Amid Lebanon’s Crisis: Northern Israelis and Shiite Leaders Criticize Ceasefire Talks...

Israeli Official Reveals Netanyahu Agreed to Hezbollah Ceasefire Amid UN Pressure

An Israeli official disclosed to The Times of Israel that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to a ceasefire with Hezbollah to avoid the possibility of a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning Israel. The deal, which is seen as a last-minute move, came amid growing concerns from the Biden administration, which, according to the Israeli official, might push for such a resolution in Israel’s final weeks. However, no clear indications from the U.S. have confirmed such actions are imminent.

The official emphasized that Israel's military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon will continue in line with the U.S.'s understanding of allowing Israel to target anyone posing a threat to Israeli security, especially Hezbollah's efforts to strengthen its military capabilities. The operations, which have been ongoing as part of a broader Israeli campaign to disrupt the flow of Iranian weapons to Hezbollah and other groups, will not stop entirely. Instead, Israel has agreed to a temporary ceasefire under the assumption that it will help prevent Hezbollah from strengthening its position further.

As part of the deal, the Lebanese Army will begin its phased deployment into southern Lebanon, which is expected to take 60 days. During this period, the IDF will withdraw. The U.S. and Lebanon have agreed to coordinate the terms of the ceasefire, with U.S. Central Command’s General Michael Kurilla and French officials taking part in the arrangement. France had been reluctant to get involved initially, primarily due to its concerns over Israeli accusations that it had ties to the International Criminal Court's decision to issue arrest warrants against Netanyahu.

Despite the ceasefire, the Israeli official stressed that this would not weaken Israel’s long-term goals in the region. "We aim to isolate Hezbollah from Hamas," the official stated, pointing out that Hezbollah had provided critical support to Hamas during the Gaza conflict. By severing that connection, Israel believes it could ultimately lead to a more favorable conclusion to the Gaza war. While the terms of the ceasefire are uncertain, the official indicated it could last anywhere from a month to a year. The hope is that by reducing the intensity of hostilities on the Lebanese front, more Israeli forces can be directed toward Gaza.

Northern Israelis Oppose Ceasefire with Hezbollah, Fear Rebuilding of Terror Group

In northern Israel, residents have expressed strong opposition to the proposed ceasefire with Hezbollah. They are concerned that such a deal would allow the terror group to rebuild its strength, potentially endangering their communities once again.

Kiryat Shmona’s Mayor, Avihay Stern, criticized the ceasefire agreement, claiming it was a “historic missed opportunity” to finish off Hezbollah. “How have we gone from total victory to total surrender?” Stern asked, expressing frustration over Israel's decision to cease hostilities when Hezbollah is at its most vulnerable. He voiced concerns that the ceasefire would allow Hezbollah to recover its strength, which would put the northern residents at risk again. “What will we come back to—a city destroyed with no security?”

Local leaders in the north, including Moshe Davidovich, head of the Mateh Asher Regional Council, echoed Stern’s sentiments. Davidovich pointed out the dangers of signing such a ceasefire when Hezbollah is actively working to enhance its military capabilities, and he questioned the disconnect between decision-makers in Jerusalem and the reality on the ground. "We cannot trust the idea of returning to the status quo, where Hezbollah is able to continue rearming and gaining strength," he said. “This ceasefire may give Hezbollah a chance to rebuild, and that would be a grave mistake.”

The security situation in the north remains tenuous, with Hezbollah’s military presence still strong along the border. The ceasefire could significantly affect the region’s stability, and local leaders are warning that it might lead to a long-term failure to secure the area against future threats. Families living in the north are already fleeing due to the uncertainty, further adding to the region's anxiety.

Political Backlash: Israeli Leaders Condemn Ceasefire Agreement

Israeli political figures across the spectrum have strongly criticized the ceasefire agreement, with many calling it a missed opportunity to eliminate Hezbollah once and for all.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir blasted the agreement, arguing that it would only strengthen Hezbollah. He suggested that Israel should continue military operations while the group is weakened. "This is a historic failure," he said, "We need to keep fighting until Hezbollah is fully dismantled."

Likud MK Amit Halevi joined in condemning the ceasefire deal, especially criticizing the role of U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein in facilitating the agreement. Halevi emphasized that the ceasefire should be conditional on Hezbollah’s complete disarmament, a demand that was not part of the agreement. “We cannot accept a ceasefire that leaves Hezbollah intact. Their weapons must be removed for any agreement to have lasting meaning,” Halevi said.

Opposition figures, including Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, also voiced skepticism. Gantz stated that only the Israeli military should be responsible for security in northern Israel, arguing that the involvement of foreign powers could undermine Israel’s ability to act decisively against Hezbollah. Lapid, a former prime minister, warned that a ceasefire agreement without a clear military and political victory would leave Israel vulnerable in the future.

Former Minister Avigdor Liberman accused Israeli leadership of failing to understand the realities of the situation. He described the ceasefire as “unreasonable” and warned that it would only prolong Hezbollah’s ability to threaten Israel. "We cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of 2006," he warned, referencing the 2006 Lebanon War, in which Hezbollah's military capabilities were left largely intact despite a ceasefire.

Shiites Ask Why Hezbollah Refused Ceasefire: 'You Could Have Prevented Death and Destruction'

As the war in Lebanon continues to take a heavy toll on civilians, particularly among the Shiite Muslim community, some Lebanese Shiites are questioning why Hezbollah did not agree to a ceasefire sooner. They argue that had the group accepted the terms being discussed now, many lives could have been spared, and Lebanon could have avoided the extensive destruction and suffering it has experienced.

The war has already caused the deaths of at least 3,500 people in Lebanon, with a significant portion of those casualties being Hezbollah operatives. However, nearly 900 of the victims are civilians, including women and children. The conflict has displaced over a million people, with damages estimated at over $8 billion.

Some critics suggest that Hezbollah could have agreed to a ceasefire months ago under the same conditions now on the table, which would have prevented the ongoing destruction, death, and displacement. Lebanese legislator Waddah Sadek, a Sunni Muslim, expressed frustration over this in a post on X (formerly Twitter), stating that the war had caused unnecessary harm to Lebanon, including the deaths of martyrs and the loss of billions of dollars.

Among those voicing criticism is Bahaa Al Hariri, son of Lebanon's former prime minister Rafik al Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005. Hariri, whose father’s death was linked to Hezbollah, pointed out that Lebanon’s Independence Day this year comes at a pivotal moment, as the country faces significant internal divisions. He emphasized the need for unity and a collective effort to rebuild Lebanon, free from foreign influences and militias. He also praised Israel’s role in killing Salim Ayyash, a senior Hezbollah commander involved in his father's assassination, and called for Hezbollah to disarm following the killing of their leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in September.

Shiite Cleric Criticizes Hezbollah's Role in War

Shiite cleric Ali Al Amin, known for his criticism of Hezbollah, sharply condemned the group's decision to open a front against Israel in support of Hamas. Al Amin called for Lebanese Shiite leaders to reject sectarianism and to declare Lebanon's independence, emphasizing that the country should act in its national interest and avoid actions that undermine its sovereignty. He said, "Ask your leaders why they brought this destruction on Lebanon," in reference to Hezbollah’s decision to escalate the conflict. Al Amin further stressed that Hezbollah’s actions, including opening a front in support of Hamas, only hurt Lebanon and its people.

Hezbollah's refusal to agree to a ceasefire has sparked significant criticism from various quarters. Many Lebanese, particularly within the Shiite community, fear that the group's continued actions will lead to further damage and long-term instability for Lebanon. While some hope that a broader political openness may emerge, allowing for a more diverse range of voices within the Shiite community, others are concerned that Hezbollah’s actions are weakening the entire Shiite population in Lebanon.

The continuing crisis in Lebanon has exposed the deepening divisions within the country, with increasing calls for the Shiite community to unite, reject sectarianism, and seek a path of coexistence that would promote Lebanon's independence and stability.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yemen’s Crossroads: Ali Al Bukhaiti’s Journey and the Struggle Against the Houthis...

🚨 BrahMos at the Bunker? Did India Just Nuke Pakistan’s Nukes Without Nuking Pakistan’s Nukes?...

The Iran-Backed Axis of Resistance: Why the War Against Israel Will Continue...