A Few Thoughts on the Lebanon Ceasefire Deal
This is a good thing
From the White House this afternoon, President Biden announced a ceasefire deal in Lebanon, which will go into effect at 4 a.m. local time. Under the terms of the deal, Israel will eventually withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon and cease its bombardment of the country. Hezbollah, in turn, will withdraw its forces from southern Lebanon and halt its rocket attacks into Israel proper.
This ceasefire is undoubtedly a positive development.
Less fighting is always better than more fighting. This ceasefire can provide immediate relief to the 1.2 million Lebanese and tens of thousands of Israelis who have been displaced over the last year, including nearly 800,000 Lebanese displaced in the last two months as fighting sharply escalated. Above all, it is important to remember that this ceasefire will directly and immediately improve the lives of millions of people.
In the longer term, this ceasefire offers a chance to de-escalate after over a year of continuous tensions: between Israel and Hezbollah, Israel and Iran, Israel and the Houthis, and between the U.S. and Iranian proxies in Iraq and Syria.
The significant fear that fighting between Israel and Hezbollah might lead to direct conflict between Iran and Israel was realized in recent months. Israel and Iran have directly targeted each other in unprecedented ways. The escalatory trajectory suggested the potential for more such attacks, even an all-out war that could draw in the United States. For now, this peace agreement appears to provide an off-ramp to that very dangerous outcome. Again, this is undeniably a good development.
The terms of this agreement, as they are known, resemble the deal that ended the 2006 conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. That agreement, codified in Security Council Resolution 1701, required Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanese territory. Hezbollah was to pull its forces north of the Litani River, and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) were tasked with filling the security gap in southern Lebanon near the Israeli border. The LAF, a relatively weak military force, was supported by approximately 10,000 UN peacekeepers to help maintain security.
That agreement remains technically in effect, though the recent major escalation between Israel and Hezbollah rendered the peacekeepers largely inactive. By design, UN peacekeepers are not active combat forces. If there is no peace to keep, they cannot perform their duties. However, with a new ceasefire deal that mirrors Resolution 1701, the peacekeepers can resume their work and assist the Lebanese Armed Forces in maintaining control over southern Lebanon. In his remarks, President Biden also referenced additional international support for the Lebanese army, mentioning that both France and the United States may provide assistance, though he emphasized this would not involve U.S. boots on the ground.
What Does This Mean for Gaza?
The hope is that this ceasefire agreement might build momentum for a similar deal in Gaza. President Biden expressed as much in his remarks. A Gaza ceasefire would be crucial, particularly for people in northern Gaza, who have been cut off from nearly all international aid. Just last week, a group of independent UN food security experts warned that famine in northern Gaza was imminent. A ceasefire in Gaza would allow humanitarian organizations to deliver aid in sufficient quantities and for a sufficient duration to avert this impending disaster.
If the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire does not lead to a ceasefire in Gaza, it would undoubtedly be devastating for the people of Gaza. However, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that this agreement is a good outcome in its own right. In over a year of endless fighting this ceasefire offers a rare opportunity for de-escalation that would immediately benefit the lives of millions of people and sharply reduce the risk that this conflict expands throughout the region.
Let’s just hope the parties are able and willing to live by its strictures.