In the wake of the recent escalation of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, an American–French diplomatic effort is underway in New York, where various world leaders are present. The focus is on achieving a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, during which the parties and mediators will discuss a long-term settlement for the Israel–Lebanon border.
A joint statement signed by the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and Qatar emphasized that the situation between Israel and Lebanon since October 8 is intolerable and poses a risk of regional escalation. These nations are calling for an immediate 21-day ceasefire to allow time for diplomatic efforts aimed at securing a settlement in line with the UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and fulfilling UN Security Council Resolution 2735 regarding a ceasefire in Gaza.
The signatory countries have expressed willingness to assist in the diplomatic efforts to end the current crisis between Lebanon and Israel. Also relevant are talks that French President Macron held with the Iranian president, urging Iran to influence Hezbollah. The Iranians, including the president, have praised Hezbollah’s resistance against Israel, implying that Iran is currently not interested in intervening in the fighting. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office has shown no willingness to consider a ceasefire and even clarified that operations will continue in both the North and Gaza as planned.
It’s clear that all talks are preliminary and fragile, and it’s doubtful that they’ll evolve into a comprehensive initiative acceptable to both sides. Even if the proposal offers positive aspects for Israel, it should only agree to a ceasefire if it promotes a sustainable settlement in both arenas, and ideally includes a hostage deal. In the unlikely event that a resolution is reached in Lebanon, this would be seen as an achievement, particularly in dispelling the threat of a multi-front conflict. The worst-case scenario would be a resumption of the intense fighting against Hezbollah after three weeks without any diplomatic gains, during which Hezbollah would be able to recover and better prepare for further conflict, especially a ground maneuver by Israel.
Until the positions of the parties are clear, it’s advisable to continue the intense military operations for a few more days while maintaining the threat of a ground maneuver. This would maximize damage to Hezbollah and increase the chances of securing a settlement that prevents a return to the current situation. The resolution should include the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River, with Lebanese and international forces stationed between the Israeli border and the Litani, thus facilitating the return of displaced residents, while implementing protective and defensive measures.
It should be emphasized that we’re in the early stages of exploration, reflecting the international community’s desire, along with that of Iran and the regional countries, to prevent the conflict from escalating into a wider regional war. However, it remains uncertain whether the parties’ differing agenda will allow for viable agreements at this stage.
In the wake of the recent escalation of fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, an American–French diplomatic effort is underway in New York, where various world leaders are present. The focus is on achieving a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, during which the parties and mediators will discuss a long-term settlement for the Israel–Lebanon border.
A joint statement signed by the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and Qatar emphasized that the situation between Israel and Lebanon since October 8 is intolerable and poses a risk of regional escalation. These nations are calling for an immediate 21-day ceasefire to allow time for diplomatic efforts aimed at securing a settlement in line with the UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and fulfilling UN Security Council Resolution 2735 regarding a ceasefire in Gaza.
The signatory countries have expressed willingness to assist in the diplomatic efforts to end the current crisis between Lebanon and Israel. Also relevant are talks that French President Macron held with the Iranian president, urging Iran to influence Hezbollah. The Iranians, including the president, have praised Hezbollah’s resistance against Israel, implying that Iran is currently not interested in intervening in the fighting. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office has shown no willingness to consider a ceasefire and even clarified that operations will continue in both the North and Gaza as planned.
It’s clear that all talks are preliminary and fragile, and it’s doubtful that they’ll evolve into a comprehensive initiative acceptable to both sides. Even if the proposal offers positive aspects for Israel, it should only agree to a ceasefire if it promotes a sustainable settlement in both arenas, and ideally includes a hostage deal. In the unlikely event that a resolution is reached in Lebanon, this would be seen as an achievement, particularly in dispelling the threat of a multi-front conflict. The worst-case scenario would be a resumption of the intense fighting against Hezbollah after three weeks without any diplomatic gains, during which Hezbollah would be able to recover and better prepare for further conflict, especially a ground maneuver by Israel.
Until the positions of the parties are clear, it’s advisable to continue the intense military operations for a few more days while maintaining the threat of a ground maneuver. This would maximize damage to Hezbollah and increase the chances of securing a settlement that prevents a return to the current situation. The resolution should include the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River, with Lebanese and international forces stationed between the Israeli border and the Litani, thus facilitating the return of displaced residents, while implementing protective and defensive measures.
It should be emphasized that we’re in the early stages of exploration, reflecting the international community’s desire, along with that of Iran and the regional countries, to prevent the conflict from escalating into a wider regional war. However, it remains uncertain whether the parties’ differing agenda will allow for viable agreements at this stage.