BEIRUT — A delicate ceasefire established between Israel and the Lebanese militia Hezbollah has persisted for over a month, but it appears that the terms agreed upon may not be fulfilled by the set deadline.
The ceasefire, which was negotiated on November 27, mandated Hezbollah to cease all military operations in southern Lebanon immediately. It also stipulated that Israel would have 60 days to withdraw its troops from the area, passing control to both the Lebanese military and United Nations peacekeepers.
As it stands, Israel has only pulled back from two of the many towns it currently occupies in southern Lebanon, while continuing its airstrikes targeting what it claims are Hezbollah military installations. Israel accuses Hezbollah of attempting to launch rockets and transport weapons that it seeks to eradicate.
Hezbollah has been significantly weakened by nearly 14 months of conflict and has warned that it will restart hostilities if Israel does not complete its withdrawal by the expiration of the 60-day period.
Despite mutual claims of hundreds of ceasefire violations from both parties, analysts suggest that the truce is likely to endure, providing a glimmer of hope for the thousands of families displaced on both sides who are eager to return home.
“The ceasefire agreement is vague and subject to varying interpretations,” noted Firas Maksad, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington. This ambiguity might enhance its chances of persisting amid evolving conditions, such as the recent ousting of Syria’s long-time leader, Bashar Assad, shortly after the ceasefire was enacted.
With Assad’s departure, Hezbollah lost a crucial route for weapon smuggling from Iran, further limiting its influence; nonetheless, Israel had previously committed to the U.S.-brokered ceasefire.
The conflict reignited on October 8, 2023, when Hezbollah launched rockets into Israel, a day following a deadly Hamas attack that escalated violence in Gaza. Consequently, over 4,000 fatalities—among them numerous civilians—have occurred in Lebanon due to Israeli air and ground operations, with more than 1 million people being displaced at the conflict’s peak.
In northern Israel, approximately 60,000 residents were forced to evacuate due to Hezbollah’s rocket attacks, which resulted in the deaths of 76 people, including 31 soldiers. Nearly 50 Israeli soldiers also perished during missions in Lebanon.
Examining the ceasefire terms reveals that both Hezbollah and Israel committed to cease offensive operations; however, both parties retain the right to defend themselves, albeit the interpretation of this clause remains ambiguous.
The Lebanese army is charged with preventing Hezbollah and other factions from launching attacks towards Israel and must also dismantle Hezbollah’s facilities and weapons in southern Lebanon, although expanding these measures to the entire country is not explicitly detailed in the ceasefire document.
The oversight of the ceasefire’s execution is a joint responsibility of the United States, France, Israel, Lebanon, and the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL.
“The critical issue isn’t whether the deal will hold, but rather what form it will take in practice,” Maksad remarked.
In recent weeks, Hezbollah has generally refrained from launching rockets and drones into Israel, and Israel has largely ceased its attacks against Hezbollah within most regions of Lebanon. However, Israel continues to conduct airstrikes on what it identifies as militant locations in southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley.
Thus far, Israeli forces have withdrawn from the towns of Khiam and Shamaa in southern Lebanon. According to the International Organization for Migration, they still occupy around 60 others, leaving an estimated 160,000 Lebanese residents displaced.
Lebanon has consistently accused Israel of breaching the ceasefire, recently filing a complaint with the U.N. Security Council, alleging that Israel executed around 816 ground and air assaults since the ceasefire commenced, hampering the Lebanese army’s ability to enforce its obligations under the agreement.
Conversely, Israel claims that Hezbollah has breached the ceasefire multiple times and has also lodged similar complaints with the Security Council. Israeli positions hold that Hezbollah has been moving munitions, attempting assaults on Israeli soldiers, and preparing rockets aimed at northern Israel, among other infringements.
Until Israeli troops relinquish control of additional territories to the Lebanese army, they are actively eradicating Hezbollah’s infrastructure, including arms depots and underground tunnels. Meanwhile, Lebanese authorities allege that Israel has inflicted damage to civilian properties and infrastructure.
Concerning the timeline following the initial 60 days of the ceasefire, the pace of Israel’s withdrawals from Lebanese towns has been slower than expected, attributed, according to Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, to insufficient Lebanese army personnel ready to assume control. Lebanon contests this assertion, indicating its stance that it awaits Israeli withdrawal before entering the towns.
Shoshani expressed that Israel is generally content with the current levels of Lebanese army oversight in areas from which it has withdrawn, although it desires a quicker power transfer. Safety remains paramount for Israel.
Notably, Israel does not view the 60-day withdrawal timeline as “sacred,” remarked Harel Chorev, an expert on Israel-Lebanon relations at Tel Aviv University, suggesting that Lebanon may need to recruit and deploy thousands more troops before Israel feels ready to transfer control.
Hezbollah representatives have asserted that if Israeli forces remain beyond the 60-day limit, the group might resume hostile actions, although Secretary General Naim Kassem indicated a current willingness to allow the Lebanese state to assume its responsibility for the agreement’s enforcement.
Recent statements from Kassem hinted at growing impatience, warning, “Our patience may run out before or after the 60 days. When we decide to undertake an action, you will observe the results immediately.”
During the closing months of the conflict, Hezbollah experienced significant losses in leadership, resources, and personnel due to extensive Israeli airstrikes and ground offensives that led to intense confrontations in southern Lebanon. Furthermore, Assad’s downfall represented another substantial setback for the group.
“The power dynamics indicate that Israel may seek to enhance its operational latitude following the 60-day period,” remarked Maksad. Despite being in a weaker position, Hezbollah has a compelling interest in ensuring that the ceasefire remains intact “despite Israeli violations.”
Though Hezbollah may currently lack the capability to engage in open warfare with Israel, former Lebanese army general Hassan Jouni noted that they or other factions could still conduct guerrilla-style assaults using light weaponry should Israeli forces persist in southern Lebanon. Even in a scenario where Israel completely withdraws its ground troops, Jouni added that sporadic airstrikes could continue, similar to Israel’s longstanding military actions in Syria.
