Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play

Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play

Lebanon, once more caught in conflict, finds itself at a critical juncture as President Joseph Aoun seeks to broker peace. Last August, during a meeting at Baabda Palace—a modernist structure atop a hill overlooking Beirut—I recalled his determination. Aoun, a retired military leader, assumed office following a brutal war between Israel and Hezbollah, a militant group and political faction backed by Iran. At that time, Hezbollah had suffered setbacks and faced internal and external isolation, prompting Aoun to pledge its disarming.

The ceasefire agreement signed in November 2024 had halted hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, yet the Israeli military persisted in daily strikes targeting the group. In certain regions, the war had never truly ended. From my residence in eastern Beirut, I could sometimes hear the whir of Israeli drones passing overhead. For Hezbollah’s adherents, the group symbolizes resistance against Israel’s encroachment, while critics argue it prioritizes Iran’s geopolitical goals over Lebanon’s stability.

“I was born an optimist,” Aoun remarked during our conversation. His vision for peace relied on dismantling Hezbollah’s arsenal, a task he believed achievable through negotiation.

Following Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s assassination in February during a US-Israeli strike on Tehran, Hezbollah retaliated by launching rocket attacks into Israel. The group framed this as a response to the loss of its Iranian leader and ongoing Israeli bombardment. Israel, in turn, escalated its response with air strikes and a new ground campaign in southern Lebanon.

Aoun, aiming to halt the violence, proposed direct talks with Israel—a bold move between nations that lack diplomatic recognition. Israel hesitated until last week, when the US brokered a ceasefire with Iran. The timing of the proposal coincided with Israel’s devastating air assault, which claimed over 300 lives in a single day. A meeting between the countries’ ambassadors, focused on a potential truce, is set for Tuesday in Washington.

Hezbollah’s Role and Lebanon’s Dilemma

Hezbollah, or “Party of God” in Arabic, emerged in the 1980s during Israel’s occupation of Lebanon. Funded, trained, and armed by Iran, it has long opposed Israeli control, maintaining its military presence despite the Taif Agreement of 1989, which required militias to surrender weapons. The accord also established a power-sharing system among Lebanon’s diverse sects, but Hezbollah retained its arsenal by framing itself as a defensive force.

Israel withdrew troops from southern Lebanon in 2000 after an 18-year occupation, yet territorial disputes lingered. The UN Resolution 1701, which concluded the 2006 war and demanded Hezbollah’s disarmament, remains unfulfilled. Though labeled a terrorist organization by the UK and US, Hezbollah operates as a political entity, influencing Lebanon’s governance and providing social services in areas where state infrastructure is lacking.

Aoun’s administration advocates for a “state monopoly on arms,” a policy that would centralize control of weapons. Under the 2024 ceasefire, Hezbollah agreed to withdraw fighters and weapons from southern Lebanon, a region it had dominated for decades. However, its secretary-general, Naim Qassem, has refused to consider comprehensive disarmament. Aoun warns that forced removal of Hezbollah’s arms could reignite violence, stating, “We can’t let the country descend into another civil war.” With limited leverage, Lebanon’s government faces an uphill battle in achieving lasting peace.