Talks with Israel: Beirut Deprives Iran of the Lebanese Card

While some Beirut residents continued on Friday, April 10, to inspect the sectors severely hit on Wednesday by Israeli aviation, as part of a surprise attack against Hezbollah cadres based in various neighborhoods of the capital, air raids continued in the South against several villages in the southern part of the country. One of these raids killed 12 people (State Security agents) in Nabatiyeh. But in the absence of major developments in military operations, it is the direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, scheduled for early next week in Washington, that are currently focusing the attention of local diplomatic and political circles.

Information available on Friday indicated that a preliminary meeting will be held on Tuesday at the office of Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, between Lebanon's ambassador to Washington, Nada Hamadé Moawad, and Israel's ambassador, Yechiel Leiter. This three-way discussion will most likely define the general framework or the broad outlines of the agenda for Lebanese-Israeli talks in the military, security, political, and bilateral relations spheres, with a view to peace between the two countries. Lebanon is expected to soon form ad-hoc committees that will be responsible for conducting bilateral talks with Israeli negotiators in the various areas of common interest.

It should be noted in this context that Hezbollah has declared its opposition to any direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel. On Friday afternoon, a few dozen supporters of the pro-Iranian party organized rallies in Zokak el-Blatt, Hamra, and in the city center, particularly in the Grand Serail area, to denounce the government's position regarding talks with Israel, obviously forgetting that Hezbollah had negotiated, indirectly, with Israel in the mid-1990s (which led to the April Arrangements), not to mention the talks initiated in 2021-2022 by the pro-Iranian party with Israel, through the American envoy Amos Hochstein (also a former Israeli army officer) with a view to demarcating the maritime borders between Lebanon and Israel.

Hezbollah supporters who took to the streets on Friday afternoon are undoubtedly too young to know, moreover, that during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, the Iranian mullahs' regime had resorted to... Israel to procure weapons and ammunition to confront Saddam Hussein's army, which at the time caused the famous Iran-Contra affair. It would also be good to recall the (direct) negotiations undertaken between Lebanon and Israel in 1983, following the 1982 war ("Operation Peace for Galilee"). Lebanese and Israeli negotiators then met, face to face, alternately in Khalde and in the Israeli city of Netanya.

A strategic issue

Beyond the populist outbidding initiated by Hezbollah, it must be noted in the current context that the stakes of direct negotiations with Israel are highly strategic for Lebanon.

This issue was clearly defined on Thursday, during the Council of Ministers, by President Joseph Aoun, who bluntly stressed that "only Lebanon negotiates for itself, and no one can negotiate on behalf of Lebanon." The allusion to the Islamic Republic is obvious, inasmuch as the Iranian power insists that Lebanon be included in the ceasefire concluded between Tehran and Washington. Clearly, this would mean that Iran would have, in this case, arrogated to itself the right to monopolize the Lebanese card in its talks with the Trump Administration. By thus embarking on the path of direct negotiations with Israel, President Aoun and the Salam government reaffirm their determination to completely dissociate Lebanon's case from Iranian maneuvers, which would amount to tearing the Lebanese card from the hands of the Islamic Republic.

This dissociation is vital for the Lebanese authorities to ensure a settlement of disputes with the Hebrew state. In the mid-1990s, it is recalled in this regard, direct negotiations took place in Washington between Lebanon and Israel but they did not lead to the desired results because Beirut had linked its approval of an agreement with Tel Aviv to the success of Israel's talks with the Syrian regime, which had then refrained from signing with the Israeli government, which had torpedoed the Lebanese-Israeli agreement.

The Salam government is thus clearly seeking to dissociate Lebanon's case from the Iranian file so as not to repeat the unfortunate precedent of the destabilizing concomitance of the Lebanese and Syrian components at the time. This dissociation is all the more fundamental for Lebanon today as the Revolutionary Guards do not seem particularly enthusiastic about concluding an agreement with the United States, as indicated by their position on the Strait of Hormuz. "From now on, we will decide which liners will be allowed to cross the strait," the Pasdaran affirmed on Friday. A small phrase which, if it materializes, risks torpedoing the Islamabad talks, scheduled to open on Saturday.