A ceasefire lasting 10 days between Israel and Lebanon was initiated early today at 2:30 AM IST. This agreement, announced by U.S. President Donald Trump prior to any official statements from either nation, is seen as a vital step forward, albeit it carries certain contradictions.
Israel’s military actions have primarily targeted Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia operating in southern Lebanon, rather than the Lebanese government itself. Following the ceasefire announcement, comments from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hezbollah raised concerns about the truce’s stability.
The ceasefire has faced backlash within Israel, with critics accusing Netanyahu of not fully leveraging recent military successes. During the truce, both nations are expected to address their disputes in pursuit of a “lasting peace,” including a proposed summit at the White House featuring leaders from both Israel and Lebanon.
The U.S. Department of State outlined the terms of the agreement, which state that:
“Lebanon and Israel have reached an understanding to foster conditions for enduring peace, involving mutual recognition of sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as ensuring genuine security along their shared boundary, while safeguarding Israel’s inherent right to self-defense.”
This mutual recognition is significant, especially since Lebanon has never formally acknowledged Israel, and Israel seeks to establish a security zone extending 30 kilometers into Lebanon. Furthermore, Israel’s right to self-defense has often been cited as justification for its military actions against neighboring states.
The agreement also stipulates that “Israel shall maintain its right to undertake all necessary self-defense measures at any time against imminent threats or ongoing attacks, irrespective of the ceasefire,” while obligating the “Government of Lebanon to take actionable steps to prevent Hezbollah and other unauthorized armed groups from launching attacks against Israeli targets.”
In response to the ceasefire announcement, Netanyahu asserted that Israel would retain control over its occupied territories in southern Lebanon, while Hezbollah insisted that any ceasefire must encompass all of Lebanon and not grant Israel any freedom of movement. Otherwise, Lebanon reserves the right to resist.
Should the ceasefire endure and dialogue continue, Israel is expected to concentrate on disarming Hezbollah, while Lebanon will likely push for the withdrawal of Israeli forces, international assistance for reconstruction, the return of displaced individuals, and the release of Lebanese detainees in Israel.
This marks the first direct communication between Lebanon and Israel since 1993, as previous ceasefires were facilitated by external parties such as the United Nations, the U.S., or France. A recurring point of contention has been Israel’s assertion that Lebanon has not fulfilled its obligations regarding Hezbollah’s disarmament, while Lebanon contends that Israeli forces have not departed its territory.
Netanyahu faces significant domestic criticism, particularly since even members of his Cabinet learned about the ceasefire through Trump’s announcement, as reported by the Times of Israel.
Residents and officials from northern Israel, which borders Lebanon and is frequently targeted by Hezbollah rockets, have expressed concerns about their safety being compromised by international negotiations.
The ceasefire follows Iran’s assertions that its agreement with the U.S. would only hold if Lebanon was included, allowing Iran to claim success in thwarting two of Netanyahu’s military initiatives in both Iran and Lebanon before he achieved his stated objectives.
Lebanon’s President, Joseph Aoun, had been advocating for direct negotiations since Israel’s military operations began in his country in early March, which were prompted by Hezbollah’s rocket attacks in response to the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. However, his calls received attention only after the U.S.-Israel-Iran ceasefire was brokered.
Following that truce, which halted Israeli operations in Iran, Netanyahu escalated airstrikes in Lebanon, drawing widespread international criticism. While many nations refrained from condemning Israel’s actions in Iran, the targeting of civilian areas in Lebanon elicited backlash, including from traditional allies like Italy’s Giorgia Meloni. With elections approaching later this year, Netanyahu faces scrutiny over allegations of succumbing to international pressure.
Former IDF chief of staff and Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot remarked that the ceasefire represents a pattern of forced agreements on Israel, noting similar situations in Gaza, Iran, and now Lebanon.
Despite Netanyahu’s claims since October 2023 of wanting to eliminate Hezbollah, the group remains active, having suffered leadership losses and diminished military capabilities, yet thousands of Lebanese civilians have died due to Israel’s campaign.
The ceasefire offers a crucial respite for a war-torn population, which has seen over 1,000 Lebanese casualties and a million displaced in recent months. While the government has advised residents in southern Lebanon against returning home immediately, some have begun to do so.
While the Lebanese government desires to disarm Hezbollah, it lacks the necessary resources and opposes actions that draw the nation into regional conflicts. Following Hezbollah’s rocket attacks on March 2, the government prohibited its military activities and previously requested the official Lebanese army to implement a phased disarmament plan for all non-state actors.
If the current ceasefire holds…
