Sources to LBCI: Lebanon insists on ceasefire mechanism as talks remain delayed

3^min

Sources informed LBCI that Lebanon reaffirmed its commitment to the ceasefire monitoring mechanism during two rounds of meetings held on December 3 and 19, during which Beirut raised the issue of the return of residents to southern areas and presented its position on the economic track of the discussions.

According to sources, Lebanese officials formally conveyed their stance to the concerned parties, and the U.S. response indicated understanding of Lebanon's position.

The same sources said the delay in convening the round of talks, initially scheduled for January 14, is linked to issues related to the mechanism's structure, the ceasefire agreement, and broader regional and international developments. They stressed that Lebanon remains firmly attached to the mechanism and is pressing for a new session to be held as soon as possible.

During the discussions, the Lebanese delegation reportedly insisted that the mechanism acknowledge the success of the Lebanese Army's deployment south of the Litani River.

However, Israel opted to issue a statement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that described both the positive and negative aspects of the situation, rather than endorsing the Lebanese position within the mechanism.

The sources added that Lebanon is ready to resume negotiations, including proposals related to both the negotiating framework and field-level arrangements.

Sources warned that the collapse of the mechanism would leave the country facing an uncertain future, emphasizing that the Lebanese state, across all its institutions, remains committed to preserving it.

When asked about possible alternatives, the sources said Lebanon is already in crisis and lacks viable alternatives, while other parties involved have options available to them.

The January 14 negotiating round was postponed, and no clear date has yet been set for the next session. The sources also noted that no proposal has so far been made to elevate the talks to a higher political level, although such a step could be considered at a later stage.