Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play

Lebanon enters talks with Israel but with no cards to play

Last August, while Lebanon once more found itself in the throes of conflict, I met with President Joseph Aoun at the Baabda Palace. This modernist structure perched atop a hill overlooking Beirut marked a symbolic setting for discussions on the country’s turbulent path. Aoun, who had previously led the military, took charge following a war between Israel and Hezbollah, a Shia Muslim group and political faction backed by Iran.

The 2024 ceasefire had ended hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah, yet the latter remained a focal point of Israeli strikes. Even as the fragile truce held, Israel targeted individuals and sites associated with the group daily. In parts of the nation, the fighting never ceased. From my residence in eastern Beirut, I could occasionally hear the hum of Israeli drones circling overhead.

For Hezbollah’s supporters, the group serves as a bulwark against Israeli aggression. They view Israel as a force determined to seize Lebanese territory. Conversely, critics argue that Hezbollah prioritizes its Iranian allies’ interests, thrusting Lebanon into wars it did not choose. The group’s recent rocket fire into Israel followed the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, during a US-Israeli attack on Tehran in February.

Aoun’s diplomatic gamble

President Aoun, seeking to halt the violence, proposed direct talks with Israel. This was a bold move for two nations that do not officially recognize each other. Israel delayed until last week, after the US brokered a ceasefire with Iran and Israel launched widespread air strikes, claiming over 300 lives in a single day in Lebanon. A meeting between the countries’ ambassadors, expected to focus on a peace deal, is set for Tuesday in Washington.

Despite limited control over Hezbollah, the Lebanese government faces a daunting challenge. The group, known as the Party of God in Arabic, was established in the 1980s during Israel’s occupation of Lebanon. From its inception, it received financial, military, and logistical support from Iran, with the destruction of Israel among its stated objectives. The 1989 Taif Agreement, which concluded the civil war, called for the disarmament of all militias but allowed Hezbollah to retain its weapons under the guise of a resistance movement.

Israel withdrew its forces from southern Lebanon in 2000 after an 18-year occupation, but disputes over territory persisted. UN Resolution 1701, enacted in 2006, mandated Hezbollah’s disarmament but has never been fully realized. The group is classified as a terrorist organization by the UK and the US, yet within Lebanon, it operates as a political party, a social movement, and a key power player. It runs schools and hospitals in regions where the state’s presence is weak, cementing its influence.

Since taking office, Aoun has championed a policy termed the “state monopoly on arms.” Under the 2024 agreement, Hezbollah agreed to relocate its fighters and weapons from southern Lebanon, a region it had controlled for decades. However, its secretary-general, Naim Qassem, has refused to entertain broader disarmament. Aoun warned that removing Hezbollah’s arms without consent could spark renewed violence. “We can’t let the country descend into another civil war,” he said during our August conversation.

“I was born an optimist,” Aoun remarked.

Amid persistent Israeli attacks and Hezbollah’s refusal to engage in negotiations, the question remains: what can Aoun do? And what hope exists for a durable peace?