- Home
- War in the Middle East
- Implementing 1701: Lebanon Trapped Between Israel and Iran's Aspirations
- 13
- Dec.
- 2023
Implementing 1701: Lebanon Trapped Between Israel and Iran's Aspirations
modified on 07 Oct. 2024 à 16:46 Read : 5 minute(s) A A A
In the aftermath of the Gaza war and the eruption of confrontations on Lebanon’s southern border, two distinct scenarios linked to Resolution 1701 may unfold.
One scenario revolves around the “measures” that Israel would take to reinforce security on its northern border, as residents of northern Israel are reluctant to return to an insecure area. Another scenario is linked to Iran's aspirations, which Iran seeks to achieve through its Lebanese proxy, Hezbollah, by impeding the implementation of the resolution and sustaining a heated front. Iran is exploiting Tel Aviv's reluctance to initiate a widespread conflict with Lebanon, on the grounds that it is exhausted by the war in Gaza and that it lacks the capability to operate on two fronts simultaneously.
Which of these two scenarios will ultimately unfold?
As French mediation, supported by the Paris Quintet, called on Lebanon to fully implement Resolution 1701, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant stated that “if the international settlement in Lebanon proves unsuccessful, we will initiate military action to eliminate Hezbollah from the borders.”
The resolution stipulates the establishment of a demilitarized zone, free from illegal weapons and non-state armed actors, to be controlled exclusively by the Lebanese army, security forces and the UN peacekeeping force (UNIFIL).
According to Western sources, the Israeli objective is made evident by the widespread promotion of a plan to establish buffer zones in both Gaza and Lebanon. This initiative aims to guarantee the safety and security of settlements, thereby paving the way for the return of Israeli citizens. Nonetheless, a fundamental question arises regarding the position of Hezbollah and Iran's stance in response to Israel's wish.
Hezbollah insists that the responsibility for the implementation of the resolution lies with the State, not the party. Furthermore, in order to guarantee tranquility, Israel must cease its violations of Resolution 1701 on land, sea and air, as it has been the one committing them, with over 30,000 breaches recorded since the resolution was passed.
According to sources closely connected to the party, “Hezbollah's presence in the South is legitimate. It is in line with ministerial statements, backed by the Lebanese people, and inherent in the Taif peace agreement and Lebanon's right to resist occupation.”
From the perspective of anti-Hezbollah "sovereign circles," it is believed that the party has lost much of the approval of the Lebanese people, primarily due to its involvement in regional wars aligned with the Iranian agenda. Hezbollah has evolved into a major point of dissent among the deeply divided Lebanese population, especially after Israel's withdrawal from the South. The divide was further exacerbated by Hezbollah’s negative involvement in Arab issues in favor of the Iranian agenda. Its claim of seeking to liberate the Shebaa Farms is unfounded, given the unresolved disagreement between Lebanon and Syria over demarcation of the area.
However, Israel approaches the dossier differently. A Western diplomat quoted Israeli officials as saying, “We are not concerned with the internal Lebanese dispute over Hezbollah. Our primary concern and objective is the complete implementation of Resolution 1701, which stipulates that the region south of the Litani River shall remain free from weapons and gunmen.”
Lebanon also demands that Israel adhere to the same terms by banning weapons and gunmen within a 40-kilometer radius from the Lebanese border, in reference to Israeli settlers carrying weapons under the pretext of self-defense.
However, according to opposition circles, establishing a demilitarized zone south of the Litani complicates matters for the Lebanese authorities who lack the capacity to implement it.
Hence, the mediators have requested that Israel proactively initiate a ceasefire, firmly commit to it, and refrain from violating the resolution. This proactive approach is imperative to facilitate the complete implementation of the resolution. This will enable the Lebanese army, with the assistance of UNIFIL, to assume the responsibility of ensuring security in the South.
Beyond the internal dynamics of Lebanon, Iran is aware of the potential consequences of escalating battles on the southern front, and perceives itself as targeted by the enforcement of Resolution 1701. For Tehran, implementing 1701 would imply the end of the so-called “unified front” against Israel and would extricate Lebanon from the sphere of Iranian influence.
An easing of tensions on the southern front and restoration of calm would pave the way for the return of US envoy Amos Hochstein, the chief advisor to President Joe Biden, to address the disputed border points, a matter that he had discussed with Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri.
However, it is highly probable that Iran may activate its military proxies in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Palestine to advance its agenda and interests. This entails impeding the implementation of Resolution 1701 by escalating tensions in the South without taking Israeli threats into consideration. Tehran believes that Israel is currently unable to open the southern front, especially in light of the US deadline requiring Tel Aviv to halt military operations in Gaza by the end of this month. This development has heightened unprecedented “tensions” in relations between the two countries.
Hence, Iran intends to capitalize on Israel's request for the complete implementation of Resolution 1701 and the establishment of a buffer zone, with the hope of reviving its interrupted communication with the US.
According to Western sources, Iran has successfully cultivated ties with Arab countries since the Gaza War. This accomplishment was prominently displayed during its participation in the Arab Islamic Summit in Riyadh, where it actively engaged with Arab countries as a regional power, contributing to decision-making.
Will Iran be able to consolidate such a (regional) position that fulfills its strategic aspirations?
According to the diplomatic sources, the region will be heading towards peace negotiations as of the beginning of the new year, notwithstanding the US veto on a ceasefire proposal in Gaza.
The process will involve setting the state for Palestinian and Israeli negotiators following a formal recognition of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.
Comments