The Israeli military's continued presence in Lebanon has become a focal point of international scrutiny as the deadline for withdrawal looms. Initially set for 60 days under a November ceasefire agreement, the deadline was intended to see both Israeli and Hezbollah forces pull back from southern Lebanon. However, the Israeli government has requested an extension of 30 days, raising concerns among stakeholders and observers. This request comes as Israel has spent months dismantling Hezbollah's military infrastructure and leveling several Lebanese villages near the border.
Israeli officials, including the security cabinet, convened to deliberate on the withdrawal issue. The Israeli military invaded southern Lebanon on October 1, 2023, following a yearlong, low-level conflict with Hezbollah. Now, as the ceasefire deadline approaches, Israel seeks to maintain its strategic positions, citing security concerns. The US Department of Defense suggested that the timeline for withdrawal might be flexible, indicating potential diplomatic maneuvering.
The ceasefire agreement, brokered by the US and Israel with significant involvement from a US envoy, outlined that post-withdrawal, the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers would be the sole forces permitted in southern Lebanon. Additionally, Hezbollah was mandated to relocate its forces north of Lebanon's Litani River as stipulated by a 2006 United Nations Security Council resolution.
"The Lebanese army is far from disarming Hezbollah," stated Sarit Zehavi, highlighting skepticism about Lebanon's ability to manage the situation post-withdrawal.
Zehavi further expressed concerns about the vacuum that might result if Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) fully withdraw without adequate Lebanese enforcement.
"We are very worried what will happen if the IDF fully withdraws and the IDF enforcement will stop because we don’t see the Lebanese army doing anything," she added.
Israel’s desire to prolong its military presence in Lebanon underscores its security apprehensions. The Israeli government has communicated to the US that it wishes to keep its troops stationed in Lebanon for at least an additional month. Michael Herzog emphasized this understanding within the incoming administration regarding Israel's security imperatives.
"There is an understanding in the incoming administration about what our security needs are and what our position is, and I believe that we will reach an understanding in this issue as well," Herzog remarked.
Meanwhile, opponents of Israel's stance argue that any attempt to extend the military stay would violate the terms of the agreement. Hezbollah has already voiced strong opposition to such a move.
"would be considered a brazen breach of the agreement," Hezbollah stated unequivocally.
The international community remains vigilant. The US military, alongside French forces and the United Nations, is closely monitoring adherence to the ceasefire conditions. While some suggest flexibility in the withdrawal timeline, others urge strict compliance to prevent further escalation.
"There is movement, but it is not moving fast enough," commented David Mencer, reflecting frustrations over the pace of diplomatic progress.
On the Lebanese political front, Joseph Aoun's recent election as president marks a significant development. Supported by the US and formerly serving as military chief, Aoun has committed to consolidating control over weapons under state authority.
In his acceptance speech, Aoun vowed to monopolize weapons under state mandate, signaling a potential shift in Lebanon's internal military dynamics.
The situation remains delicate as Israel plans to reassess the viability of withdrawing from southern Lebanon at the conclusion of the proposed extension period. The international community continues to watch closely as negotiations unfold.
