Negotiations await US envoys decision: Hezbollah disarmament remains a priority for Israel

3^min

Report by Amal Shehadeh, English adaptation by Akram Chehayeb

While waiting for the results of U.S. envoy Tom Barrack's shuttle visit between Lebanon, Israel, and Syria, Tel Aviv continues to discuss ways to deal with the security settlement proposal towards Lebanon in a way that guarantees its security first, in light of the skepticism that the Lebanese government can succeed in disarming Hezbollah.

Israel does not hide its fear that the proposal and understandings will be a narrowing window that closes whenever Hezbollah succeeds in rebuilding its capabilities and internal status in Lebanon.

In sessions assessing the situation, Israeli authorities warned against giving in to American pressure and committing to a timetable about the five occupied sites in Lebanon or the gradual withdrawal of operations.

However, Israelis dread American steps that oblige Tel Aviv at a certain stage to withdraw and stop its operations in Lebanon.

Security and military officials considered that the freedom of Israel's action in Lebanon may not last for long, which prompted them to prepare a paper that, if adopted by the mini-ministerial cabinet, will be presented to Washington.

The paper outlines a new strategy that combines the continuation of daily military activity with political and economic steps to weaken Hezbollah.

The first phase provides for demilitarization in southern Lebanon based on U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, in exchange for Israel's withdrawal from the five points it controls under the supervision of an American force, not UNIFIL.

In the second phase, Hezbollah would be disarmed in the Bekaa Valley and in the border crossings between Syria and Lebanon in exchange for settling the land border disputes between Israel and Lebanon, with the possibility of settling the border between Lebanon and Syria.

In the third and final phase, Hezbollah would be disarmed in all of Lebanon in exchange for a complete cessation of Israeli attacks and an Israeli commitment to respect Lebanese sovereignty.

In terms of Israel-Lebanon relations, the proposal includes postponing initiatives to improve official relations between the two countries to a later stage, pending the strengthening of the new leadership in Lebanon.

According to the Israelis, for the time being, a return to the 1949 ceasefire agreement is more accepted by the Lebanese public than presenting ideas under the heading of normalization.