom...boom.”
The Hebrew media was filled with dozens of articles, especially by former generals, criticizing this policy by saying that “the Israeli army is making tremendous military gains against the Iranian axis of evil and its arms, but the Israeli political leadership does not capitalize on this or translate it into political gains.”
Many wondered why the government refrained from advancing the “road map” plan to implement the “second phase” of US President Donald Trump’s plan in the Gaza Strip, “which should lead to a committee of technocrats assuming power in place of (Hamas), so why is Israel obstructing this transition... Is it interested in maintaining Hamas’ rule?”
Similar questions are raised about the Syrian front, where there are official negotiations between the two governments in order to reach security and political understandings... “So why does Israel obstruct these negotiations and replace them with military strikes?” The same applies to Lebanon.
In the end; The Idlib attack implicates Israel with the United States, and does not add any good will in Damascus. According to what researcher Ksenia Spitlova wrote in Yedioth Ahronoth on Thursday. She said in an article entitled: “Israeli election campaign in Idlib”: “If someone believes that the attack increased the extent of Israeli deterrence, he is called upon to read again the statements issued in recent days from Washington, from Damascus and from Ankara... stressing that in order to prevent the Turkish attempt to expand its influence in the region, Israel will have to formulate a smart policy, and not just an iron fist, the use of which would cause harm but would not prevent the march itself.”
She adds that “the goals of the Israeli escalation are known: they are electoral,” and warns: “In the end; The Idlib attack (the bombing of Abu al-Duhur Airport) implicates Israel with the United States, and does not add goodwill in Damascus.”
Ehud Barak, the former Israeli Prime Minister, who also held the positions of Minister of Defense and Chief of Staff of the Army, had stated that “the Israeli escalation of tension on all fronts is a repetition of Netanyahu’s policy that targets one thing: (remaining in power)... In order to achieve this, it fuels the war mentality and despair of any political settlements.” He does not care that Israelis die in these empty wars that do not achieve security. Barak said, in an interview with Channel 12, that this policy “is becoming more dangerous as the election date approaches, and if polls continue to predict the fall of Netanyahu, we could see the outbreak of a major war with the aim of postponing the elections.”
Yair Golan, head of the left-wing Democrats party, who served as deputy chief of staff and was nominated by Netanyahu as chief of staff, said: “The recent wars have nothing to do with Israel’s interests and security. These are Netanyahu’s wars for the sake of Netanyahu and his partisan interests.”
