Written By: Justin K.P.
On Friday, Israel and the Lebanese government signed a deal brokered by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio that essentially gives Lebanese sovereignty away to Israel and destroys the MoU with Iran.
The End Of Lebanese Sovereignty.
The deal, as Benjamin Netanyahu boasted, is “a historic achievement for Israel” because it allows Israel to hold, “a security zone in Lebanon for as long as is needed for Israeli security”, (ie continue the occupation of South Lebanon).
Israel Channel 12 reported that , “The Lebanese government requested from Washington not to publish the secret security annex within the framework agreement with ‘Israel’” which “stipulates a clear commitment from both parties that any step will not be implemented according to timelines but according to conditions” and that “The framework agreement stipulates freedom of operation inside the ‘Blue Line’ against immediate and emerging threats”.
Furthermore, Israeli media reports that within the security annex to the Israel-Lebanon framework agreement, “Israel does not only have to confirm the pilot locations - the IDF will also enter the areas it withdrew from to verify that the Lebanese army has indeed dismantled Hezbollah’s infrastructure on the ground.”
In other words, according to the deal, Israel is allowed to occupy areas of South Lebanon with no timetable to withdraw, and is able to enter areas of Lebanon to “verify that the Lebanese army has indeed dismantled Hezbollah’s infrastructure on the ground”.
As the analysis Elijah J. Magnier noted , under the agreement, “Israel keeps the power to decide when it feels secure enough to withdraw, the United States presents itself as mediator while acting as Israel’s strategic protector, and Lebanon is asked to implement security obligations that its own political and social reality may not allow.”
He added, “The most dangerous feature is the absence of a clear timetable for full Israeli withdrawal. Netanyahu has made clear that Israel will remain in southern Lebanon, in its security or buffer zones, until Hezbollah disarms and until Israel judges that the threat to its citizens has been removed. This makes Israel not merely a party to the agreement, but the judge of Lebanese compliance. It gives Israel the authority to decide whether Hezbollah has been sufficiently disarmed, whether the Lebanese army has done enough, whether the threat has disappeared, and therefore whether Israel should withdraw. That is not sovereignty. It is conditional sovereignty under Israeli review.”
Furthermore, as Lebanese journalist Rania Khalek reported , within the published deal , “Point 2 stipulates that Israeli withdrawal is contingent on the Lebanese Army first disarming Hezbollah, meaning civil war. This flips international law on its head. Israel’s occupation is illegal whether Hezbollah exists or not. The agreement states: ‘the LAF will restore effective sovereign authority over all Lebanese territory, pending the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups and dismantlement of associated infrastructure, enabling the IDF to progressively redeploy out of Lebanese territory.’ By agreeing to disarm Hezbollah first, with the markers for ‘verified disarmament’ yet to be determined by the U.S., the Lebanese government has cemented the occupation of the south.”.
An anchor on the Israeli channel 13 boasted , “It seems we’re leading the state of Lebanon towards civil war. Maybe it’s not so bad for us. Let the Lebanese government fight Hezbollah”.
Furthermore, Rania Khalek noted, “Point 13 demonstrates shocking incompetence as it gives up Lebanon’s right to ‘hostile or adverse actions in international political or legal fora.’ That means the Lebanese government agreed to forfeit using the law against Israel for the endless list of war crimes they’ve committed against Lebanon. It’s wild that this is coming from a government whose Prime Minister was a judge on the International Court of Justice and presided over South Africa’s case on the genocide in Gaza.”
The End Of The MoU.
Aside from giving up Lebanese Sovereignty to Israel and the United States, it destroys the U.S.-signed MoU with Iran, which includes an unconditional Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon.
Point one of the MoU reads , “The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, and their allies in the current war, by signing this MoU, declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and undertake from now on not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other, and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other, and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon.”
But as Elijah J. Magnier noted, “The Washington framework effectively empties paragraph 1 of the US-Iran MOU of its meaning. That paragraph required an end to the war, respect for Lebanon’s sovereignty, and Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory. The new framework replaces that obligation with a conditional mechanism: Israel withdraws only when it decides that Hezbollah has been disarmed and the threat has disappeared. In other words, Netanyahu has turned an Israeli duty to withdraw into a Lebanese obligation to prove itself under Israeli supervision.”
Iran has stayed strong in stating that an unconditional Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon is a red line in the future of the MoU.
Iran Press TV reports that during a call between Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf and Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said, “Our goal is to end the war in Lebanon, [help] return of refugees to their homes, end the occupation and [secure] withdrawal of the Zionist regime from Lebanese territory” and “reiterated Iran’s seriousness in pursuing the issue.”
According to Press TV, both speakers of parliament agreed that the Israel/Lebanon deal was in violation of the MoU. The report noted:
The Lebanese parliament speaker warned that the Zionist enemy seeks to circumvent the issue related to Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity under the Islamabad MoU through alternative means.
Berri described the Washington-brokered agreement between Lebanon and the Israeli regime as a conspiracy and sedition.
The Iranian and Lebanese parliament speakers emphasized the need for an early meeting of the deconfliction unit to help oversee implementation of the Islamabad-brokered MoU and end the war in Lebanon.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei has similarly reiterated that an unconditional Israel withdrawal from South Lebanon is crucial to the future of the MoU.
Press TV reported, “He reiterated Iran’s longstanding position on Lebanon’s sovereignty, saying the Islamic Republic considers the protection of Lebanon’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity, along with safeguarding the dignity and security of all Lebanese citizens, to be a fundamental prerequisite for any sustainable agreement aimed at ending the war and Israel’s military presence in the country.”
It added:
He also emphasized that Tehran had placed an end to Israel’s military offensive in Lebanon alongside the termination of hostilities against Iran as one of its principal demands and has consistently insisted on the implementation of those commitments.
The Iranian spokesman further stated that the full implementation of the first provision of the memorandum—which calls for ending Israeli attacks against Lebanon and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Lebanese territories—is essential for reaching a final and lasting agreement capable of restoring stability to the region.
Referring to the United States’ explicit commitment under the first provision of the June 18 memorandum, Baghaei urged Washington to take all necessary measures to compel Israel to halt all acts of aggression and military offensives across Lebanese territory.
He also called for the prompt establishment of a timetable for Israel’s unconditional withdrawal from the occupied areas of Lebanon, saying that such a step is necessary for the successful implementation of the agreement and the achievement of durable peace and security.
The remarks came after Israel and Lebanon signed a 14-point framework agreement in Washington aimed at ending hostilities and addressing long-standing security issues along their shared border.
Note to readers: The Dissident is a reader-supported outlet. If you liked this article, consider becoming a paid subscriber.
The Lebanonese government is shameful. Regime change now.
Is it me, or is so much of this (or all of it) intentional, with each party performing their part?
Thank you for this!