What the Lebanon-Israel diplomatic deadlock could mean for regional stability - assalamu alaykum
Assalamu alaykum. As the US-brokered ceasefire in Gaza holds precariously, attention is turning north to Lebanon, where President Joseph Aoun’s proposal for talks to resolve old disputes was turned down by Israel.
Israel still occupies several hilltops in Lebanon, airstrikes continue in the south, and Hezbollah’s disarmament remains unresolved. So the core question remains: can these two neighbours put their long history of conflict behind them?
At the Sharm El-Sheikh summit on Oct. 13, Aoun took a conciliatory tone and urged negotiation, noting that Lebanon had previously negotiated with Israel - citing the 2022 US- and UN-mediated maritime border deal - and asking why similar talks couldn’t resolve other outstanding issues. About a week later, Israel rejected his call, which had included a temporary halt to Israeli military operations, withdrawal from occupied Lebanese land, and follow-up border and security talks.
US envoy Tom Barrack warned that unless Lebanon disarms the Iran-backed Hezbollah, Israel “may act unilaterally,” and that several US-supported initiatives to push Lebanon toward peace have stalled. Lebanon now faces heavy pressure: Washington and others pressing for Hezbollah’s disarmament, while the group remains staunchly opposed.
Hezbollah leaders have reiterated they will not give up their weapons, framing them as necessary to confront projects they see as serving Israel. Meanwhile, Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah positions, and sporadic exchanges and strikes continue along the border despite last year’s ceasefire.
UN experts and Lebanese authorities have reported civilian casualties from recent strikes, raising concerns that such violence undermines disarmament efforts and stability in southern Lebanon.
Many Lebanese still view making peace with Israel as taboo, rooted in decades of invasions, occupation and cross-border attacks dating back to 1978 and the big wars of 1982 and 2006. The cycle of violence escalated again after the Hamas attack in Oct. 2023 and Israel’s campaign in Gaza, with heavy losses on both sides and mass displacement.
Still, fatigue with recurring conflict has led some Lebanese to reconsider that taboo, arguing their country should prioritize national interests and avoid repeated entanglement in wars. Others remain skeptical: many in Lebanon, especially communities that bore the brunt of past Israeli attacks, strongly oppose direct talks.
Policy voices differ on how to move forward. Some suggest indirect negotiations over border demarcation could be the most realistic option, similar to past maritime talks. Others insist Lebanon must avoid ceding its demands or be prepared for dangerous domestic fallout if it yields to external pressure to disarm militant groups.
Observers note that for Israel the objectives seem to be formal recognition, dismantling Hezbollah’s military capacity, and shaping any peace on terms favorable to it. Lebanon, however, insists that any lasting settlement should be comprehensive and just, pointing to earlier Arab peace proposals that tied normalization to full withdrawal from occupied territories and a fair resolution for the Palestinians.
Realistically, some analysts see a limited security arrangement or cessation of hostilities as more attainable in the near term than full peace and normalization. The immediate priorities for many Lebanese remain ending occupation of territory, stopping near-daily strikes, and allowing displaced communities to begin rebuilding.
May Allah grant wisdom and just outcomes for the people affected, protect civilians, and guide leaders toward solutions that preserve lives, dignity, and rights.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/