In the same city where the biggest diplomacy of the Iran war is being managed, a parallel and almost equally consequential negotiation has begun. Today, for the first time since 1993, Israeli and Lebanese government officials are meeting directly — face to face — under US auspices at the State Department in Washington.
The talks are narrow in scope. They are enormous in implication.
Who Is in the Room
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is hosting the talks. The Israeli and Lebanese delegations will be led by their respective ambassadors — Yechiel Leiter for Israel and Nada Hamadeh for Lebanon. The US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa and State Department counselor Michael Needham will also be part of the US delegation.
“This conversation will scope the ongoing dialogue about how to ensure the long-term security of Israel’s northern border and to support the Government of Lebanon’s determination to reclaim full sovereignty over its territory and political life,” a State Department official said. “Israel is at war with Hizballah, not Lebanon, so there is no reason the two neighbors should not be talking.”
What Each Side Wants
The gap between the two delegations’ starting positions is wide.
Lebanon’s president hopes the meeting will result in a ceasefire. Israel will be working under two principles Prime Minister Netanyahu laid out: the disarmament of Hezbollah and the conclusion of a historic peace agreement with Lebanon.
Israeli sources assess that the gap between the two sides is wide — Lebanon is demanding a ceasefire as a precondition for talks, while Israel insists military operations against Hezbollah will continue and that negotiations must proceed under fire.
According to a report by Israel’s Channel 14, Israel is expected to propose dividing southern Lebanon into three security zones. The first zone, 0-8km from the border, would see a long-term intensive Israeli military presence until Hezbollah is fully dismantled.
The second zone, up to the Litani River, would see Israeli forces gradually hand control to the Lebanese army. The third zone, north of the Litani, would fall under sole Lebanese army responsibility for disarming Hezbollah.
Hezbollah’s Response
Hezbollah has fiercely condemned the negotiations. Secretary-General Naim Qassem called them a “free concession” to Israel and the US. “You cannot conduct negotiations to stop the fighting if you are under fire and under pressure,” said Ali al-Miqdad, a Hezbollah member of the Lebanese parliament. Qassem warned the talks require “Lebanese consensus” and accused the government of acting without the backing of the majority.
Hezbollah’s Secretary-General Naim Qassem rejected the upcoming talks between the Lebanese government and Israel outright, calling them “futile.”
Why Lebanon Is the Key to the Whole Conflict
Lebanon’s inclusion — or exclusion — from any Iran ceasefire has been the deepest fault line in the entire diplomacy. Iran insists Lebanon must be part of any deal. Israel and the US have said Lebanon was not covered by the ceasefire. Pakistan, which brokered the ceasefire, said it was.
After the failure of Iran negotiations in Islamabad and Hamas’s apparent rejection of the Gaza demilitarisation plan, this week’s Israel-Lebanon talks may be the only near-term chance for US diplomacy to translate military success into diplomatic achievement. The incentive for Secretary of State Rubio to produce a positive outcome is therefore especially high.
Netanyahu agreed to scale back strikes on Beirut due to American pressure, refraining in recent days from attacking the city. Every strike must now receive political-level approval. Israel has, however, continued to strike what it says are Hezbollah targets in southern Lebanon.
If today’s talks produce even a framework for a Lebanon ceasefire — without necessarily solving everything — it would remove the single biggest obstacle to extending the US-Iran ceasefire past April 22 and opening a path to the next round of negotiations. If they fail, the Iran deal loses one of its last remaining props.
