A proposed 45-day truce between Israel and Hezbollah, which was intended to begin at midnight between Sunday and Monday, has been suspended following reported violations by Israel and subsequent responses from Hezbollah. Both parties currently remain in a state of anticipation, with neither side taking a clear position on the failure to commit to the ceasefire.
The stalemate is occurring against a backdrop of heightened tensions between the United States and Iran. Observers note that both Israel and Hezbollah appear to be monitoring the potential failure of U.S.-Iranian negotiations, particularly as U.S. President Donald Trump has increased threats against the Iranian leadership.
While a Pakistani mediator has attempted to restart diplomatic efforts to prevent a full-scale return to war, Israel continues to apply military pressure in Lebanon. This pressure is reportedly intended to ensure that the disarmament of Hezbollah remains a central point of the negotiations.
Diplomatic Divisions and the Role of the U.S.
The failure to stabilize the truce means Lebanon may face an escalation in conflict. President Joseph Aoun has been engaging in communications with the U.S. Administration to pressure Israel into adhering to the ceasefire it had pledged to establish.
According to political sources, the U.S. Administration is considering providing increased support to President Aoun. This follows Aoun’s decision to meet a U.S. Request to enter direct negotiations with Israel, which includes increasing the level of representation and involving military officials.
This shift toward direct diplomacy contrasts with the position of Hezbollah, which continues to insist on indirect negotiations. This divergence in approach may place Hezbollah in a tough position if the U.S. Successfully pressures Israel to stabilize the ceasefire.
The Struggle Over Initiation
Sources indicate that Hezbollah is unlikely to be the first to agree to stabilize the truce. The group reportedly intends to wait for Israel to initiate the process, citing Israel’s role in breaking the initial ceasefire agreement.
From Hezbollah’s perspective, insisting that Israel take the first step is a way to project a moral victory to its political and popular base, suggesting it forced Israel to submit to its demands. This occurs despite significant field losses, including the systematic destruction of homes, displacement of residents, and the leveling of towns.
Hezbollah has remained silent regarding current ceasefire efforts and continues to reject direct negotiations. The group is also reportedly critical of a planned military meeting at the Pentagon scheduled for May 29. Analysts suggest Hezbollah is tying Lebanon’s fate to Iran, fearing that a localized ceasefire could lead to a resolution that ends the war on terms unfavorable to its broader strategic goals.
Proposed Security Roadmap
Potential security arrangements may include a defined timeline for the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon. In exchange, the Lebanese government could pledge to implement the “exclusivity of arms” in gradual stages, without utilizing force to disarm Hezbollah.
The U.S. Has proposed the creation of a special Lebanese Army brigade to deploy in the region south of the Litani River. This proposal is currently being evaluated by the military establishment in coordination with President Aoun.
There is a possibility that a high-ranking officer, potentially Brigadier General Nicola Tabet—the commander of the South Litani operations area—could join the Lebanese negotiating delegation due to his field experience in the region.
The Tripartite Committee
Negotiations may also address the necessity of equipping and supporting the Lebanese Army to establish state authority in the south, alongside a timeline for the withdrawal of Hezbollah’s weapons.
A possible next step could be the formation of a tripartite committee consisting of U.S., Lebanese, and Israeli representatives. This body would serve as a liaison committee to monitor the implementation of any agreement and intervene in the event of violations.
This proposed committee would mirror the existing military committee comprising Lebanon, Israel, and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). It could eventually serve as the alternative framework for security once UNIFIL’s mandate expires at the end of the current year.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was the 45-day truce suspended?
The truce was suspended following violations by Israel and subsequent responses from Hezbollah, leaving both parties waiting for the other to commit to the ceasefire.
What is the proposed role of the Lebanese Army in the south?
The U.S. Has suggested creating a special Lebanese Army brigade to deploy south of the Litani River to establish state authority, a move currently under evaluation by the Lebanese military.
What is the purpose of the proposed Tripartite Committee?
The committee, consisting of U.S., Lebanese, and Israeli members, would monitor the agreement’s execution and handle violations, potentially replacing UNIFIL after its mandate ends this year.
Do you believe a tripartite committee is a viable alternative to UNIFIL for maintaining stability in southern Lebanon?
