No Truce in Gaza, but What About Southern Lebanon?

Nida Al Watan, Lebanon, March 9

If nothing miraculous occurs, the ongoing conflict in southern Lebanon appears destined for a grim conclusion: a significant escalation leading to a destructive Israeli war, and a troubling repetition of past incursions from 1978 through 1982 to 2006. Israeli intentions to respond forcefully to Hizbullah’s provocations are glaring, encompassing destruction, casualties, and forced displacement—evident in the ravaged villages of the South. Hizbullah, instigators of the conflict, are forthright about their immediate goals: refusing a cease-fire until the conflict in Gaza subsides. However, the dynamics in Gaza differ, with proposed truce talks focusing on a six-week cease-fire, prisoner exchanges, and increased humanitarian aid. While Israel may consider this proposal, Hamas vehemently opposes it, demanding a full cease-fire and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza; an outcome Israel deems inconceivable as they seek to eradicate Hamas and secure the region. Negotiations in Cairo have hit a roadblock due to these conflicting stances. Rumors of a Qatari ultimatum to deport Ismail Haniyeh if Hamas persists in their stance add a layer of complexity to the situation. With the arrival of CIA Director William Burns, a last-ditch effort is underway to broker a truce before the onset of Ramadan. Despite these efforts, a truce prior to Ramadan seems unlikely. Conflict in Gaza will persist, with increasing casualties. Calm could potentially be replaced by humanitarian relief efforts facilitated by the Biden Administration. As this unfolds in Gaza, concerns rise about Lebanon’s fate. Echoes of Condoleezza Rice’s involvement in 2006 have now come full circle with Amos Hochstein in 2024. The crux of the matter lies in Lebanon’s intertwined destiny with Gaza’s; a linkage that Hochstein vehemently resists, urging caution to avoid further conflict. The urgency of finding a resolution is paramount to prevent a broader regional conflict. An American proposal, mirroring elements of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, seeks to quell tensions by enhancing military presence and reinforcing UNIFIL forces in southern Lebanon. Although this is a welcome step towards de-escalation, this proposal does not tackle the issue of militias, nor does it address Israeli activities. It merely sets the stage for future negotiations between Lebanon and Israel based on the resolution and cease-fire agreement. This plan, however, does not align with the conditions in Gaza. The looming question remains: What will the actors in the South decide? How will Iran react? And most crucially, what course of action will Israel pursue, given its history of aggressive responses? —Tony Francis (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)