Israel's Conditions Rejected by Nabih Berri and Hezbollah

The key developments tonight revolve around two main themes: first, the American proposal conveying Israeli conditions to Lebanon, and second, Hezbollah and the Amal Movement’s stance on these conditions and how to approach them.

Regarding the first theme, information from Al-Jadeed indicates that following the issuance of the trilateral Lebanese-Israeli-American statement, objections by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Hezbollah’s rejection of the proposed formula prompted Washington to attempt further clarifications through a tour by US Ambassador Michel Aoun to Lebanese leaders.

According to the information, Ambassador Aoun explained that the proposal centers on a complete ceasefire, to be implemented initially through pilot areas where the Israeli withdrawal, Lebanese army deployment, and the return of residents would occur simultaneously, alongside dismantling military installations and removing armed displays.

However, Al-Jadeed reports that the Americans relayed a set of Israeli conditions to the Lebanese side, which were rejected by President Berri and Hezbollah. The first condition demands the removal of approximately 2,300 Hezbollah members from the south of the Litani River, with the individuals to be specifically named by Israel. The rejection by the duo was based on information indicating that some named individuals are not Hezbollah fighters but rather villagers belonging to Hezbollah’s social and economic environment.

The second condition establishes a principle that any attack on Israel would be met with retaliation against the southern suburbs. The third condition grants Israel the right to direct military response if it deems Hezbollah has violated or exceeded the agreement’s terms.

The fourth condition concerns the field implementation mechanism, with Israel proposing to start the pilot areas from the Zoutar region and beyond, a proposal Hezbollah refused.

Information suggests that the Lebanese-preferred approach considers the entire area south of the Litani River as the framework for pilot zones, instead of limiting them to specific areas or imposing gradual facts starting from certain points.

Further details mention subsequent phases involving the establishment of security points approximately two kilometers deep from the border, followed by a final phase including what are termed as controlling security points.

Hezbollah and Amal's Position on the US Proposal

Concerning the second theme, Al-Jadeed reports that on Monday evening, a lengthy meeting took place between the Amal Movement and Hezbollah to discuss the details of the American proposal and the conditions conveyed through Washington. The party expressed willingness to cooperate towards reaching an agreement but emphasized that any final decision requires consultation with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, in addition to arrangements related to the pilot zones.

Moreover, the party seeks to adopt a coordination mechanism similar to that used during the Pakistan track, which relies on returning to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard for strategic decisions related to the Lebanese file. The data also indicate that Hezbollah appointed a figure who accompanied the Pakistan negotiations alongside the Iranian delegation to participate in following up on this track.

Consequently, the ongoing negotiations do not appear limited to security and field arrangements in the south but also involve Lebanese and Israeli calculations intertwined with broader regional tracks. This situation makes any potential agreement dependent not only on understandings on the ground but also on the political negotiations occurring beyond Lebanon’s borders, with information suggesting progress or practical results may be achieved in the coming days.