Salam: We Did Not Link Israeli Withdrawal to Weapons Handover; Extending State Authority Is a Commitment We Took Upon Ourselves

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam stated during an interview on NBN channel that "the limits of our sovereignty are our internationally recognized borders, and what is required is a complete Israeli withdrawal to them."

He said: "The framework we are talking about rests, in my view, on two fundamental principles: reciprocity and gradualism. But what this framework lacks today is a timeline. I want to know: when will Israel withdraw? And when will it withdraw from the positions it occupies? There must be a timeline so that this framework translates into practical steps that people can see."

Salam added: "Conversely, when we talk about reciprocity, I say clearly that extending the authority of the Lebanese state over all its territories with its own forces is not a new commitment."

He continued: "Restricting weapons is a matter we agreed upon since 1989 in the Taif Agreement, and we reaffirmed it in international resolutions, then in the cessation of hostilities declaration in November 2024. And we are committed to it."

Salam confirmed that "we did not link the Israeli withdrawal to the process of collecting or handing over weapons. Extending state authority over all its territories is a commitment we Lebanese took upon ourselves before any external party requested it."

He said: "There is no secret agreement. There is a security and military annex, and these annexes, according to conventions, do not always have their details announced due to their security and military nature."

He added: "Let someone tell me: what is the new commitment we bound ourselves to that we were not previously committed to?" He continued: "Would I have written this framework in the same way if I had drafted it myself? Certainly not. There are many things I would have phrased differently and more clearly."

Salam noted that "for example, when the text speaks about the repositioning of Israeli forces outside Lebanese territory, I interpret that as a complete withdrawal to our internationally recognized borders."

He stressed that "we must also understand the nature of this framework. Some treat it as if it were an agreement or treaty. An agreement or treaty produces legal obligations. As for this, it is a political framework, or a roadmap, and does not itself produce such legal obligations."

Salam told NBN: "Not a day passes without us confirming that our goal is the complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territories."

He added: "We do not want to reopen a debate we started decades ago. We spoke about restricting weapons in Taif in 1989. We have no time to waste on new negotiations regarding matters we have already agreed upon."

He continued: "When Israel withdrew in 2000, why did the army not enter all border areas?"

Salam said: "The army is the protection for our people, and the protection for our borders. And certainly, we want an equipped, armed army capable of performing its duties."

He added: "What concerns me is that there should be no vacuum in the south after the end of UNIFIL's mission."

He said: "We will still need the presence of an international force in the south. It may not be named 'UNIFIL,' and it may have another form that has not yet been determined."

He clarified: "I explained this to the UN Secretary-General. What matters to us is that any force be under the umbrella of the United Nations and with a mandate from the Security Council."

Salam said: "The Iranian President was the one who requested the meeting, and I accepted the invitation immediately. As I requested meetings with other presidents and officials, and we met with a large number of countries whose support for Lebanon interests us."

He added: "As for Iran, we want to open a new page in relations between Lebanon and Iran, based on mutual respect and non-interference in each other's affairs."

He continued: "We do not interfere in Iran's affairs. Have you ever seen Lebanon supporting an opposition faction in Iran, or siding with one party against another, or interfering in the political choices of Iranians? Certainly not."

He said: "We want the relationship to be based on the same foundation: mutual respect for state sovereignty, non-interference in others' affairs, and building relationships on shared interests."

He added: "There is a long history of relations between Lebanon and Iran, and we want to open a new page in it. In this context, we prefer that Iran appoint a new ambassador to Lebanon, because that facilitates the transition to a new stage in relations."

Salam said: "We renewed the residence of the Iranian ambassador for a period of three months as a citizen, and not in his previous diplomatic capacity. But we want a new ambassador appointed if we truly want to move to a new stage of relations between the two countries, and I am keen on moving to this stage."

He concluded: "The issue of Iranian flights is different, because it relates to matters concerning airport safety. Airport and passenger safety is my priority, and we hope this is understood."