Berri: Israel requested a ceasefire... and communication is ongoing with Aoun and Salam

Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri confirmed that he is in constant communication with President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, even though "they have ideas different from mine."

Berri added, in a statement to "Asharq Al-Awsat": "I do not think there is a problem between us, as long as we are united by Israel's withdrawal first from the south, the deployment of the Lebanese army, the return of residents to their cities and villages, the release of prisoners, and the development of a plan to rebuild what was destroyed with Arab and international support, to enable them to remain in their land to which they cling. We appreciate the hosting by Lebanese of all sects and parties of their displaced brothers who were forced to leave their homes, after the systematic Israeli destruction of their villages."

Berri's remarks to "Asharq Al-Awsat" came on the eve of the launch of the fifth round of Lebanese-Israeli negotiations at the political and military levels, under the auspices of the US State Department in Washington, expressing his satisfaction with "the efforts that led to a ceasefire, hoping it will hold, and this depends on Israel's readiness to abide by it, in return for (Hezbollah's) commitment; because it is not permissible to negotiate under the pressure of fire."

Berri revealed that Israel requested a ceasefire, and this is what he informed the "Mechanism" committee supervising the implementation of the cessation of hostilities.

American pressure

He said that "its agreement to the ceasefire came based on the American pressure exerted on it, after it flooded the south with two bloody days that claimed the lives of dozens of civilians, including members of the paramedics in the (Islamic Message) Scouts and Civil Defense, in addition to elders, women, and children."

He affirmed that "Hezbollah remains committed to the ceasefire, and that Israel is the one violating it, and we hope it holds under American pressure, and we welcome any effort from any party to pressure Israel to stop its aggressive war on Lebanon."

Timetable

Berri paused at his opposition to the experimental zones, explaining his position by saying that agreeing on their geographical borders could take two years, if not more, unlike adopting the administrative division of the south based on districts, provided that the gradual withdrawal from them begins concurrently with the deployment of the Lebanese army.

Berri pointed out that "we have no interest in wasting time that allows Israel to continue its aggression, and the solution lies in adopting a timetable for its withdrawal from every district in the south, in return for the army's deployment; because it remains the shortest path to liberating it from occupation, instead of getting bogged down in defining the geographical borders of each experimental zone, which keeps the south under Israeli pressure by fire, under the pretext of not agreeing on its division into experimental zones."

Berri affirmed that "Israel's withdrawal from any district, for example Tyre, must be coupled with the army's deployment, to make way for the return of the displaced to their villages, provided that the return is limited to the people of that district, and so on."

He said that "Israel's withdrawal from it will coincide with it being free of weapons, and this is what I undertook on behalf of (Hezbollah), to clear south of the Litani, provided that Israel commits to that."

Administrative division

He stressed "the necessity of adopting the administrative division of the south, taking into account those areas that are still under occupation. Then the army command is left to set a timetable for deploying military units in them in stages, in return for Israel's commitment to a similar timetable for its withdrawal from them, in a way that allows the displaced from this or that district to return to their villages," in an indirect reference to limiting the return to its residents.

Washington negotiations

In this context, "Asharq Al-Awsat" learned from a ministerial source that the fifth round of negotiations, held at the political and military levels, will witness, immediately upon its opening, insistence by the head of the Lebanese delegation, former ambassador Simon Karem, on the necessity of consolidating the ceasefire, amid the tension dominating US-Israeli relations, in light of Trump's unprecedented attack on Netanyahu.

The ministerial source said that consolidating it paves the way for discussing a timetable for Israel's withdrawal from the south, in return for Lebanon's pledge to turn the area south of the Litani River into a safe zone free of weapons, and this is what President Berri took upon himself on behalf of "Hezbollah", provided that an agreement is reached on a similar timetable for withdrawing the party's weapons or containing them starting from north of the river, considering it an internal affair, hoping that the American side would understand Lebanon's point of view by providing guarantees to prevent the party from using them and pressuring Israel to respond, while remaining committed to gradually withdrawing them to the international borders of Lebanon with Syria.

Rubio-Aoun call

He revealed that the call by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to the President of the Republic remained under the umbrella of consolidating the ceasefire, as a basis for discussing a timetable for Israel's withdrawal, in return for deploying the army in the areas from which Israel withdraws. He said that Rubio raised the issue of removing Hezbollah's weapons, and this is what the government pledged to implement by monopolizing them in the hands of the state.

He affirmed that Berri's opposition to dividing the south into experimental zones had been raised with presidential envoy Brigadier General Andre Rahhal, and discussed by his political advisor Ali Hamdan with the US Ambassador to Lebanon Michel Issa, before he left for Washington to join the US State Department delegation, explaining to him the reasons behind his opposition, and replacing it with dividing the south into districts taking into account those that are active; especially since it will be proposed as an item in the context of discussing the Israeli withdrawal that follows the consolidation of the ceasefire.

In response to a question, the source said that the memorandum of understanding signed between Washington and Tehran under Pakistani sponsorship is welcomed by Aoun and the government of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. He affirmed that discussing the Israeli withdrawal timetable is coupled with Lebanon's pledge of a program to collect Hezbollah's weapons; but in stages, provided that it commits to not using them, starting in its first phase from south of the Litani River.

Consolidating the ceasefire

He considered that Washington will insist on consolidating the ceasefire in response to Lebanon's request, affirming the necessity of separating the Lebanese track from the Iranian one, and thereby it wants to sell its position to the government to consolidate the lack of linkage between them, although Iran sought to leverage its refusal to start negotiations unless Israel commits to a ceasefire, to pass a message that it is still present in the Lebanese file.

He pointed out that the discussion between Washington and Iran on the file of its proxies in the region, foremost of which is "Hezbollah", necessarily means that its weapons will be included as an item on the agenda of the negotiations in Switzerland, placing it before an option that requires its engagement in the state project based on its readiness to Lebanese-ize its positions.

He said that what matters to Iran is maintaining its presence in Lebanon, even from the political gateway, after the role of "Hezbollah" military has gradually declined, amid the imbalance of power in favor of Israel, and it has no choice but to affirm strengthening its presence in the political equation, where no one denies its role.

Heavy prices

Tehran - according to the source - has no political presence left except through the party, after its memorandum of understanding with Washington omitted any mention of Palestine, although the party imposed heavy prices on Lebanon at both the human and material levels, by unilaterally supporting Gaza and later Iran, which was forced to link the start of its negotiations to the cessation of military operations in Lebanon, desiring to take a position to compensate for the party's involvement in supporting it in an uncalculated confrontation with Israel's reaction, in order to pass a message to its popular base that it is not abandoned, perhaps managing to dispel their questions about its lack of support for the party as it should, after the blows it received with the assassination of its two former secretaries-general, Hassan Nasrallah, and Hashem Safieddine, and its most prominent military leaders, and its subsequent forced intervention to reduce its reservations about the Iranian leadership.

Thus, it chose the right time to reconcile with it in parallel with maintaining its role in Lebanon, even if it was subject to regulation - in the political sense of the word - by the decline of Hezbollah's military influence through the monopoly of its weapons in the hands of the state.

Accordingly, the question remains: Does the fifth round of negotiations constitute a first station for seriously discussing the parallelism of steps, between Israel's withdrawal and the army's deployment, based on Lebanon's insistence on the monopoly of weapons in the hands of the state, in light of the government's commitment in its ministerial statement to withdraw them, unlike the insistence of its Secretary-General Naim Qassem on keeping them, to include them - as he requests - as a leading item in the discussion of Lebanon's national security strategy, as stated in the oath speech?

Although the party's opponents classify his threat as a nerve-racking tactic for his environment, by following populist rhetoric in his speech, he knows that his weapons no longer have a role, after they began to decline despite his boasting of achieving victories, while most of the south has turned into a destroyed area stripped of weapons and people, unfit for living, and its displaced await the promises he constantly makes to rebuild their homes, and he realizes that the mandatory path for its reconstruction lies in his response to an international and Arab consensus, which is expanding locally, to disarm in return for engaging in its reconstruction project.

Mohammad Shukeir - Asharq Al-Awsat