US-Lebanon military cooperation seen as key in next phase amid Israel talks — the details

Report by Lara El Hachem, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

With the start of the Iran war, the head of the mechanism committee, Gen. Joseph Clearfield, moved to Saudi Arabia to take over CENTCOM-related duties there. Since then, the committee tasked with overseeing the 2024 ceasefire agreement has not convened. 

With the outbreak of war in Lebanon, the ceasefire collapsed, and the committee’s work was effectively paralyzed, now limited mainly to coordinating and facilitating Lebanese army missions in rescue and relief operations.

Against these developments, a meeting between Gen. Rodolph Haykal and Clearfield was notable, described in an army statement as exceptional and swiftly arranged.

The timing of the meeting carries several implications. First, it underscores U.S. support for the Lebanese army and its leadership amid growing doubts targeting both institutions. Washington is aware that there is no alternative to the army to replace nonstate armed groups.

The second implication is that cooperation between the Lebanese and U.S. armies will form a cornerstone of the next phase, which is expected to include negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, both political and military in nature. 

This was also highlighted by U.S. President Donald Trump, who tasked U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine with working alongside the political side to achieve lasting peace between Lebanon and Israel.

However, with a ceasefire still not firmly in place, the roadmap for Israeli withdrawal and Lebanese army redeployment remains unclear, and sources expect the process could take months.

This ambiguity also extends to the future of the UNIFIL mission after its mandate expires at the end of the year. 

So far, there is no final plan, only several scenarios under discussion, including a multinational format under European Union auspices, a bilateral arrangement between Lebanon and interested countries, most notably Italy, France, Spain, and Germany, or a new U.N. framework, which would require U.S. approval and remains the main obstacle, as Washington reportedly prefers a force operating under its supervision.

The existence of multiple scenarios underscores the uncertainty and sensitivity surrounding Lebanon’s future phase.