Mixed signals from US envoy Tom Barrack: Lebanon Israel mediation...

4^min

Report by Joe Farchakh, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

“We put together a negotiating team and started to be an intermediary [...] My belief is that’s happening in spades.”

With that statement, delivered during a press conference in New York, U.S. envoy Tom Barrack stirred Lebanese political circles Saturday after revealing a direct American role in facilitating undisclosed talks between Lebanon and Israel — despite Lebanon’s clear legal ban on any direct contact with Israel.

So, is Barrack referring to U.S.-backed backchannel mediation involving both Lebanese and Israeli representatives? Or is he pointing to a different committee?

Sources further told LBCI, “If there are direct talks, then what is Barrack here to do?” They added that what Barrack referred to pertains only to the “mechanism” — meaning the committee overseeing the ceasefire agreement.

According to LBCI information, Barrack has a roadmap for action — a paper outlining how to implement the agreement. The sources added that the U.S. envoy expressed doubt about the current committee’s effectiveness in stopping violations and holding violators accountable.

Barrack, they said, is working to either reactivate the current committee with American guarantees or replace it altogether if negotiations fail.

Barrack also stressed the need to support the Lebanese army, enabling it to deploy in the south, dismantle Hezbollah’s military infrastructure and confiscate its weapons.

He noted that the Lebanese government has delayed addressing Hezbollah’s weapons out of fear of civil war. He also drew a distinction between Hezbollah’s military and political branches.

In response, Hezbollah sources told LBCI, “There are no two wings within the party. Any attempt to treat Hezbollah as a dual-structured organization is categorically rejected.”

The sources added that Barrack’s remarks, despite their “flattering tone,” do not deceive the group, which views any American approach with caution — especially under the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, whom Hezbollah accuses of dishonesty and deception, as seen in the Iran file.

From Hezbollah’s perspective, no discussion of any national defense strategy is possible until Israel complies with the ceasefire agreement and U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701: halting daily violations and aggressions, withdrawing from Lebanese territory, and releasing detainees.

The sources concluded by emphasizing that the national defense strategy remains an entirely internal matter. No external party has any say.

Barrack also addressed Lebanon’s ties with Syria, warning of the danger that Lebanon could fall further into the grip of regional powers if it fails to act on Hezbollah’s weapons stockpiles.

He warned that Lebanon must resolve this issue, or it could face a real existential threat — so much so that if "Lebanon doesn’t move, it’s going to be Bilad al-Sham again."

Sources familiar with the matter noted that during his recent visit to Beirut, Barrack reassured Lebanese officials that border demarcation with Syria would be completed and that there is no intention to annex Lebanon to Syria, contrary to what some circles are promoting.

The question remains: Are we witnessing deliberate scaremongering or a calculated raising of the stakes in preparation for a broader deal?