A ceasefire has momentarily halted fighting between Hizbollah and Israel, revealing ongoing tensions and challenges in Lebanon. Disarming Hizbollah is pivotal, as returning displaced citizens could lead to renewed conflict if the truce collapses. Lebanon’s leaders must seek negotiations for disarmament while gaining external support that respects domestic affairs. Political changes in leadership may present new opportunities, but Hizbollah’s military strength remains a significant obstacle to stability and reform in the country.
In November 2024, a ceasefire concluded 14 months of conflict between Hizbollah and Israel, initiated on October 8, the day after Hamas’s significant attacks on Israel. Despite the ceasefire, tensions persist, with Israel having inflicted substantial damage on Hizbollah, emboldening the political opposition in Lebanon. Disarming Hizbollah remains a critical issue, as many of the one million displaced Lebanese have returned home, but unrest may resurface if the ceasefire fails. It is essential for Lebanon’s leaders to pursue disarmament through negotiations rather than confrontation, aided by external support which avoids intervening in domestic affairs.
The ceasefire mechanism proposed that the Lebanese army would oversee the dismantling of Hizbollah’s military capabilities, while Israel planned to withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon by late January. Although the ceasefire has held, its fragility is evident as both Hizbollah and Israel have accused each other of breaches. Israel’s failure to meet the deadline for troop withdrawal, coupled with violent incidents against Lebanese citizens, threatens the already strained stability of Lebanon.
The challenges resulting from the war extend beyond territorial disputes, as numerous conflicts arise from the displacement of Shiite residents. While the ceasefire has somewhat eased hostilities toward these displaced individuals, underlying tensions persist. Furthermore, the war has ignited a divisive dialogue about Hizbollah’s military future in Lebanon. Differing narratives regarding the group’s role in the conflict have emerged, leading to a stark divide within the Lebanese political landscape regarding its disarmament and authority.
Lebanon’s recent political developments signal the need for addressing these tensions. The election of Army Commander Joseph Aoun as president and the establishment of a new cabinet under Nawaf Salam represent a potential turning point after a prolonged political vacuum. Aoun has committed to restoring state control over armed factions. However, Hizbollah’s past obstructionist tactics and its current military capabilities pose significant hurdles to implementing reforms and maintaining peace.
Sovereignist factions in Lebanon acknowledge Hizbollah’s military strength but hold that escalation into armed conflict is unlikely, viewing the current political moment as a chance to limit Hizbollah’s military influence. However, any aggressive attempts to disarm Hizbollah may provoke instability or increased sectarian violence. The future of Hizbollah remains uncertain, and it is crucial for Lebanon’s government, as well as external actors, to promote negotiations that avoid exacerbating divisions among various communities.
The ongoing ceasefire faces risks from both parties, with violations reported on multiple occasions. The external role of the United States, particularly in light of its fluctuating foreign policies, will be vital in encouraging compliance from both Israel and Hizbollah. Supporting the Lebanese army amidst domestic challenges and facilitating humanitarian efforts will be crucial for building a more secure and resilient Lebanon in the aftermath of the war.
In summary, while the ceasefire between Hizbollah and Israel has created a momentary pause in hostilities, underlying tensions remain in Lebanon. The complexities surrounding Hizbollah’s role, the need for disarmament, and ethnic divides must be navigated carefully. Lebanon’s new leadership faces the dual challenge of promoting national unity while addressing Hizbollah’s military presence, with external support necessary for stabilizing the region and advancing reforms.
Original Source: reliefweb.int
