BEIRUT — According to diplomatic sources, negotiations aimed at establishing a ceasefire between Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah face several hurdles, despite favorable conditions for an agreement. The Israeli military has managed to eliminate almost all of Hezbollah’s senior leaders; however, the group continues to launch missiles into Israel. Thousands of Israelis displaced from the border area months ago are urging their government to facilitate their return home, while there is a collective international wish to prevent the ongoing regional conflict from escalating after over a year of intense fighting.

Following a recent visit from a U.S. mediator, Israel conducted strikes on central Beirut over the weekend, prompting Hezbollah to respond with one of its largest attacks in recent weeks, as both sides exert pressure in the hopes of finalizing a deal. Since Hamas-led militants initiated an attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, the two groups have engaged in daily exchanges of fire. Israel commenced extensive bombardments across Lebanon two months prior and subsequently initiated a ground invasion that has resulted in more than 3,500 casualties in Lebanon, predominantly among civilians. In Israel, fatalities have surpassed 70, with over 40 civilian deaths recorded alongside more than 50 Israeli soldiers who have perished during the ground offensive.

The negotiations presently revolve around a proposed two-month ceasefire aimed at halting the hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah. This proposal stipulates an initial ceasefire period during which Israeli forces would withdraw from Lebanon, while Hezbollah would dismantle its armed presence in the southern border region south of the Litani River. In conjunction with these withdrawals, the plan envisions an influx of thousands more Lebanese army troops, which have largely remained inactive during the conflict, to patrol the border alongside the UN peacekeeping forces already stationed there.

Moreover, a new international committee is intended to oversee the enforcement of the ceasefire agreement and ensure compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, enacted in 2006 to conclude a prior month-long war between Israel and Hezbollah, though it was not fully implemented at that time. Hezbollah had maintained its presence in southern Lebanon, while Lebanese authorities have accused Israel of regularly violating their airspace and occupying portions of their territory. Whether the new ceasefire plan will prove more effective than its predecessor remains uncertain.

Michael Herzog, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S., commented that the proposed agreement seeks to enhance oversight and compliance with Resolution 1701. Although he acknowledged there are still several unresolved issues, he expressed optimism that a deal could be finalized “within days.” A U.S. official indicated that negotiations were ongoing but essential matters required resolution before an agreement could be finalized, though details of these matters were not disclosed.

According to two Western diplomats, Israel’s demands include ensuring the removal of Hezbollah’s weaponry from the border. Israeli officials are reportedly unwilling to agree to a ceasefire deal that does not specifically allow them the freedom to strike inside Lebanon should Hezbollah breach the terms. An anonymous Israeli official characterized this issue as a major point of contention, though he noted that discussions are progressing positively.

Conversely, Lebanese officials maintain that such stipulations would infringe upon Lebanon’s sovereignty. Hezbollah’s leader, Naim Kassem, has stated the group will not accept an arrangement that does not include a “complete and comprehensive end to aggression” and guarantees Lebanon’s sovereignty. Additionally, disagreements arise regarding the composition of the international committee monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire and Resolution 1701, with Israel opposing France’s inclusion due to its close ties with Lebanon and its recent tensions with Israel. Conversely, Lebanon has expressed its refusal to allow Britain’s involvement.

The European Union’s chief diplomat, Josep Borrell, expressed skepticism regarding Israel’s interest in achieving a ceasefire during a recent visit to Lebanon, noting the complexities of the situation.

Both Israel and Hezbollah are inclined to conclude the current conflict, as a ceasefire is expected to significantly reduce regional tensions, which have raised alarms about a potential direct confrontation between Israel and Iran. However, the implications for the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza remain ambiguous. Hezbollah previously insisted on a ceasefire contingent upon the resolution of the Gaza war but seems to have relaxed that condition.

There is growing anxiety that failing to establish a ceasefire could extend hostilities into neighboring Syria and Iraq, as Israel continues its airstrikes against Iranian-affiliated groups in Syria and threatens action in Iraq against Iran-linked militias. Geir Pedersen, the UN special envoy for Syria, emphasized the necessity of ceasefires in both Gaza and Lebanon to prevent Syria from becoming more deeply embroiled in the conflict.

While analysts suggest that Hezbollah’s militancy has been diminished, the group continues to direct consistent fire towards Israel. Recently, Hezbollah fired approximately 250 rockets and other projectiles into Israel, injuring seven, marking one of its heaviest salvos in months following Israeli airstrikes in Beirut. Violence persists in southern Lebanon as Israeli forces strive to gain control of strategic locations.

Israel’s stated objective in combating Hezbollah centers on allowing displaced Israelis to return home safely. In Lebanon, where about a quarter of the population has been displaced, significant destruction has occurred, particularly in southern Lebanon and regions close to Beirut. Amidst lingering hopes for peace, optimism in the region has diminished after the U.S. envoy on Israel and Lebanon, Amos Hochstein, departed without securing a ceasefire agreement, leading many to believe that no resolution will occur until after the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump in January.