Lebanese army chief’s cancelled Washington meetings put army in focus as US attention shifts

Report by Lara El Hachem, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

There has been widespread talk of a strained relationship between Lebanese Army Commander Gen. Rodolph Haykal and U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus, with some claiming it was a key reason for the cancellation of Haykal’s meetings in the United States.

However, sources from both Western and local circles told LBCI that the reality is different.

It is true that some tension marked the first meeting between Ortagus and Haykal in April in Beirut, but the issues were quickly resolved. Western sources confirm that Ortagus is one of the army’s strongest defenders in Washington.

From this perspective, the controversy over the visit goes beyond the army itself. The U.S. has praised the Lebanese army’s work through the U.S. Central Command and the ceasefire monitoring committee, and Congress allocated the largest aid package to date, totalling $230 million.

The real issue lies with hardline elements in Washington, who successfully sent a message to the Lebanese state via the army leadership: this is only the beginning, Hezbollah’s weapons must be addressed as quickly as possible, and serious steps must be taken on financial, economic, and judicial reforms.

According to LBCI sources, the Lebanese government has not been informed of the actual reasons behind the cancellation of the army commander’s talks.

Meanwhile, high-level communications are taking place in Baabda to understand what happened and resolve any confusion calmly and away from the media. Discussions focus on the role played by the influential Israeli lobby in Washington in pressuring the Lebanese state.

Baabda insists that the president has not retreated from his commitments. He was the first to raise the issue of disarming Hezbollah in decades and the first to extend a hand for negotiations with Israel, though no response has been received. 

The government also directed the army to develop a plan to contain weapons and begin its implementation.

However, what Baabda considers the fulfillment of commitments is seen by hardline figures in Washington as insufficient. Today, the Lebanese state — president and government alike — is expected to adopt a clear strategy to lift Lebanon out of its current reality and align with developments in the Middle East.

Officials stress that solutions must come from Lebanon itself, not from abroad.