Analysis: Test of Israel's good faith, Lebanon's ability, U.S. resolve
by Dalal Saoud · UPIBEITUR, Lebanon, July 10 (UPI) -- Lebanon and Israel prepare to implement the first two pilot zones in southern Lebanon as an early test of last month's framework agreement -- a move that depends on Israel's willingness to act in good faith, the Lebanese Army's ability to assume security responsibilities and Washington's resolve to sustain pressure on Israel to uphold its commitments.
The U.S.-brokered framework agreement, reached June 26 after four days of marathon talks between Lebanese and Israeli negotiating teams under pressure from Washington, provides for a phased Israeli withdrawal from occupied areas of southern Lebanon.
It will begin with two pilot zones, agreed upon by both sides, to enable the Lebanese Army to deploy and "restore effective sovereign authority."
If successfully implemented and verified, displaced residents would be allowed to return and reconstruction could begin, paving the way for further Israeli withdrawals.
Israel's withdrawal from the pilot zones it has designated in the towns of Froun, Ghandourieh, Zawtar al-Gharbieh and Zawtar al-Sharqieh, situated in the central sector of southern Lebanon near the strategic Litani River, would represent a significant step for Lebanon.
It would mark a reversal in the trajectory of Israeli military actions in the south since the 2023 war, which have resulted in the occupation of additional Lebanese territory, systematic destruction of villages, and displacement of residents.
A U.S. military delegation is expected in Beirut for talks with the Lebanese Army on the military procedures to be implemented in the pilot areas, amid Israeli media reports that the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the two zones is expected to begin in the coming days.
Despite falling short of Lebanon's expectations and facing strong rejection from Hezbollah, the initial agreement with Israel was viewed as the only available option to prevent a worse outcome.
A diplomatic source with Lebanon's negotiating team said the framework agreement reinforced the principle that the Lebanese state is negotiating on its own behalf, halted a phase of intensive Israeli military operations and destruction, and, most importantly, paved the way for some 500,000 to 600,000 displaced residents to return to their villages in parts of southern Lebanon.
"The displaced people reacted quickly; the scale of their return was beyond expectations," the source told UPI.
Such a massive return to largely destroyed villages and homes took place despite continued Israeli strikes in southern Lebanon that have caused further casualties and damage, even as the cease-fire agreement succeeded in significantly reducing the scale of attacks and sparing Beirut, its southern suburbs and other Lebanese areas.
The source cautioned that Israel, which had been forced into the Washington negotiations, "is not in a mood to withdraw or give anything before the ... Israeli elections, if it can avoid it," while repeatedly reaffirming its intention to "retain a security zone, a scorched-earth area in southern Lebanon ... a land without people or a single stone standing."
"After the [Israeli] elections [in late October], only God knows what will happen. ... The vivid illustration is Gaza," he said, emphasizing the need for greater pressure on Israel to ensure it implements the agreement "in good faith," beginning with the pilot zones as a critical step toward reversing the current trajectory.
This is expected to be Lebanese President Joseph Aoun's main request when he meets U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House on July 21.
Trump and his administration also will have to reconcile Lebanon's aim of achieving a security agreement backed by U.S. guarantees with Israel's demand for a peace accord, according to the source.
Another challenge will be preventing Iran and Hezbollah -- which insist that Lebanon remains part of the U.S.-Iran negotiation track -- from thwarting the framework agreement and the implementation of the pilot zones and from pushing Lebanon away from its separate U.S.-mediated negotiations with Israel.
The source said the framework agreement succeeded "to a great extent" in separating the U.S.-Iran track from the Lebanon-Israel one, warning that "the alternative would be Israel continuing its campaign of destruction and displacement."
However, the core of the June 26 accord is Hezbollah's disarmament and the dismantling of its military infrastructure -- a key Israeli condition for ending the war and withdrawing from Lebanon, the implementation of which rests largely with Tehran.
Iran, which has nurtured, armed and financed Hezbollah since its founding in the early 1980s, turning it into one of its most valuable assets in the region, would not easily relinquish such an important card in its negotiations with Washington.
Riad Kahwaji, a Middle East security analyst, said that Hezbollah's rejection of the agreement with Israel and refusal to cooperate left the Lebanese state "in a war not of its choosing, negotiating and committing to steps that are not entirely within its control."
"Here we have a very blurry picture. The big question is how the Lebanese state is going to carry out its end of the deal when Hezbollah is operating as a rogue force in a mutiny against the state," Kahwaji told UPI, referring to the Lebanese state's ability to disarm Hezbollah and prevent its fighters from returning to areas Israel is expected to evacuate in southern Lebanon.
He said that while Aoun's meeting with Trump represents "a big opportunity" for Lebanon, it is also a major test for the Lebanese state to demonstrate its strength, seriousness and some action.
Failing to do so would give Israel a pretext to walk away from the agreement and continue its military campaign, as it has been doing in Gaza.
For Lebanon, securing U.S. pressure on Israel to begin its gradual withdrawal from southern Lebanon would be essential to strengthening the Lebanese state's position, weakening Hezbollah-Iran arguments and reducing their intransigence.
Otherwise, Lebanon would remain a bargaining chip for Iran, which would continue to dictate its negotiating track and use the country as a front in any future escalation with the United States, Kahwaji said.