Israel’s KAN News broadcast a leaked draft of a potential ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon on Wednesday. The draft is an “announcement of a cessation of hostilities and related commitments” that could be made between Lebanon and Israel.
At the same time, there is talk of a potential ceasefire in Gaza. This is one of the few times since the war began that there appeared to be movement on two fronts, and it presents Israel with a unique opportunity. However, it also has potential pitfalls. A year of war has been difficult for Israel. Israel’s enemies have suffered serious losses. It’s possible that a deal with Lebanon could also lead to a ceasefire in Gaza. However, the terrorist groups will still look to recover in the wake of any deal.
The deal with Lebanon would appear to mean the Lebanese Armed Forces will deploy to southern Lebanon and that Israel would withdraw from Lebanon. The agreement is with Lebanon, not Hezbollah, and it asks Lebanon to implement what it has refused since 2006. The agreement mentions Lebanon’s confiscation of weapons from “armed groups,” an Orwellian term that conceals the word “Hezbollah.” Hezbollah had 150,000 rockets before the war began and, over the last decades, has stockpiled more arms than many small countries. However, these documents consistently use the term “armed groups” so that these countries, in this case Lebanon, are not forced to fulfill the agreement.
One of the pitfalls of the agreement is that it doesn’t spell out exactly what Lebanon would do differently than it had after 2006. The Lebanese armed forces have never been willing to confront Hezbollah. Using terms such as “armed groups” allows the Lebanese army to claim they did not encounter any “armed groups” because they view Hezbollah as the “resistance.”
Nevertheless, there is hope that Hezbollah may be willing to withdraw from the border. The group has suffered blows since Israel’s Northern Arrows operation began on September 23. The group has lost parts of its arsenal; Israel’s defense minister has said it may have lost up to 80 percent of its rockets. This would leave it with some 30,000 rockets – still a significant arsenal. It also has its precision attack drones. Hezbollah may have lost 1,000-2,000 fighters in the war, but the estimates are never verifiable. It has also lost many of its bunkers and storage facilities near the border, which deprives it of some of its anti-tank missiles and firing positions.
Along with the reports about a potential ceasefire, there is hope that Lebanon’s Prime Minister Najib Mikati is enthusiastic about a deal. There is no doubt that the US administration wants a win before leaving office. Regardless of who wins the US election, the Biden administration is now wrapping up its legacy. Sending envoys like Amos Hochstein and Brett McGurk to the region this week is a sign that the White House takes this seriously. However, one might wonder how Hochstein can achieve a deal when he pushed for the maritime deal in 2022 with Lebanon that led directly to Hezbollah’s escalation. In the past, these deals with Lebanon did not achieve the desired results.
What else would shape a ceasefire deal?
There are also other elements at play. Hezbollah has a new leader, Naim Qassem. He has been a second in command for decades and is therefore familiar with the group’s workings and losses. He may want to shape his legacy as well as save his own head by agreeing to a ceasefire. Both his successors have been killed, including Hezbollah’s longtime leader Hassan Nasrallah.
According to a report by Iran’s Tasnim News, various Palestinian factions are also weighing a potential ceasefire. However, the main message from these groups, such as the PFLP and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, is that a ceasefire must meet their needs. They don’t say exactly what these “conditions” are, but they imply that they want to feel they have come out of a year of war with some claims of victory. What they mean is they believe that having survived the war is enough of a win. PIJ and PFLP haven’t suffered blows as serious as Hamas did. Reports say that around 17,000 or more terrorists have been eliminated in Gaza, but thousands remain.
When Hamas began the war, Iran prodded Hezbollah to join the fight. Qassem told NBC News in November 2023 that “Hezbollah participates [in the war] for the sake of lowering the pressure on Gaza.” Now, Gaza has been largely ruined in the war, and Hezbollah has suffered blows. If both Hezbollah and Hamas assume they can achieve a ceasefire, then this might remove the conditions that brought Hezbollah into the war in the first place.
IRANIAN STATE MEDIA is also reporting on a potential ceasefire. IRNA noted that “Lebanon’s Prime Minister Najib Mikati has expressed hope that a ceasefire will be established in his country in the next few hours.” Lebanon claims it is ready to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701. However, that resolution has existed since 2006, and Lebanon never implemented it. Instead, Lebanon let Hezbollah grow from a group that had 13,000 rockets to one with 150,000 rockets. Hezbollah has exponentially expanded since 2006. It’s possible that Lebanon “wants” 1701 to return because under 1701, it built Hezbollah into a massive war machine and threatened Israel and caused a massive war.
The fact that Lebanon is paying some lip service to a ceasefire via Iranian media is important. It shows Iran may also favor a ceasefire. The question is whether Iran thinks it has benefited from this year-long war. Has Iran preserved Hezbollah and Hamas enough for them to recover in the wake of the war? Lebanon’s prime minister says “a ceasefire must be established with American guarantees.”
Lebanon’s Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has also said that there will be no change in UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and that it must be implemented word for word. This would seem to imply a possible return to 2007 and a return of Hezbollah to the border with UNIFIL and the Lebanese Armed Forces only pretending to implement the resolution. The reason it implies a return to 2007 is that Israel has wanted an improved version of 1701 that gives it more freedom of action to stop Hezbollah from rearming.
While it’s possible that a two-front war could be ended by agreements, there are many questions regarding implementation and how Iran or the groups it backs will respond. Hezbollah and Hamas likely want a break from the fighting to regroup. However, if they regroup as they have in the past, then it’s not clear how this year of war could result in long-term strategic shifts that differ from the outcome of the 2006 war in Lebanon or the 2009 or 2014 war in Gaza.