Lebanon and Israel are engaged in US-sponsored indirect talks to resolve border disputes. This process involves three committees dealing with outstanding issues and does not indicate normalization. The release of five Lebanese prisoners by Israel was a goodwill gesture linked to these discussions. The situation remains tense due to ongoing military actions and accusations surrounding Hezbollah’s compliance with ceasefire agreements.
On March 12, a new agreement facilitated by the U.S. aims to resolve the border dispute between Lebanon and Israel through indirect talks. This agreement involves the establishment of three committees focused on negotiating outstanding issues but not engaging in direct negotiations. Sources informed Al Mayadeen that claims suggesting these committees indicate a prelude to normalization are unfounded.
The committees will specifically address unresolved topics, including border disputes and other contentious points originating from 2006. These issues encompass territories occupied by Israel post-war and the status of prisoners. Previously, an Israeli official stated that the committees would aim for normalization, indicating that negotiations at the political level are set to be conducted.
On March 11, Israel released five Lebanese prisoners as a gesture of goodwill towards President Joseph Aoun. As part of the ongoing U.S.-sponsored dialogue, there is also a collaboration between the U.S., France, and Lebanon to establish workgroups focused on resolving the border disputes. U.S. envoy Morgan Ortagus emphasized the aim of these talks is to diplomatically address several lingering issues, including prisoner release and contested territories along the Blue Line.
Among the thirteen disputed locations are Ras al-Naqoura, Marwahin, and three in Alma al-Shaab, all of which Israel was meant to vacate after the 2006 war. Moreover, there are five sites that Israel currently occupies following ground operations related to conflicts with Hezbollah. The Israeli military regularly conducts operations in southern Lebanon, which it justifies as preventive measures against Hezbollah’s rearmament.
Claims from Tel Aviv contrast with the stipulations of UN Resolution 1701, which calls for the disarming of Hezbollah by the Lebanese army without Israeli military interventions. Israel has alleged Hezbollah failed to comply with ceasefire conditions, accusing the group of not withdrawing as required, thereby complicating these ongoing negotiations.
The ongoing indirect talks between Lebanon and Israel, supported by the U.S. and involving three negotiation committees, aim to address unresolved border disputes without suggesting normalization. The release of prisoners and collaborative efforts from the U.S. and France highlight a commitment to resolving longstanding issues. However, tensions remain as Israeli military actions and Hezbollah’s presence in southern Lebanon continue to complicate the situation.
Original Source: thecradle.co
