Differential readings to visit Barak

The visit of the American envoy Tom Brak to Beirut, which came after the recent Lebanese government’s decision and political and media escalation by Hizbullah, seemed calm and without a direct threat tone, but it carried multiple messages in it.
Barak did not direct any direct criticism of “Hizbullah” or to Lebanon, on the contrary, he held Israel responsible for completing the solution, stressing the need for Tel Aviv to make concessions after the Lebanese decision to limit arms in the hands of the state.
This position seemed surprising to some, especially since it was not in line with the traditional image of American pressure.
The political circles in Beirut read the visit in two different ways. The first reading considered that Washington is dealing realistically, and that it does not want to go towards an internal bombing or dividing the Lebanese army, not even igniting a new civil war. This estimation is based on the fact that the United States may have reached a conviction that any major shook at home will lead to chaos that exceeds the borders of Lebanon, which is what the Biden administration is trying to avoid in the current stage.
On the other hand, a second more pessimistic reading emerged, which saw that what happened was only a strategic deception of the Americans, in preparation for a more dangerous step that might be a major military escalation by Israel. The owners of this opinion stress that the history of the American abuse in the region is full of maneuvers, and that the Prak’s public calm may be just a cover for various field preparations. So far, it seemed cautious about his approach to the stage. He did not head towards any escalation in the street or in direct political discourse, and preferred to monitor developments pending what matters would happen.
The position of the “party” is focused on a clear base: there will be no move before reaching the “red line”, that is, the moment of a real process to withdraw weapons by force or direct the army towards its facilities. Only then, the party will be in front of an open confrontation, completely different from the management of the current tension. The most prominent question remains whether the Americans will walk the option of direct confrontation by imposing military facts on the ground, or whether at this stage they will be satisfied with removing the Lebanese official cover from the party’s weapon, in what places it in the political and popular defense site, without going to a comprehensive war. Thus, the visit of Tom Barak in the gray region remains between calming and threatening, Between realism and maneuver. In any case, it reflects the complexity of the Lebanese scene, as the interior accounts interfere with the pressure of the outside, amid increasing concern that any error in the accounts may open the door to a more dangerous stage than Lebanon today.