Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun received American diplomat Thomas Barrack in Beirut on Monday and gave him the Lebanese state’s reply to a proposal from the United States about disarming Hezbollah.
Barrack, ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy for Syria, said Lebanon’s response was “something spectacular” and that he was “unbelievably satisfied” by the reply, which has not been made public as of yet.
The visit comes amid continued Israeli attacks on alleged Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, which have killed civilians, since a ceasefire went into effect on November 27, 2024.
Here’s what you need to know about the visit and what it means for Lebanon and Israel:
Why did the US envoy visit Lebanon?
Not for the summer weather.
Barrack went to receive the Lebanese state’s official response to a US proposal, delivered to Lebanon on June 19, to disarm the Hezbollah group.
Under the terms of a ceasefire deal with Israel from last November, Hezbollah was to withdraw its fighters from south of the Litani River – which runs across south Lebanon and up into the Bekaa Valley – and turn over military infrastructure and bases there.
However, according to diplomatic and political sources with knowledge of the agreement, the language was purposefully undefined, leaving it open to interpretation by both sides.
The US and Israel have chosen to interpret the ceasefire as contingent on Hezbollah’s complete disarmament in the entirety of the country.
Barrack insinuated in his statement after the meeting that support for Lebanon would be contingent on the Lebanese government acting in line with what he said was a “region moving at Mach speed”, although he did not specify what it was moving towards.
Over the past two years, Israel has waged war on Gaza, Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, with full US support.
Developments have often been touted as victories against Iran and its allies in the region.
What was the Lebanese government’s response to the US demand?
The response has not yet been made public.
But reports indicate the government demanded that Israel withdraw from all Lebanese territories, including five points it occupied during the recent ceasefire and areas it stayed in after the 2000 withdrawal from southern Lebanon.
It also reportedly called on the US to pressure Israel to:
- abide by the ceasefire,
- return Lebanese prisoners it took, and
- adhere to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for a cessation of hostilities, for Hezbollah to withdraw from south of the Litani, and for financial and economic reforms, among other provisions.
Barrack said he received a seven-page reply from Aoun’s team and had not yet had time to study it, but that he was satisfied.
His comments also seemed to suggest Lebanon needs to meet certain expectations if it wants US support, talking about Lebanon turning over a new leaf, similar to neighbouring Syria, which has indicated it is willing to have a peace agreement with Israel.
“If you don’t want change, it’s no problem,” Barrack said, before adding: “The rest of the region is moving at high speed.”
Barrack did not specify if US support would be in the form of reconstruction financing – the World Bank says Lebanon needs $11bn for recovery following the latest Israeli aggression – or in terms of reining in Israel, which continues daily attacks on southern Lebanon and occasionally on Beirut and its periphery.
What are the demands for Hezbollah to disarm?
There are external and internal demands.
The external demands come mostly from the US and Israel. Before Hezbollah was battered in this latest war and lost much of its military leadership, Israel saw the group as a military threat.
Many Gulf states have also opposed Hezbollah and its benefactor Iran’s influence over Lebanon and the Levant.
Internally, Lebanon’s president and prime minister, as well as a variety of political parties and figures, want Hezbollah to disarm and for the Lebanese army and state to control the use of force and decisions of war and peace.
In much of Lebanon’s post-civil war period (1990 onwards), Hezbollah has been Lebanon’s political and military hegemon. Its support comes mostly from the Shia community, and most elected Shia officials are members of Hezbollah or their allies, the Amal Movement.
The group’s critics say the party has isolated Lebanon from good relations with regional and international countries and has grown from a party outside the corrupt Lebanese political system to that system’s protector.
What pressures are there on the Lebanese government to comply?
The US seems to have become the only power that can rein in Israel’s attacks, which are undermining the new government’s efforts at reform and at helping a segment of the population that feels they are not being properly supported by the state.
Historically, Hezbollah filled the void left by the state, while at times undermining the state’s attempts to fill that void.
Further pressure is on the country because it is badly in need of foreign investment and aid for reconstruction, which the US has signalled may be tied to disarming Hezbollah.
Here, Hezbollah seems to agree with the Lebanese government and has expressed some willingness to cooperate, as it knows many of its supporters need their homes or villages liberated or rebuilt.
What are the obstacles to Hezbollah disarming?
There are a few.
One is the continued Israeli attacks and presence in south Lebanon, in the five points that the Israeli military occupied during the ceasefire period and the continued occupation of the Shebaa Farms and Kfarchouba Hills.
Few in Hezbollah or among their supporters believe the group should disarm as long as Lebanese territory is under occupation or attack.
“We cannot be asked to soften our stance or lay down arms while [Israeli] aggression continues,” Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem told supporters in Beirut’s southern suburbs on Sunday for Ashura, an important Shia commemoration.
Hezbollah says it is unwilling to disarm as long as Israeli presence remains in the south of the country and as long as the fear of invasion exists. Israel invaded Lebanon in 1978 and again in 1982, occupying the south until Hezbollah drove them out in 2000.
They reinvaded last year.
Hezbollah has also raised concerns about the Lebanon-Syria border, where clashes erupted earlier this year.
While both countries said they want border delineation, a resumption of tensions is not out of the question.
What about Israel?
That is the big question.
Whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will heed any pressures from the US to stop attacking Lebanon and to implement fully the terms of the agreements between the two countries remains to be seen.
It is unclear if Barrack’s visit to Beirut and the Lebanese state’s response had any effect on a meeting between Trump and Netanyahu in Washington, DC, on Monday.
What is clear from Lebanon is that it is hoping the US will get the Israelis to stop attacking the country, enforce the ceasefire, and support the Lebanese state as it attempts to complete the fragile task of bringing Hezbollah’s weapons under state control without isolating the Shia community from the nation-building project.
Leave a comment