Israel is refusing to withdraw troops from Lebanon, violating a ceasefire agreement that was to take effect by January 2024. Israeli forces remain in five strategic locations, and the Lebanese government, along with Hezbollah, is demanding full withdrawal. The issue has significant legal implications and could lead to renewed hostilities in the region.
Israel has decided to maintain its military presence in five specific locations in Lebanon, defying a ceasefire agreement that went into effect on November 27, 2023. Originally set to withdraw by January 26, 2024, Israel has remained in several Lebanese villages, prompting the Lebanese government and Hezbollah to negotiate a new withdrawal deadline of February 18, which has since passed without action from Israel.
The ongoing presence of Israeli troops raises concerns about a potential long-term occupation. Following a series of low-intensity conflicts between Israel and Hezbollah, which escalated after Hamas’s attacks on October 7, 2023, Israel aimed to secure its borders from Hezbollah threats while Hezbollah sought to pressure Israel regarding its operations in Gaza.
Israeli forces are staying put because no Lebanese force appears capable of ousting them at the moment. The ceasefire accord is overseen by a U.S.-led monitoring body that includes France, which historically tends to overlook Israel’s commitments under international law. In response, Israel claims it will only withdraw once the Lebanese army fulfills its obligations under the agreement.
Israeli forces are currently stationed in five key hilltops along the Lebanese-Israeli border: al-Aziyah, al-Awaida, el-Hamames, Jabal Bilat, and Labbouneh. For decades, Israel has also occupied the Shebaa Farms area, which it has annexed, while Lebanon claims ownership of that territory.
Lebanon’s government has adamantly opposed any Israeli military presence, citing the ceasefire agreement as a basis for withdrawal. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun expressed his distrust of Israel, stating, “the Israeli enemy cannot be trusted”. Hezbollah’s leadership has similarly insisted on enforcement of the ceasefire and complete withdrawal from Israeli forces.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials have been dismissive of Lebanon’s stance, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio advocating for the disarmament of Hezbollah instead. European diplomats, however, have taken a more diplomatic approach, with France proposing to replace Israeli troops with UN peacekeepers to ensure compliance with the ceasefire.
Israel’s refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon despite a ceasefire agreement raises concerns of a prolonged occupation, which some fear may reignite conflict. With U.S. allies not pressing Israel to comply and Lebanon’s government and Hezbollah opposing the military presence, diplomatic negotiations continue. The legal aspects of Israel’s occupation are contentious, with interpretations varying on its legitimacy. The situation remains critical as regional stability hangs in the balance.
Original Source: www.aljazeera.com
