Tel Aviv dodges .. Will the government save from concessions?

What the American delegate Tom Brak carried from Israel to Lebanon came opposite to the foregoing and promised him on his previous visit on August 18, as he promised positives and returned with negatives, so he retracted the idea of ​​”a step in exchange for a step” so he came from Tel Aviv with insisting on withdrawing weapons before searching any Israeli step corresponding to, in terms of withdrawal, stopping attacks and release prisoners. What Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put forward on his army’s readiness to reduce his presence in exchange for the withdrawal of Hizbullah, is only a political and media maneuver bearing more than one interpretation and does not reflect a real intention to withdraw from the Lebanese territories. Instead of dealing with the clear obligations imposed by Resolution 1701, Netanyahu is trying to link an international requirement binding on Israel, which is withdrawal, and a political demand that his government places on the table, which is the disarmament of Hezbollah. This intended confusion aims to distort the discussion of Israel’s responsibility in the differences and daily attacks and to hold Lebanon the burden of almost impossible to investigate.
The term reducing existence, as political sources, says, is a mysterious term and allows Israel a wide margin of maneuver, as it can mean mitigating military deployment in some points or re -tactical positioning without any commitment to a complete withdrawal. In conclusion, it remains certain that Israel is not about to get out of Lebanese territory. The initiative set by Washington seemed until yesterday as if it were a single framework for the solution, and Beirut was in front of a difficult choice: either accepting what exceeds its ability, or rejecting the initiative and bearing the consequences of American anger. Today the equation has changed. If it is Israel that spoiled the initiative, then Lebanon is no longer required to make additional concessions, and there is nothing that it can make to the Americans more than what was presented. This development gives the government an opportunity to have breathtaking, and rearrange its ranks after weeks of charged climates and political divisions. It can say: We did not withdraw from the initiative, but it was Israel that failed it. Thus, its responsibility in front of Washington and the capitals supporting the path is negated. Despite that, the government realizes that it does not have the luxury of its withdrawal from the American initiative directly, but it can act with the flexibility of maintaining a letter of commitment to Resolution 1701 and implementing its items through the army with a clear reservation that any practical steps are mortgaged by the withdrawal of Israel from its positions north Diplomacy raises pressure from it and receives responsibility for Tel Aviv. As the army ended its plan for the next stage in the south, in a strategic move that acquires double importance in light of the recent UN Security Council resolution to extend the mandate of the United Nations temporary forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) until the end of 2026, after which it begins a gradual withdrawal of the international force, it was agreed that the army commander General Rodolf will present the structure of the plan first to the President of the Republic General Joseph Aoun for discussion, before defense Minister Michel Mansi referred to it to the Council of Ministers at his session scheduled for September, and Mansi explained that the army is always moving within the framework of the political decision, stressing that any mandate plan for the military leadership must have the approval of the government, and that government debate will be the basis for determining the final position and implementing the plan, in a way that guarantees the consensus between the military orientation and political will of the state. The army’s plan is a decisive proactive step, which combines military readiness and institutional political coordination, as it does not guarantee mere military implementation, but rather creates an integrated national path that links internal security and adherence to the international decision. In light of this climate, it is assumed, according to parliamentary sources, that the next cabinet session will go according to the following scenario: Listen to the army’s plan on deployment in the south and record a conservative position that requires practical implementation in parallel with withdrawal Israel is one of the Lebanese territories. The way for division climates fueled by external pressures.