US envoy’s cautious tone reflects Lebanon’s mixed response to US proposal—The details

Report by Yazbek Wehbe, English adaptation by Akram Chehayeb

The soft tone in U.S. envoy Tom Barrack’s remarks stemmed from what he had heard from the Lebanese president and an initial reading of Lebanon’s official response to the U.S. proposal. 

The U.S. Embassy in Beirut had already begun reviewing the response and forwarded it to the State Department and the National Security Council in Washington, even before Barrack presented it to U.S. President Donald Trump.

The Lebanese response calls for a cessation of hostilities, a discussion on ensuring that weapons remain exclusively in the hands of the state, the gradual disarmament of armed groups, an end to the armed presence of all factions across Lebanon, and support for the army, including extending its authority throughout the country.

Lebanon’s top three leaders have approved the Lebanese paper, but Hezbollah, which was informed about it, has yet to give its final approval or rejection. However, some of the party’s concerns and viewpoints were communicated by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to the U.S. envoy, including demands for guarantees backed by Washington, a commitment that Israel will not violate the agreement, and assurances to halt raids and assassinations and to withdraw from the areas it occupied last year.

Sources further confirmed that Hezbollah did not give a pledge or agreement to hand over its weapons, nor did it reject it outright, and left the matter for an internal Lebanese discussion so as not to appear to have submitted to external dictates and pressures, whether Israeli or American, while stressing that it does not want war but will remain ready for defense in the event of escalation.

The sources added that the party would have preferred to postpone the Lebanese response to the U.S. paper. 

However, the commitment of Lebanon's leaders and the government to respond by a specific date prevented this from happening.

Even Speaker Berri informed those close to him that he does not prefer to bear the consequences of any agreement alone, as had happened in the cessation of hostilities agreement at the end of last November.

The sources believe that Hezbollah is trying to gain time to secure the most significant percentage of guarantees about its future, hence the importance of what Barrack announced on Monday regarding the future political role of Hezbollah.

The U.S. envoy, after receiving a briefing from General Rodolph Haykal on the army's missions in the south and the role it plays, also met with Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces Party, who said that collecting all illegal weapons, whether Palestinian or Lebanese, paves the way for the establishment of a "real state" in Lebanon.

The U.S. envoy is expected to return to Beirut by the end of July. By then, Lebanese officials should have prepared a roadmap detailing when to start handing over weapons, implement reforms, and resolve border disputes with Syria.