Noah Rothman
National Review, Nov. 26, 2024
“Why should we expect a more serious effort now by the attenuated Lebanese government? Why would “a multi-nation committee” be any more effective at “monitoring” (distinct from “enforcing”) developments north of the Israeli border than U.N. peacekeepers?”
The terms of the cease-fire deal to which Israel and Lebanon agreed on Tuesday are still somewhat vague as of this writing.
According to media reports, a full and permanent cessation of hostilities in Lebanon will begin immediately. Sixty days from today, all Israeli forces should be withdrawn from Lebanese territory, with the initial drawdown to begin no later than December 6. But it is not entirely clear who will police the portions of Lebanon north of the Israeli border and south of the Litani River, from which Hezbollah had been expelled by the Israel Defense Forces.
“Under the proposed deal, Lebanese forces and United Nations peacekeepers are expected to jointly patrol southern Lebanon to ensure the terms of the agreement are adhered to,” CBS News reported. “Earlier reports suggested the southern region would be monitored by a multi-nation committee, which would include both the U.S. and France.” Paris’s involvement in peacekeeping efforts could be complicated by the Emmanuel Macron government’s promise — to which Israel has understandably objected — to enforce an International Criminal Court warrant for the arrest of Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defense minister. But these are the terms as we understand them for the time being.
The problem with this arrangement is that Israel was never at war with the Lebanese government. It embarked on a campaign of hostilities against Hezbollah, a distinct terrorist entity over which Beirut has limited influence. The goal of the Israeli government’s pivot to the northern front in the wars inaugurated by the 10/7 massacre was to degrade Hezbollah’s capacity to project force across the Israeli border so that the tens of thousands of Israelis displaced by terrorist rocket and mortar fire could return home.
The deal, which treats Hezbollah as an adjacent third party to the conflict, compels it to end its armed presence near Israel and relocate its heavy weapons north of the Litani. That’s a familiar demand — one that is codified in the tragically unenforced United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701. Perhaps that’s why the terrorist entity does not seem all that displeased by recent developments. “Hassan Fadlallah, a senior Hezbollah official and member of parliament, told Reuters on Tuesday that the group will remain active after its war with Israel ends,” CNN reporters wrote.…SOURCE
