By Taghreed Saadeh
To those who side with Iran and claim that Lebanon has been included in its agreement with the United States to halt hostilities across multiple fronts assuming that Israel merely acts under American control, they are mistaken.
Within any bilateral understanding between Washington and Tehran, and despite apparent US attempts to bypass Lebanese sovereignty or to give Iran implicit authorization to speak on behalf of Lebanon, such developments may still be met with Israeli hardline positions. At the same time, the Lebanese president may seize this moment, especially after previously criticizing the notion that Lebanon is under Iranian guardianship, and calling for strengthening the role of the Lebanese state and the independence of its decision-making, as well as addressing the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons within the framework of state sovereignty.
Israel’s lack of enthusiasm toward any US–Iranian understanding could, in fact, open an important pathway toward serious negotiations with the Lebanese delegation, potentially leading to arrangements that reinforce the authority of the Lebanese state and its official institutions. This would go beyond the current reality in which Hezbollah holds significant influence over decisions of war and peace, and remains closely tied to Tehran, according to its political opponents.
Studies examining possible US–Iran agreements, suggest that there may be an opportunity for President Joseph Aoun to further strengthen Lebanon’s independent decision-making in this file, and to encourage Israel to engage more seriously with Lebanese demands related to security and stability, away from Iranian calculations.
The key question remains, what would Hezbollah do if it were subjected to an Israeli attack? Would it respond based on its declared role of resisting Israel, or would it adhere to any regional understandings or constraints that may emerge in the post–US–Iran agreement phase?
The Israeli military may seek to test Hezbollah’s position and place it before a difficult dilemma balancing its traditional role with the need to adapt to new regional dynamics. Meanwhile, Israel itself would also be required to engage with the Lebanese state and its legitimate institutions as the responsible authority for maintaining Lebanon’s security. Thus reinforcing Lebanese national sovereignty, through independent Lebanese decision-making free from external interference.
11 Total Count
