What does the framework agreement with Lebanon look like in Israel? | | US-Israel War on Iran News

The declaration of a framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon after talks in the United States have met the hope of security in Israel.

Friday’s agreement outlines a “successive plan” that will see the Lebanese army restore “effective control over all parts of Lebanon, pending the verification of non-government armed forces” – a clear reference to Hezbollah, which has been fighting Israel since October 2023, in varying degrees.

Recommended Articles

list of 4 itemsend of series

After completing the operation, the Israeli army will be able to “gradually rebuild” from a large area of ​​southern Lebanon where they have been since the beginning of March, when they launched an offensive that has killed more than 4,000 people.

The Washington framework does not specify the methods that will be used to ensure the withdrawal of weapons but describes two “pilot areas” to leave Israel, where the Lebanese army “will gradually take over the full responsibility for security”.

Yossi Mekelberg, a senior adviser at Chatham House, said that “only time and its implementation will tell” whether this is “a real agreement or something that has been signed” to please the US, the main representative of Israel and a signatory of Friday’s agreement.

Last week, Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to end the war that the US and Israel launched against Iran at the end of February which was conditional on Israel stopping its campaign in Lebanon and agreeing to respect “the integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon”.

“Can the Israeli government really leave Lebanon and face the electorate? We don’t know,” Mekelberg said. “Similarly, can the Lebanese government really deal with Hezbollah, who is really the problem?

As expected, Hezbollah rejected the plan. In a statement on Saturday, the group’s secretary general Naim Qassem called the Washington agreement “absurd” and insisted that the Iran-US agreement should be the basis for resolving the conflict. He also warned against linking Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon to disarming Hezbollah, saying they had crossed “red lines”.

But what have Israeli politicians done with this framework, and what are the chances of its implementation?

What did the Prime Minister of Israel say?

Shortly after the announcement of the framework, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a video in which he tried to sell the deal to people who polls show do not want to stop Hezbollah’s attacks.

Describing the deal as a major blow to Hezbollah’s ally and Israel’s former adversary, Iran, Netanyahu assured the people – especially the citizens of northern Israel who have come under fire from Hezbollah – that Israel will maintain a “safe zone” inside Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed.

“Iran is trying to persuade us to leave southern Lebanon by force,” he said.

“And basically, Israel, Lebanon and the United States are telling Iran – it’s not your business. You have no business in Lebanon. Neither you, nor Hezbollah,” he added.

How has Israel’s opposition done?

It is mixed.

Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid criticized the plan, saying its policies allow Iran to continue funding the group, while hoping it will return to Lebanon.

Some political commentators have long criticized Israel’s policy on Hezbollah, saying it aims to drive rather than eliminate the threat the group poses. Writing on X, Deputy Prime Minister Avigdor Lieberman said that “as long as Hezbollah exists and is growing more and more every day, the next confrontation is a matter of time and even cooperation”.

Some leaders have criticized the way Israel has ceded power in its war against Hezbollah to its US ally. Speaking to a Hebrew-language podcast earlier this week before the signing, Gadi Eisenkot, a former chief of staff and known as Netanyahu’s main opponent, said: “We did not benefit from the victory of the war and we woke up with a security that should not be allowed”.

What have people done in the north of Israel?

Local leaders in northern Israel, often the scene of Hezbollah protests, greeted news of the deal with optimism.

David Azoulay, head of the Metula Regional Council, near the Lebanese border, welcomed the agreement but stressed that any withdrawal from Israel must be justified and carefully managed by the Israeli military and political leadership.

“Without disarmament of Hezbollah, there is no complete elimination,” he said. “Without disarmament of terrorist groups, there is no agreement.”

Eyal Shmueli, head of the council of the small town of Kfar Vradim, about 14km (9 miles) from the Lebanese border, expressed skepticism. “Events are teaching us that the previous and short-term commitment of the Lebanese government to disarm Hezbollah has not been fulfilled,” he said.

Ahron Bregman, senior lecturer in the Department of Military Studies at King’s College London, described the plan as an attempt by Israel and the US to “manage the border between Lebanon and Iran” and reduce “Iran’s influence in Lebanon”.

He added: “It won’t work, not in a million years”.

Meanwhile, Bregman said, neither Hezbollah, which still sees itself as the protector of Lebanon in the face of aggressive Israel, nor its ally Iran, whose confidence was boosted by bringing the US to the negotiating table, has no interest in surrendering its weapons or being dissolved.

This agreement should join 1701 in the growing pile of Israel-Lebanon cooperation,” he added, referring to the United Nations resolution established in 2006 to end the previous war between Israel and Hezbollah.