Israel has raised three objections that are blocking progress toward a political or military resolution in southern Lebanon: it has rejected a proposed Italian force to carry out verification in a pilot zone, opposed expanding the model zones and obstructed plans for the post-UNIFIL phase. Those plans include proposals for a European force to replace the UN mission when its mandate expires at the end of this year. Arrangements for the next phase in southern Lebanon are becoming increasingly tangled. Disputes persist over the security mechanism that would accompany any Israeli withdrawal, who would verify compliance and how far that party’s authority would extend, as Israeli operations in the south continue. Against that backdrop, President Joseph Aoun met Lebanese Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal to review security conditions across the country, particularly in the south, amid continued Israeli attacks on southern villages and towns. Haykal briefed Aoun on his visit to Italy and talks with Italian officials. The presidential statement gave no details of those discussions or whether they directly addressed proposals for future security arrangements. Israel accused of obstruction Nearly two months after the Framework Agreement was signed, there has been no move to establish additional pilot zones. Israeli media have meanwhile reported objections to a proposal for an Italian force to help monitor areas from which Israeli troops are expected to withdraw and where the Lebanese army would assume responsibility. Lebanese ministerial sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Israel’s shifting positions and objections were among the main reasons no decision had been reached on who would take part in the next phase of security arrangements in southern Lebanon, what duties and powers that party would have, or the rules governing its work. “The Israelis previously had no objection to Italian participation, but they are now objecting to an Italian force, after objections to the French had also emerged,” the sources said. “So far, there is no final decision on who will participate, what tasks will be assigned to them, the limits of those tasks, or how they will be carried out.” Israeli positions keep changing, the sources said. “Sometimes they object to the French and sometimes to the Italians. At every stage, new conditions or positions emerge. That is why the final arrangements have yet to take shape.” Contacts are continuing as Lebanon explores possible alternatives, but no final formula has been agreed upon, the sources said. “Otherwise, the outlines of the next phase would already be clearer.” The terms of the arrangements themselves are a major source of the deadlock, the sources added. “Israel is making demands about the force’s powers and operating mechanisms, including issues involving searches of homes and the nature of its participation in field operations. These matters raise several concerns and are obstructing an agreement.” The sources said those demands were accompanied by Israeli claims that the Lebanese army was not fulfilling the role expected of it. “Taken together, these signs point to an Israeli tendency to obstruct.” Washington is at the center of talks Asked what options Lebanon had in the face of the deadlock, the sources said Beirut was consulting Washington because the United States also bore responsibility for the process. “When the negotiating framework was established, the American role was central to it. The process is therefore not limited to Lebanon and Israel.” The sources said there was practically no alternative to engaging with Washington. “The Americans are the party capable of communicating with the Israeli side and influencing the process. Contacts with them are therefore continuing.” Israel’s account of the pilot zones Israeli leaks suggest the dispute goes beyond the identity of any international party involved in future arrangements. It also covers the scope of that party’s powers and duties, its relationship with the Lebanese army and the mechanisms for verifying implementation. Israeli news website Walla reported that Israel had told the United States it was dissatisfied with the results of the pilot zones project and had criticized the Lebanese army’s performance in those areas. An Israeli security official said the Lebanese army was not carrying out the required measures from Israel’s perspective, according to the website. The official linked that assessment to Tel Aviv’s current refusal to move to additional zones. Those statements remain part of Israel’s account of how the understandings are being implemented. Lebanese sources, for their part, say contacts are continuing, with neither the arrangements nor a final formula settled. Israeli veto of Italian force A separate dispute centers on who could help monitor the implementation of the arrangements. Israel’s Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper reported that Israel opposed deploying an Italian military force in southern Lebanon to monitor the pilot zones. It cited Israeli officials as saying they feared any new international presence could restrict the Israeli military’s ability to operate in Lebanon. The newspaper also quoted Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz as rejecting the proposal and voicing concern that it could replicate the UNIFIL model.
