Listen to the article
A surge of messages from across the globe has been flooding Beirut, each one carrying the hope of diverting Lebanon from the precipice of an all-encompassing conflict. However, the most important challenge is acknowledging that the decision does not reside in the Lebanese government’s hands. Therefore, the Cabinet has been urged to communicate these messages to Hezbollah. The Caretaker Prime Minister has sent numerous letters to Hezbollah since the outbreak of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation, all of which revolve around the prevention of an escalation of hostilities.
Yet, neither Mikati nor other officials and mediators have received a direct or clear response from Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah, assuring a commitment to sidestep an all-out war. Rather, the received responses only convey a tacit acknowledgment of receipt. After Nasrallah’s two speeches, Mikati and other officials exercised caution. This prevailing atmosphere has been conveyed to both Americans and Europeans, urging them to intensify their efforts toward Israel to prevent an escalation led by Hezbollah that could potentially throw the country into a full-scale war.
According to some reports, the Israeli response to Lebanese officials echoes their statements through the media. The Israelis blame Hezbollah for any escalation and threat of mass destruction while holding the Lebanese government accountable. They deny its official limitations in controlling military operations, noting that several diplomats have communicated to the Lebanese side that they understand the Israeli stance.
Western diplomats noted that Mikati meant to convey two distinct messages when he talked about Nasrallah’s rationality. The first message was directed to the US and countries supporting Israel, informing them that the pro-Iranian formation would avoid crossing specific escalation thresholds and that Mikati successfully contributed to that rationality. As for the second message, it was conveyed to Hezbollah and was regarded by Mikati as a form of war commendation. This implied the necessity for a mutually beneficial exchange of political concessions, wherein certain rights belong to Mikati and others to Hezbollah.
These diplomats highlighted Mikati’s approach to engaging with Hezbollah, with the aim of securing the support of influential Arab and Western countries. Hoping to assume a pivotal role in the upcoming government phase, amidst a new presidential era and a reshaped political landscape, Mikati envisions playing a central role in Lebanon. This is especially evident in terms of negotiations with Hezbollah and working with the Shiite militia toward an understanding that will govern the unfolding situation in southern Lebanon and in the country.
