Discussions about the implementation of the Lebanese “Framework Agreement” and the medical aid crisis in Gaza

The Lebanese discussion about the “Framework Agreement” with Israel is moving from the principles on which it was based to the implementation test, amid the disagreement focusing on the order of steps, their timetable, verification mechanisms, and guarantees. This comes at a time when Beirut links the completion of the Lebanese army's deployment in the south to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the areas that are supposed to transfer to state authority.

This path gained additional momentum after the meeting between Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in Washington, at the end of last September, as Salam’s office officially announced that he stressed the activation of the “tripartite framework” and the translation of the principles of reciprocity and phasedness into practical steps, and the setting of a clear timetable and the establishment of a reliable mechanism to verify commitments, while Rubio renewed, according to the official statement, Washington’s commitment to supporting Lebanon in implementing the “framework agreement.”

In this context, a Lebanese ministerial source told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the framework agreement is committed to by three parties: Lebanon, the United States, and Israel. Lebanon is committed to it in all its aspects, while the United States is the sponsor that signed the agreement and its guarantor, and therefore it is required to put pressure on Israel.

While the source pointed out that the Israeli withdrawal was halted, he pointed out that “the issue of prisoners has not been completed,” pointing out that there are 34 Lebanese prisoners on lists that reached the Israeli side during the negotiations.

The source said: “Today the agreement is under the test of implementation, awaiting the outcome of the military meeting expected to be held this month (with the Israeli side) in Florida, where Israel will continually discuss the policy of destruction, bombing, and bulldozing, in addition to other files related to the implementation of the agreement.”

Regarding the guarantees, the source said: “The main sponsor of the agreement is the United States, which must play the role required of it and put pressure on Israel as well.”

The source's demand for a greater American role intersects with the official proposal that Salam brought to Washington, which focused specifically on the implementation schedule and verification mechanism, while emphasizing that the path of Israeli withdrawal, extension of state authority, and arms exclusivity would advance in parallel.

For his part, MP Pierre Bouassi, a member of the Lebanese Forces bloc and a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Lebanese Parliament, told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The framework agreement, with its broad outlines and its political and practical aspects, is good, but the problem began during implementation, as several factors entered the process, preventing the start of implementation.”

He added: “It is clear that Israel has not adhered to the framework agreement. It was supposed to withdraw from certain areas so that the Lebanese army would be deployed and there would be observers, but it did not withdraw, and this is where the problem begins. The army cannot be deployed in areas from which the Israeli withdrawal has not occurred.”

He explained that “the lack of observers so far is also due to Israel placing a veto on the participation of large countries currently within the international emergency forces, even though we are talking about a completely different mission,” adding: “We are facing a long path, but if it does not start from somewhere, it will not reach any result.”

Bouassi criticized the talk about the Lebanese army’s lack of seriousness in implementing it, saying: “This path must be launched so that the Israelis and the Americans, and above all we as Lebanese, can see whether the army is capable, and whether it has the capabilities and political decision necessary to deploy.”

He stressed that “the framework agreement is multi-faceted and cannot be reduced to experimental areas only. It addresses several aspects and a broader path, but at this point in particular there is a great influence of the Israeli position and the role of American sponsorship in pushing for implementation, as well as to remove obstacles to the presence of international observers capable of monitoring the implementation of the agreement.”

Bouassi said, “The issue has actually moved to the implementation schedule and its guarantees.” These matters are more complicated because we are in a state of conflict, and if we were in a state of peace, the process would be simpler. The agreement was drawn up to overcome them, not to make these problems a reason not to start.”

This focus on the schedule and guarantees coincides with the position announced by the Prime Minister following the Salam-Rubio meeting, as she spoke officially about a “clear timetable” and a “reliable mechanism for verification,” indicating that implementation details have become at the heart of the current stage of the process.

Bouassi rejected the suggestion that it was necessary to wait for the Lebanese army to be more equipped before starting to carry out its mission, and said: “There is no doubt that the army must be equipped as best as possible and the largest possible amount of aid must be provided to it, but the military establishment today is able to begin implementing this mission, provided that it has the required political cover.”

He concluded: “Our political position in the Lebanese Forces Party is clear: we want to implement the framework agreement, Israel’s withdrawal, the return of prisoners, and reconstruction, and we insist on all of these points. At the same time, we are keen for the Lebanese army and the legitimate Lebanese security forces to have exclusive arms and security over the entire Lebanese territory, and this is the path launched by the Lebanese government during the years 2025 and 2026.

Yesterday, Friday, the World Health Organization revealed that the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza via Israel is witnessing “one delay after another,” denouncing a “chronic shortage” of medical supplies.

The representative of the World Health Organization in the Palestinian Territories, Reinhilde van de Weerd, stated that the health situation in the Gaza Strip “is still very catastrophic,” while none of its hospitals are operating at full capacity.

She told reporters in Geneva in statements she made from Jerusalem: “Sufficient amounts of humanitarian aid are not entering Gaza, and certainly not enough to expand and restore health services effectively.”

She noted that the Israeli approval system for the entry of medical supplies and other humanitarian aid constitutes a major obstacle.

She stated: “It is an arduous and time-consuming process with no guaranteed results.”

Based on the latest analysis by the World Health Organization, large quantities of medical supplies are waiting for permission to enter for an average of 74 days, Van de Weerdt said, adding that if this is not done, “we start this long and complicated process all over again.”

She explained that the approval system is constantly changing with the introduction of new rules.

Israel says that it prevents the entry of materials that may have military uses, while it accuses the Hamas movement of planning new acts of violence after the unprecedented attack it launched on the Hebrew state on October 7, 2023, which sparked the war in the Gaza Strip.

Van de Weer pointed out that basic medical supplies commonly used in the world have the lowest approval rates, while X-ray machines, sterilization equipment, spare parts for computed tomography (CT scan) machines, and other basic equipment are “frequently rejected.”

“In the past six months alone, a shipment of prosthetics and assistive devices has been rejected four separate times,” she said.

But she noted that the introduction of medicines is going “relatively well,” with nearly 87 percent of them approved.

She continued, “It is not about one obstacle, but rather it is a complete system in which one delay follows another, and behind every delay a patient is waiting.”

She said: “We need humanitarian and health supplies to enter Gaza without obstacles, on a regular basis, and in large quantities.”

She hoped that “Israel would at least ease restrictions on medical supplies.”

Van de Weerd called for opening more crossings into the Strip, and providing “clear and announced instructions” regarding procedures and requirements.

She added that success should not be measured by the number of trucks crossing the border, explaining that this “reflects little about whether the actual health needs of the population are being met or not.”

In this regard, she said, “A truck loaded with non-priority supplies, or the appropriate supplies arriving too late, does not save lives.”

The Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 resulted in the deaths of 1,221 people, according to a census conducted by Agence France-Presse based on official Israeli figures.

On the other hand, the war launched by Israel on Gaza in response to the attack resulted in the deaths of more than 74,000 people, according to the Ministry of Health run by Hamas in Gaza, and the United Nations considers its data reliable.