U.S. Applies Very Little Pressure and Conflicting Signals to Israel to About Lebanon
 |
The rare talks between Israel and Lebanon in Washington this week were hailed by the United States as a “historic milestone” and a major first step toward lasting peace between the Mideast neighbors.
But the message the Trump administration sent as the talks concluded suggested a different reality: that Israel was under little pressure from Washington to end the fighting.
The meeting, which took place on Tuesday and was the first of its kind in decades, ended with an agreement to work toward “direct negotiations” between Israel and Lebanon, a U.S. statement said. The statement did not, however, call for a halt to Israeli strikes in Lebanon against the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah as a condition for negotiations, instead citing Israel’s “right to defend itself” from Hezbollah’s “continued attacks.” Nor did it urge Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory that it has invaded and signaled that it plans to occupy.
The statement provided further indication that Washington was largely leaving Israel to decide whether to press the offensive in Lebanon, even as the humanitarian toll mounted.
Israel has overwhelming military superiority and is pressing its advantage on the battlefield, while Lebanon’s government is hobbled and exercises no direct control over Hezbollah. The powerful group has outright rejected any negotiations with Israel, leaving Lebanese officials to negotiate over a war that is largely out of their control.
 |
After more than a year of near-daily strikes, Israel last month launched a sweeping offensive against Hezbollah. That operation came after Hezbollah fired a salvo of rockets into Israel in solidarity with Iran, which had been attacked by Israel and the United States.
Despite President Trump’s announcement of a cease-fire with Iranlast week, Israel has intensified attacks in Lebanon, claiming that the country was not included in the truce.
Mr. Trump said last week that he had urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel to scale back the campaign. But other than a halt to strikes on the Lebanese capital, Beirut, there has been little sign of a slowdown in attacks.
For Lebanon’s government, even the prospect of talks with Israel was deeply fraught at home, exposing political divisions about how to engage with Israel, which it still officially regards as an enemy state.
Lebanese officials nonetheless signaled an openness to negotiations and, under mounting international pressure, reiterated pledges to disarm Hezbollah. In response, Hezbollah leaders rejected calls to lay down their arms and threatened street protests that could further destabilize the country.
Lebanon’s promise to disarm Hezbollah comes as Israel seems no closer to agreeing to halt strikes that have inflicted widespread civilian casualties and destruction in Lebanon. That contrast fuels Hezbollah’s accusations that the Lebanese government is acquiescing to Israel and engaging in futile negotiations while still under fire.
But Lebanon’s government has few cards left to play, and it faces a bitter dilemma: confront Hezbollah and risk internal rupture, or shrink from that fight and watch as Israel’s war grinds on.
Comments