Regional order: Israeli strikes expose limits of diplomacy in Lebanon under Trump-era policies

Report by Bassam Abou Zeid, English adaptation by Yasmine Jaroudi

The political approach adopted by U.S. President Donald Trump continues to have a direct and tangible impact on the Middle East, with Israel under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acting as Washington's closest ally and primary enforcer, particularly in relation to Lebanon and Hezbollah.

It has become increasingly clear that neither the monitoring mechanism, nor Lebanon's presidency and government, regardless of their composition, nor Hezbollah itself can halt Israeli attacks on Lebanese territory without the disarmament of the group, and possibly further measures beyond that.

Israel did not notify the mechanism of the airstrikes it carried out in recent hours, instead framing them as acts of self-defense under its own interpretation of the ceasefire agreement. 

The strikes were also seen as a message rejecting any discussion of what Israel describes as "containing" Hezbollah's weapons, an option it considers unacceptable. This comes as attention turns to what the Lebanese Army is expected to present in early February regarding its plan to restrict weapons, including the possibility of moving into a new phase north of the Litani River.

The latest strikes have placed the Lebanese government in an awkward position. Officials acknowledge that diplomatic efforts are unlikely to succeed in stopping the attacks, while at the same time recognizing that the government cannot persuade Hezbollah to hand over its weapons.

Hezbollah has also been embarrassed by the situation, as it is widely believed that it cannot respond militarily without severe consequences, assuming it is still able to access its remaining weapons. 

In this context, informed sources say the group is attempting to shift the confrontation inward, directing its pressure toward the state and the government. Such a move, they warn, would deepen Hezbollah's predicament without ending the Israeli threat, while adding a new layer of strain on the GROUP and its support base.

The same sources say Lebanon continues to rely on the mechanism to avoid a worst-case scenario, even if it remains inactive. At the same time, they note that undermining this committee appears to serve the interests of both Israel and Hezbollah.