After more than three months of anticipation marked by significant political and military hurdles, the United States and Iran have announced the conclusion of a peace agreement. This pact is set to be signed in Geneva next Friday, following conflicts that have engulfed the Gulf countries, Lebanon, and international energy channels.
Although the details of the agreement remain unclear for Lebanon, which awaits further developments to distinguish the proverbial white thread from the black, the country is set to bear the brunt of this protracted conflict. Lebanon is preparing for a fifth round of direct talks between military and diplomatic representatives from Lebanon and Israel in Washington on June 22 and 23. Meanwhile, Israeli leadership, from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Defense Minister Yoav Galant, has collectively dismissed the agreement, deeming it unfavorable. In essence, Israel has vowed not to withdraw from Lebanon, maintaining its military stance to thwart "Hezbollah" threats and continuing its campaign against the Iranian regime's potential acquisition of a nuclear weapon.
This situation or, more fittingly, the obscurity surrounding the agreement's terms, poses a significant concern and unease for Lebanese citizens, who have grown weary of bearing the costs of foreign conflicts on their land. They face an uncertain future where statements about an immediate cessation of military operations across the Middle East, including Lebanon, stand in stark contrast to Israeli discontent and refusal to commit due to perceived ongoing threats to its northern settlements.
The region now enters a politically challenging landscape, with many keenly awaiting to see if the agreement heralds stability and peace or if Lebanon continues to pay the hefty price of international conflicts on its soil amid Israeli escalation. Israel treats its engagement with Lebanon distinctly, maintaining a separate stance on its conflict with "Hezbollah."
In an exclusive with "Wirdna," MP Mohammad Khawaja reiterated Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri’s support for the memorandum of understanding, highlighting the significant efforts behind it. He emphasized the United States' need to pressure Israel into compliance, particularly regarding Lebanon, noting that this understanding differs in nature from the 2024 ceasefire agreement. The agreement needs to be signed to avoid premature judgments, and Lebanese unity is crucial for implementing its particular provisions related to Lebanon, hoping it might conclude their last war.
Conversely, MP Ayyoub Hmeid cautioned against reliance on the dependability of the United States due to its bias toward Israel, which seeks to isolate Lebanon for its aspirations. Lebanon must engage actively rather than sever communication with the Iranian side.
Seeing the agreement as a significant achievement, Hmeid called for Lebanon to capitalize by strengthening its internal resilience. He advocates for engagement with Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other responsible parties to pressure Israel and curb its aggression against Lebanon.