France's diplomatic precision: Crafting last draft for Lebanon's International Forces

A sense of "relative relief" prevailed in Beirut on Tuesday after the amendments introduced by France to the draft resolution for the renewal of the international forces, which was written in blue ink, indicating its referral to the Security Council for a vote in the coming hours.

This article was originally published in, translated from the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar.

Practically, Lebanon engaged in a diplomatic battle in the past few days, adopting a similar approach to the method it used on the eve of demarcating the maritime borders in the fall of last year. Full coordination was achieved between the government, represented by its caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habib, Speaker Nabih Berri, Hezbollah, and the Lebanese Army leadership.

According to informed sources, the expected decision to be issued in the Security Council on Thursday did not eliminate the paragraphs granting international forces freedom of movement in their deployment areas.

However, it includes a settlement with Lebanon, emphasizing "coordination" between the international forces and the "Lebanese government," although clarity required a direct reference that movements should be pre-coordinated with the Lebanese Army.

Coordination with the Lebanese government eases the concerns of the international forces on the ground, which fear being compelled to take operational steps that might lead to confrontation with the residents of southern villages and, subsequently, with the Resistance.

Furthermore, Israel and several countries and parties are fully aware that the decision will not fit into the Western plan aimed at using international forces in the south to halt the development of the Resistance in the areas of the southern Litani River. Senior diplomats in Beirut have heard that any suspicious action by the international forces based on the decision will face significant anger from the residents of southern villages.

While waiting for the Lebanese delegation to clarify the situation entirely, there are "concerning" indications about the nature of the negotiations that took place in New York during the presence of the Foreign Minister and the accompanying delegation. It seems that things did not go as expected.

Furthermore, the countries' delegates supporting Lebanese demands demanded explicit Lebanese consent. Meanwhile, the American and British sides resorted to intimidation and threatened the Lebanese delegation with the consequences of defying international community decisions.

The British delegate even threatened that Lebanon's rejection of the initial formula would prompt the Security Council to issue a resolution considering Lebanon "captured by a terrorist organization, Hezbollah," and calling for the punishment of the Lebanese government on multiple levels.

However, these delegates received a message indicating that Lebanon is not in a weak position, forcing it to accept keeping the text as it was issued last year.

Beirut negotiations and Lebanon's demands

Al-Akhbar sources stated that the core communications were also taking place in Beirut with representatives from member states of the Security Council, involving an exchange of documents at a time when the Lebanese team at the United Nations was emphasizing Lebanon's demands, which can be summarized in four points:

- An attempt to prevent the Security Council from including paragraphs about the internal political situation in Lebanon, especially regarding the absence of a presidential election. However, key states within the Security Council insisted on their stance, considering that the internal Lebanese situation directly affects the operation of international forces in the south.

- Lebanon's request to replace the name of the northern part of the village of Al-Ghajar with "the outskirts of Al-Mari" and the emphasis on the necessity of Israeli occupation forces withdrawing from it.

- Emphasis that the movements of the international forces in the south must be carried out in full coordination with the Lebanese Army and that the international forces should not have any right to act independently.

- Confirmation that the demarcation of maritime borders with occupied Palestine was not within the context of direct Lebanese-Israeli negotiations but was conducted through mediation led by the United States.

After days of back and forth, and as Israel intensified pressure on those involved in the United Nations, and with threats from the United States and UK to Lebanon of consequences if it did not agree to the renewal decision as they desired, the French side returned and ensured the formulation that would compel Israel and its allies to adhere to Lebanon's demands.

This led to adopting a wording that allows everyone to exit the battle with a "win-win" outcome.

The Last Draft

France delivered a copy of its latest draft to Lebanon and the Security Council member states on Tuesday before writing it in blue ink as the official version immediately referred to the Security Council for a vote.

This draft considers the agreement signed between Lebanon and the United Nations, known as "SOFA."

The draft reiterated what was stated last year that UNIFIL forces "do not require prior authorization to carry out their mandated tasks" and that they are allowed to "conduct their operations independently."

However, a phrase was added that speaks to the appreciation for "continuing their coordination with the Lebanese government, under the SOFA agreement."

The draft also reiterated the demand to condemn any act that leads to preventing the international forces from gaining "immediate and full access to the sites requested by UNIFIL for rapid investigation." This includes "all critical sites and all relevant sites north of the Blue Line related to the discovery of tunnels crossing the Blue Line, which the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon reported as violations of Resolution 1701."