Arab News | Why Israel is unlikely to withdraw from Lebanon

The Israeli army on Friday announced that it had taken control of the Ali Al-Taher ridge, Hezbollah’s last stronghold in the south of Lebanon. The group’s operations have been almost nonexistent recently. As stipulated by the Lebanon-Israel framework agreement, Tel Aviv should hand over the areas it occupies to the Lebanese army once they have been cleared of Hezbollah and other nonstate actors. The million-dollar question is: Will Israel comply?

While the agreement instructs an Israeli withdrawal from areas handed over to the Lebanese army, this would not be the first time Israel has reneged on an agreement. The actions we are witnessing today — such as the destruction of roads, the building of barriers and the establishment of a military presence on the ground — do not suggest an imminent withdrawal. Rather, they point to an Israeli attempt to impose a fait accompli and transform the south into a buffer zone.

Lebanese factions sympathetic to Israel claim that it has no reason to remain in Lebanon if there is no threat from Hezbollah. These factions — namely the Lebanese Forces and the Phalangists — constantly blame Hezbollah without faulting Israel, believing that Tel Aviv has no expansionist plans in Lebanon. They will face a great deal of scrutiny if Israel fails to comply with the framework agreement.

Today’s actions point to an Israeli attempt to impose a fait accompli and transform the south into a buffer zone

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib

The government of President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, which gambled that the agreement would automatically lead to an Israeli withdrawal and a full handover to the Lebanese army, is today facing a difficult test. Aoun will face particular scrutiny as it was he who initiated the process of negotiations with Israel. And he did so without an internal agreement on the matter. Hence, if things go south, he will be the first one to be blamed. However, it is important to see the issue objectively.

Aoun took the decision to negotiate in the early days of the Iran war. The general assumption was that Tehran was losing and it would be better to join the winning team, i.e., the US. However, the situation changed and America now seems stuck in a quagmire. As the war has progressed, the Iranian position has hardened and its demands have increased. The US, on the other hand, wants a graceful exit from the conflict while preserving the image of a winner.

Additionally, the Lebanese leadership believed that US President Donald Trump would be able to pressure Israel. However, that seemed unrealistic. US envoy Tom Barrack clearly stated in July that Washington cannot force Israel to do anything it does not want to do. Israel has declared that it wants to retain freedom of action. In addition, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated that he is not willing to withdraw from Lebanon, Syria, Gaza or the West Bank.

Any observer can conclude that the Israeli presence in south Lebanon is part of a broader expansionist agenda aimed at retaining leverage and a sphere of influence in Gaza, southern Lebanon and southern Syria. Following its seizure of Ali Al-Taher ridge, Israel conducted an intense bombardment campaign around Nabatiyeh. Among the targets destroyed were the Finance Ministry building and a civilian hospital. Aoun held Israel responsible and asked the international community to pressure Tel Aviv to stop the bombing and withdraw.

An Israeli failure to withdraw after it has cleared the south of Hezbollah’s presence will increase internal tensions

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib

The chances are that Israel will not withdraw. It has a long history of not respecting agreements it has signed. The most recent case is Gaza. Though Hamas surrendered all the hostages and expressed a willingness for “complete disarmament,” Israel refused the plan presented by the US and Washington did nothing to twist its arm. The Board of Peace put together by Trump is sitting idle. In this context, how is the US expected to pressure Israel to withdraw from Lebanon?

Aoun visited Greece the day the latter signed a $3.5 billion defense deal with Israel. He urged Athens to plead with Israel. However, if the US is unable to pressure Tel Aviv, why would Greece be able to do so? It is unlikely that Washington will pressure Israel to withdraw. I sincerely hope I am proved wrong, but I doubt it. Nevertheless, an Israeli failure to withdraw after it has cleared the south of Hezbollah’s presence will increase internal tensions.

This would help Hezbollah politically, giving it legitimacy. It would renew the narrative of the resistance. It would further weaken the state and any effort to disarm the group. However, if the state was successful in its negotiations and was able to push the Israelis to withdraw, then it could rally the different factions around it and confront Hezbollah. If the diplomatic track fails, it will be difficult for the state to disarm the group. While Israel says it wants Hezbollah disarmed, it is indirectly preventing the state from doing so by incapacitating it.

Maybe Israel will surprise us and withdraw, though it is very unlikely. All the indicators show that it will not. It would be in Israel’s interest to withdraw and work, through the Americans, with the Lebanese government on disarming Hezbollah. However, the Israeli leaders do not think that way. They are blinded by arrogance. They think they can do whatever they want, whenever they want to.

It was a big step for the Lebanese government, against all odds, to accept direct negotiations with Israel. But if the Israelis refuse to withdraw, they will be throwing the current government under the bus and will make sure that the government that follows it will not negotiate.

• Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is co-founder of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building, a Lebanese nongovernmental organization focused on Track II.

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is co-founder of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building, a Lebanese nongovernmental organization focused on Track II.

More from Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib