Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon would benefit all parties

Following the ceasefire agreement that was sealed on Nov. 27 last year, Israel was supposed to withdraw from Lebanese territory by Jan. 26. The deadline was last month extended to Feb. 18. However, as we approach that date, Israel is showing no signs that it will withdraw in time. Its withdrawal is necessary for Lebanon to have any kind of stability or state-building.

Israel has been successful in decapitating Hezbollah’s leadership. It used advanced technology to assassinate the group’s field leaders. Later, it conducted the attack on Hezbollah pagers, in which more than 3,500 top operatives were simultaneously either killed or maimed. Israel followed this attack with an intensive bombing campaign, in which it killed all commanders of the group, starting with Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah.

According to the ceasefire agreement, Hezbollah needs to withdraw north of the Litani River. The deal also includes the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which orders all Lebanese militias to disarm. Meanwhile, Israel was supposed to withdraw by the end of an initial 60-day period. However, it did not. The excuse that Israel presented was that it needs to clear the south of the country of all arms depots and pockets of resistance. This is why it keeps bombing parts of the south and the Bekaa Valley every now and then.

What is obvious is that Israel and the new US administration do not believe in soft power or the ideas of nuance and narrative. They only believe in hard power. They believe that the only way to get rid of Hezbollah is to kill all its operatives and dry up all its sources of funding. What they do not realize is that by adopting this method they are undermining the Lebanese state.

Hezbollah’s military muscle can be weakened, but the idea of Hezbollah cannot be eradicated as long as there is any form of Israeli occupation or breach of Lebanese sovereignty. Hezbollah’s argument, on which it bases the legitimacy for its existence, is that the Lebanese army cannot protect Lebanon from Israeli aggression. Hence, a guerrilla force is needed.

If Israel wanted to act intelligently, it would withdraw before the next deadline and allow the Lebanese state to take the credit

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib

If Israel wanted to act intelligently, it would withdraw before the next deadline and allow the Lebanese state to take the credit. This way, Beirut could show the Lebanese people, including Hezbollah, that the Lebanese state can repel the Israelis and protect the country from its aggression by using diplomacy. However, the Israeli leaders’ arrogance, coupled with American permissiveness, is undermining the Lebanese state.

Though Hezbollah is weakened militarily, its narrative is being strengthened at the expense of the Lebanese state’s prestige. When the 60-day period finished, the people of the south rushed back to their homes. Israel shot 22 people dead. This was a blow to the Lebanese state. It showed that the state was unable to protect its own people. Hezbollah will not be weakened as long as its audience feel that they need protection. Israel might kill the commander and disrupt the chain of command. However, it will only be a matter of time before the group restores its chain of command and grooms new leaders.

The US, which brokered the ceasefire, should show respect and empower the Lebanese state in order for the Lebanese people to trust it. If the average Lebanese, especially in the south, does not feel that the state can protect them from Israeli aggression, they will revert to Hezbollah for protection. They will send their children to be enlisted in the group. They will contribute from their hard-earned money to finance the group.

However, this is not how the US has acted. During her visit to Lebanon last week, Deputy Special Middle East Envoy Morgan Ortagus thanked Israel for defeating Hezbollah. Israel had just destroyed half of the country and the US envoy, speaking at the presidential palace, thanked it. This announcement undermined the Lebanese state and exacerbated the country’s internal divisions. It also reinforced the perception among Lebanese Shiites that the state cannot protect them. The Shiites feel alienated and hurt and Hezbollah is taking advantage of that.

At the same time, the camp that is antagonistic to Hezbollah feels empowered. Progress MP Mark Daou said that the speaker of the parliament, who is an ally of Hezbollah, should walk the line, otherwise he should be wary of a woman’s shoe (referring to Ortagus) or to a boot (probably referring to a military boot). The supporters of Hezbollah and Amal were deeply offended by his disrespectful comments toward their leadership. They accused him of being an agent for the Israelis.

The US, which brokered the ceasefire, should show respect and empower the Lebanese state in order for the Lebanese people to trust it

Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib

This is a watershed moment for the Lebanese — a moment where the people should rally around the state and focus on institution-building and the conducting of reforms. However, the Israeli presence is creating a point of contention between the Lebanese who are happy that Hezbollah has been defeated and the supporters of the group, who feel alienated by the rest of Lebanese society. It is also a distraction from state-building and a gift for corrupt politicians to derail the progress toward reforms.

The US, which has the upper hand, should have a strategic view. It should pressure Israel to withdraw, while getting enough guarantees from the Lebanese state that it will pressure Hezbollah to disarm and to morph into a political party on a par with the other parties in the country. However, the US seems to prefer hard power and a blunt approach. This approach entails the risk of internal unrest.

The US should realize that the only viable alternative to Hezbollah is a strong Lebanese state that can deliver security and services to its citizens. This cannot happen as long as Israel occupies parts of Lebanon and infringes on its security. The US should pressure Israel to withdraw by the deadline of Feb. 18.

• Dr. Dania Koleilat Khatib is a specialist in US-Arab relations with a focus on lobbying. She is co-founder of the Research Center for Cooperation and Peace Building, a Lebanese nongovernmental organization focused on Track II.