Aoun in Paris, backs “step-by-step peace” with Israel
From the “political confidence” test that President Nawaf Salam’s government won—which sought to subject the government to parliamentary accountability but instead turned into an audit of Hezbollah, its weapons, and the wars of 2023 and 2026 that plunged Lebanon into conflict—to the test of confidence in the Lebanese Army, embodied by the preparatory meeting for the support conference hosted in Paris tomorrow, Thursday, two themes converged over a scene marked by “verbal clashes” under the parliamentary dome regarding the party’s status and an attempt by the French capital to entrench a “de-escalation” between supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces from the Arab and international communities and restricting weapons “first,” making “state support” and its legitimate institutions the primary tool for extending its sovereignty over its entire territory through its own forces alone.
While certain “hidden currents” surrounding the two-day general debate on the government hinted at “intentions” to politically weaken it and “shatter” it, via the agenda of direct talks with Israel, the framework agreement, and “burning” livelihood issues, aiming to strip the entire negotiation track of its momentum and leave President Nawaf Salam heading to the United Nations General Assembly with “broken wings,” the forces of the majority supporting the government’s composition—since the first day of the session—questioned whether any party (Deputy Jibril Bassil’s bloc or Hezbollah, each for its own considerations) would move to vote confidence in it. Instead, they moved to fortify the government through concentrated attacks on the party and its weapons, placing it in an unusual defensive posture, exposing the “isolation” it now faces as a military organization outside the state, and bolstering Salam with renewed support under the slogan “Move forward and decide.”
This outcome, in which Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri was not far from “contributing” by adopting a stance of “neutrality” toward the sharp attacks Hezbollah faced, appearing as a political “UNIFIL” wearing a “blue helmet,” practically helped strengthen the position of President of the Republic, General Joseph Aoun, who arrived in Paris today, Wednesday, to participate in the meeting dedicated to laying the groundwork for the conference supporting the army and other armed forces, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron, Jordanian King Abdullah II, a military delegation representing no fewer than 15 countries, the United Nations, and other organizations.
The file of direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, in both its political-diplomatic and military dimensions, will be present at this meeting and on its sidelines, given that the army constitutes the executive arm of the framework agreement, specifically the “pilot zones” that require its deployment in towns from which Israel is gradually withdrawing, dismantling Hezbollah’s military infrastructure there, and preventing its return. Verification of this will be conducted through a multinational mechanism, likely to replace the UNIFIL force whose mandate ends at the end of the year, although the mechanism’s role will be supervisory, unlike the blue helmets whose mission was predominantly supportive of the army on “the ground of Resolution 1701.”
It was no ordinary move for Aoun to precede his arrival in Paris with prominent positions that set the ceiling for his approach to the preparatory meeting, and went further in defining the “end product” of the direct negotiations with Israel, whose eighth round is scheduled for October in Rome. This end product is envisioned as a “step-by-step peace agreement” following a security agreement to end the state of hostility and the deployment of the army along the border. This appeared to be part of an effort to provide Washington with additional leverage to increase pressure on Israel to facilitate the expansion of pilot zones and curb any new expansion north of the Litani River, especially after Benjamin Netanyahu turned the destruction of tunnels in the Ali al-Tahir heights into a “campaign poster” in his field campaign, amid fears that a military “annex” to the hill could be launched in the coming weeks.
In an interview with Agence France-Presse, Aoun stated that “Lebanon is seeking to reach a security agreement with Israel that would end the state of hostility between the two countries and could serve as a precursor to a later peace agreement, but we cannot jump directly to a peace agreement; it must be step by step.” He emphasized that the fundamental step is the Israeli withdrawal, the deployment of the Lebanese army along the border, and the return of residents and prisoners.
He affirmed that “Lebanon has no other option but direct negotiations to prevent any new war,” explaining that the state opted for negotiation because it is the least costly path, whereas abandoning negotiations would mean war, “and its cost would be enormous for us.”
He noted that “Lebanon wants to find an alternative force to UNIFIL to avoid any vacuum after its mandate expires,” adding that “the purpose of having a force in southern Lebanon is to assist the army and strengthen the state, not to replace the state.”
While observers are closely watching what will emerge from the meeting—whether a date will be set for the support conference, and whether its outcomes will be conditionally linked to the prior withdrawal of Hezbollah’s weapons or the serious initiation of this process north of the Litani River, despite the party’s opposition and its rejection of any pilot zones outside the predominantly occupied southern Litani area—the meeting held at the U.S. State Department headquarters between Lebanese Ambassador Nidaa Maouss and Israeli Ambassador Yechiel Leiter gained significance in light of Washington’s desire to maintain the direct negotiation track that began in April and culminated on June 26 in the signing of the tripartite “Framework Agreement,” before being complicated by Tel Aviv’s drive for further “self-execution” and Beirut’s policy of balancing the containment of weapons with avoiding internal confrontation.
The U.S. State Department was quoted as commenting on the ambassadors’ meeting that discussions covered the next round of expanded negotiations, and that Washington remains “committed to the tripartite framework, which is the only path to achieving peace and stability between the two countries.”
The visit by U.S. Ambassador Michael Eissa to the town of Zoutar al-Gharbiyeh on Tuesday, which lies within the first and only pilot zone adopted to date, carried a signal of support for the tripartite framework and was viewed as an on-the-ground inspection of the withdrawal of both Israel and Hezbollah from the town.
In parallel, the government accountability session did not escape high-level attention given its timing and what was at stake had it succeeded in creating an atmosphere that would embarrass Salam, who is set to meet with numerous leaders on the sidelines of his participation in the United Nations General Assembly, as well as with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in New York and then in Washington.
As on the first day of the accountability session, so on the second, the party found itself facing an unprecedented parliamentary inquiry in both scale and intensity, stemming from the two wars that have entangled Lebanon and its refusal to hand over its weapons. Amidst this, some of its members of parliament attempted to disrupt their opponents’ interventions through walkouts that were not devoid of insults. This occurred when the party’s MP, Ihab Hamada, interrupted MP Michel Mawaz during his speech, describing him as a “fool” and accusing him of “lying.” The interruption led to commotion, with other MPs intervening to reject Hamada’s remarks. Hamada had labeled them “Israel’s gang” and directed at one of them, “Get lost,” prompting MPs Ziad Hawat and Wadah al-Sadegh to retort, “You are the ones who brought the Israelis into Lebanon.”
While verbal skirmishes recurred on multiple occasions, the second day saw a notable intervention by MP Antoine Habchi (of the Lebanese Forces), who recalled two statements by Speaker Nabih Berri. Berri did not object, merely responding to the first with “Oh, oh.”
Habchi stated, “Mr. Speaker, a few days ago, you said that the Framework Agreement had flown away, and if the Israelis wish to occupy, they can do so. This means that the entire narrative of resistance and deterrence has collapsed and no longer exists. Consequently, why not hand over the weapons to the army and build a state?”
He added, “On March 16, 2024, your response to the American mediator, Amos Hochstein, was that moving the Litani River to another location would be far easier than removing the Radwan Force from the southern border. Today, the Litani remains in its place, the Israelis are north of the river, and there is no longer a Radwan Force on the southern border.”
At the end of the session, following the Prime Minister’s response, MP Gebran Bassil moved a vote of confidence in the government. The result was a vote of confidence with 68 votes in favor, 12 against, and 2 abstentions, out of a total of 128 members of parliament.
