Lebanon-Israel negotiations raise questions over path to lasting peace — the details

Report by Bassam Abou Zeid, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

Lebanon’s efforts to secure a ceasefire have failed to materialize. Instead, negotiators in Washington settled on extending the fragile truce for 45 days.

The Israeli military later began the extension by issuing warnings to several villages in southern Lebanon before targeting them.

Against this backdrop of ongoing hostilities, the agreed negotiation sessions are expected to begin.

The military track is scheduled for May 29 at the Pentagon, while the political track will take place on June 2 and 3 at the U.S. State Department.

Before then, the Lebanese side is expected to hold its first session and prepare the framework for the upcoming round.

Developments on the ground have pushed the military aspect to the forefront, making it necessary to form a military delegation representing Lebanon and capable of discussing the issues on the table, from supporting the Lebanese army in extending state authority to Hezbollah’s disarmament, in addition to the possibility of discussing security arrangements that could be included in any agreement.

During the latest round of negotiations, attention was drawn to the wording of the U.S. statement, which said Lebanon and Israel had agreed on a negotiating framework aimed at advancing toward lasting peace. 

The language aligns with Israel’s desire to reach a peace treaty with Lebanon, while the Lebanese delegation said launching both political and security tracks would improve the chances of reaching a permanent peaceful solution.

Will these negotiations lead to such a solution, or will all Lebanese players, along with Israel, wait for the outcome of the U.S.-Iran negotiations to become clearer?