The Financial Times newspaper reported that the United States sent a military team affiliated with the US Central Command (Centcom) to Beirut, to help stabilize the ceasefire and support the implementation of the framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, amid Lebanese fears of faltering implementation of its provisions.
The newspaper quoted prominent Lebanese officials as saying that the American move comes before a new round of technical talks expected between Lebanon and Israel in Rome, where delegations are supposed to discuss the details of implementing the agreement that was reached with American mediation on June 26.
The Rome talks are scheduled to be held on July 15 and 16, after Washington hosted five previous rounds of negotiations, which led to an agreement based on a gradual Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, coinciding with the deployment of the Lebanese army and its handover of the areas from which Israeli forces withdraw.
Under the agreement, Israel agreed to hand over two experimental areas in southern Lebanon to the Lebanese army, with the step being an initial test that would pave the way for gradually expanding the withdrawal and consolidating the authority of the Lebanese state in the southern regions.
However, the agreement did not specify a clear timetable for a complete Israeli withdrawal, which raised fears in Beirut that the experimental phase would turn into an open path, especially in light of Israel’s insistence on remaining within what it describes as the “security zone,” which extends at some points to about 10 kilometers inside Lebanese territory.
Beirut demands that Israel withdraw from the two experimental areas before participating in the next round of negotiations, in an attempt to obtain a field step that proves the seriousness of implementing the agreement, instead of being satisfied with political pledges.
The Centcom delegation is expected to contribute to discussing the military and technical arrangements related to the withdrawal of Israeli forces and the deployment of the Lebanese army, in addition to mechanisms for coordination, monitoring, and preventing friction between the parties on the ground.
The US Central Command previously announced its support for the Committee to Supervise the Cessation of Hostilities, which has become known as the “Lebanon Conflict Prevention Cell,” noting that it plays a role in field coordination and supporting compliance with security understandings.
Centcom also considers that supporting the Lebanese Army is essential for the success of any long-term arrangements in the south, and to enable it to become the only security body capable of assuming responsibility for the region and implementing the understandings related to restricting weapons to the state.
The framework agreement stipulates that the Lebanese army will assume full security responsibility in southern Lebanon, after verifying the dismantling of military structures belonging to non-state groups, in a clause that practically targets the weapons of Hezbollah, which rejects the agreement and any attempt to disarm it by force.
The agreement sparked a wide political division in Lebanon, as Hezbollah and its allies rejected it and described it as affecting sovereignty and giving Israel the right to link its withdrawal to disarmament, while other powers considered that some of its provisions included major concessions and needed review and clear guarantees.
One of the most controversial provisions, according to the Financial Times, is a clause that prevents Lebanon from prosecuting Israel before international courts in files related to accusations of war crimes, which increased objections to the agreement within Lebanese political and legal circles.
On the other hand, the Lebanese government adheres to the negotiating path as a means to end the confrontation, restore territory, and deploy the army, but it demands that Washington put pressure on Israel to implement its obligations and stop the raids, fearing that continued violations will lead to the collapse of the understanding before its actual implementation begins.
US President Donald Trump had expressed his belief that Israel would withdraw from southern Lebanon, stressing that he had discussed the issue with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, despite the latter’s announcement that his forces would not withdraw as long as Hezbollah posed a threat to Israel.
The arrival of the American military delegation puts the agreement before a practical test: either it will succeed in establishing a clear mechanism for withdrawal and the deployment of the Lebanese army, or the differences over the timetable, weapons, and guarantees will turn into obstacles that hinder the Rome negotiations and return the south to the cycle of escalation.
