- 15:30
Amid a fraught ceasefire, preparations are underway for the next phase of the U.S.-mediated Lebanon-Israel diplomatic process, which analysts describe as a major turning point. Security talks between Lebanese and Israeli military delegations are scheduled to begin at the Pentagon on May 29, while a parallel political track is set to reconvene in early June.
Officials and analysts see the Pentagon’s growing role as a sign that the process has shifted from exploratory diplomacy to detailed military-security negotiations centered on borders, security guarantees, and enforcement mechanisms between Lebanon and Israel.
"The discussions are expected to address practical solutions, how the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) can gradually move toward disarming Hezbollah, and managing the security dimensions of any future agreement,” security analyst Riad Kahwaji told This is Beirut.
The talks are expected to focus on strengthening the LAF’s capacities. “The objective will be to empower the Lebanese army to secure the south and assume responsibilities that would reassure Israel of the [Lebanese] state’s ability to control the border,” Kahwaji said.
“That, in turn, could eventually pave the way for a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory,” he added.
Former MP and political activist Fares Souaid echoed Kahwaji’s assessment of the upcoming Pentagon meeting. “The discussions are expected to address the modalities for ensuring the Lebanese state’s control over its entire territory,” he said.
Pushing Forward Under Pressure
At the center of the diplomatic push stands Joseph Aoun, who analysts say has made a strategic decision to continue pursuing efforts to stabilize the situation despite mounting political pressure from Hezbollah and its allies.
“The state has no real alternative but to move forward,” Kahwaji said. “There is clear determination within the government to push these talks toward a positive outcome capable of ending the war. Under U.S. sponsorship, this process has become the only realistic way to pull Lebanon out of the current mess.”
Hezbollah has repeatedly called on Lebanese officials to end the direct talks with Israel while warning of potential civil strife if they continue. On May 21, the U.S. Department of the Treasury sanctioned nine individuals in Lebanon, including Hezbollah-linked political figures, Lebanese security officials, and Amal Movement operatives for impeding the peace process and efforts toward Hezbollah's disarmament.
Kahwaji argued that the changing balance of power in the region has significantly reduced Hezbollah’s ability to obstruct such negotiations. “Hezbollah today is far weaker than it used to be, and that weakness will continue regardless of what it says or does,” he said.
“Even inside Lebanon, many of Hezbollah’s former allies have shifted away from it. Neither Hezbollah nor Speaker Nabih Berri nor allied leftist factions are in a position to repeat what happened in May 2008.”
Kahwaji was referring to Hezbollah and its allies’ takeover of West Beirut after the government moved to dismantle the group’s private telecommunications network and remove a Hezbollah-linked airport security official. The clashes, which spread beyond the capital, lasted several days and left more than 70 people dead nationwide.
Despite the momentum surrounding the Israel-Lebanon negotiations, Souaid cautioned that the process remains politically fragile and highly sensitive.
“It is a complicated path,” he said. “Lebanon still lacks a full national consensus around the president’s initiative, while Israel may seek to establish a broader security belt stretching across Gaza, southern Lebanon, and southern Syria.”
Still, Souaid argued that negotiations remain Lebanon’s only realistic option. “There is no alternative with Israel other than negotiations, and there is broad recognition of that reality,” he said.
“We are on the rails now, but we are also entering a phase where anything could happen,” Souaid added.
Breaking the Taboo
For decades, direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel were considered politically off-limits due to fears of domestic backlash and Hezbollah’s reaction. However, the two-day talks held in Washington on May 14 and 15 signaled what analysts described as a major shift in Lebanon’s political landscape amid rapidly changing regional dynamics.
“The taboo surrounding talks with Israel has been collapsing gradually over the past few weeks, but these negotiations formally put the process on the rails,” Kahwaji said. “This is now an established reality.”
Souaid similarly described the talks as “a historic political shift,” noting that they marked only the third time Lebanon and Israel had engaged in direct diplomacy. “The first time was in 1949 with the armistice agreement, which remained in place until 1969. The second was in 1983, when Lebanon signed a peace agreement with Israel,” he said.
“The 1983 accord eventually collapsed because the regional and international environment at the time was hostile to such an agreement,” Souaid explained.
“The internal Lebanese and broader Arab context in 1983 was not favorable,” he added. “Internationally, the agreement came during the Cold War, and the Soviet Union opposed Lebanon falling under American influence.”
The current negotiations are unfolding under far more favorable regional and international conditions, while domestic opposition has also weakened despite increasingly sharp rhetoric from Hezbollah and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, according to Souaid.
“The fact that Lebanon is now negotiating directly on its own is, in itself, a political achievement,” he said.
Comments