Lebanese and regional contacts contained a sharp deterioration in Lebanon’s security situation after a major military escalation between Israel and Hezbollah, and threats by Tel Aviv to escalate further. Lebanese sources said Israel was seeking to undermine the ceasefire agreement, pressure Lebanese negotiators ahead of a fifth round of talks with Lebanon in Washington, and secure gains on the ground. Reuters quoted a US official as saying Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to a ceasefire starting at 4 p.m. local time, after a major escalation that killed 47 Lebanese, including children and civilians, and four Israeli soldiers in clashes with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. The Israeli air force carried out more than 150 strikes in southern and eastern Lebanon. “Hezbollah and Israel agreed to a ceasefire,” the US official said, adding that US and Qatari negotiators reached the agreement with help from Iran. “We understand that after the exchange of fire earlier today, Israel and Hezbollah are now in a ceasefire,” the official said. Israel and Hezbollah both said they were ready to respect the ceasefire and respond to violations. Lebanese and international contacts The security deterioration triggered a flurry of regional, international and local contacts. Official sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Lebanese President Joseph Aoun “began a series of international contacts in the morning with influential countries to lower the escalation, prevent further deterioration and ensure commitment to the ceasefire.” The contacts focused mainly on the United States and Qatar. Aoun also condemned “the continuing Israeli escalation.” “What we are witnessing today in the south and the Bekaa, with the expansion of Israeli attacks and further killing and destruction, is a dangerous and condemnable escalation, especially as it has affected dozens of innocent people, including women and children,” Aoun said. He said the escalation “effectively targets all ongoing efforts to consolidate the ceasefire and end the war, especially after the latest developments between the US and Iran.” “But this will not prevent work to achieve a comprehensive ceasefire as quickly as possible. This is what I instructed the Lebanese negotiating delegation to pursue in the next round in Washington,” he said. “There can be no leniency on this issue because a comprehensive ceasefire is the entry point for discussing other issues, most importantly the Israeli withdrawal, the deployment of the army and the return of prisoners.” On the international level, Hezbollah parliamentary bloc member MP Hassan Fadlallah said Iran had informed the group that negotiations with the United States could not continue without the implementation of a comprehensive ceasefire. Fadlallah urged the Lebanese government to reject any direct negotiations with Israel while Israeli attacks on Lebanon continue. He said Washington was responsible for ensuring Israel stops its attacks and implements the terms of the agreement. Geographic expansion and pressure on Lebanon The sudden deterioration appeared to signal an Israeli attempt to bypass the agreement that took effect last Monday. Sources in the Shi’ite duo told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel was “pressuring to strike the agreement directly and target it.” They said Tel Aviv was also trying to pressure the Lebanese negotiator before the fifth round of direct negotiations with Israel opens in Washington next Tuesday. The talks are due to run for three days. The sources said Israel was trying to “seize additional cards with which to pressure Lebanon.” They cited “an Israeli desire for geographic expansion after its failure to achieve a major expansion during 110 days of war.” The area where Israel made significant advances in the first weeks of the war, they said, was the same area Hezbollah evacuated and where it committed to restricting weapons to the Lebanese state. But attempts to expand beyond that area “met fierce resistance that slowed the push,” the sources said. The source said a fourth reason was “an internal crisis linked to the rising far-right mood in Israel,” adding that “military failure is driving it to target civilians in Lebanon.” Ceasefire before any arrangements Lebanese observers say Israel’s failure to abide by the ceasefire agreement is not driven only by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s sense of being “sidelined” after the agreement was signed. They say Israel is also trying to reach an agreement with the Lebanese state in exchange for withdrawal from occupied territory, and to begin disarming Hezbollah in exchange for halting the escalation. Hezbollah rejects this. The group is relying on US-Iranian understandings and continues to criticize the Lebanese state’s negotiating track. Still, Lebanese authorities are proceeding with the sessions scheduled to begin Tuesday. Lebanese ministerial sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that the instructions to the negotiating delegation are clear: demand a full and comprehensive ceasefire before discussing any other arrangements. The sources said Beirut “is holding to its demands.” Singling out Lebanon Hezbollah, however, rejects the direct negotiating track. Sources following Hezbollah’s escalation against the track said the group “believes there is an overlap of interests between Tel Aviv and the state within the framework of the track on which the state is relying to achieve withdrawal and a ceasefire.” The sources said Hezbollah believes the direct negotiating track rests on the view that Israel is uncomfortable with US performance in the agreement with Iran, while Lebanon is uncomfortable with Iran’s performance. They said Hezbollah had “sensed that Lebanon was being singled out” through the US statement issued after the first negotiating session. This, they said, was reinforced in the declaration of intent paper in the fourth round, which appeared to show bias toward Israel in the negotiations. Hezbollah MP Hussein Hajj Hassan said: “The authorities agreed to a joint statement with the Americans and Israelis containing language to the effect that Hezbollah is a common enemy of Israel, America and Lebanon. This was stated by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, while the Lebanese delegation did not utter a word. No Lebanese official in power objected to this language. Therefore, what is required from them is a position clarifying whether they agree with this language or not.” He called on Lebanese officials “to bridge the gap they created with the resistance and its public, and to bridge the gap they created with the Islamic Republic of Iran, for Lebanon’s interest and not for Iran’s interest.”
