The framework agreement signed in Washington between Lebanon and Israel was not just a passing political milestone, but rather quickly turned into an extremely dangerous internal test, after it opened the door to a sharp division that almost moved the confrontation from the political table to the street. At a moment when the country seemed to be facing the possibility of an open political and institutional explosion, Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri came to the forefront of the scene, trying to control the rhythm, block the path to strife, and prevent the dispute over the agreement from turning into an internal confrontation that threatens stability, the government, and institutions.
From the first moment, Berri raised the slogan “No to strife,” putting civil peace above all accounts, and emphasizing that the dispute, no matter its size, must remain within the institutions and not in the street. From this position, he rejected calls to overthrow or boycott the government, and called for the primacy of dialogue and the search for political solutions that would protect the country from a slide whose borders and ends no one knows.
In an interview with Al-Diyar, Berri discussed various aspects of the crisis, from the chances of a settlement to the arms issue, through his vision for the framework agreement, and reaching the Arab and international role required to help Lebanon emerge from its crisis.
Regarding the possibility of reaching a way out of the crisis that arose after the framework agreement, Berri stressed, in an approach that places protecting internal stability and preventing strife at the core of priorities, that the door to settlement is still open, stressing his readiness to find ways out if the other party is also ready. He said: “If there is a readiness for a settlement, then I am ready for it, and no one wants the country to reach a dead end.”
Regarding the form of the possible settlement, Berri renewed his position opposing direct negotiations from the beginning, considering that he was aware of where they would lead, and that they had led to an agreement that he described as a “sedition agreement,” bad and unfair to Lebanon. He pointed out that the agreement he sponsored on November 27, 2024 represented a different model, as it led to Hezbollah’s complete withdrawal from southern Litani without resorting to direct negotiations.
Berri revealed that before reaching the framework agreement, there was contact with the President of the Republic, where he requested the adoption of the principle of Israeli withdrawal according to the districts, not according to the experimental areas, considering that this option provided a clearer and more serious mechanism for implementation. He added that Baabda agreed to this proposal, but the surprise was that the framework agreement adopted the principle of experimental areas instead of the principle of districts.
Regarding expanding international demands to include what goes beyond South Litani, Berri explained that there is preparation for Hezbollah’s withdrawal from South Litani in conjunction with a complete Israeli withdrawal. As for the weapons north of the Litani, he stressed that the position is based on containing the weapons within the framework of the Lebanese state, not only in the north of the Litani, but in all of Lebanon, so that the state is the only reference.
Berri stressed that Israel seeks, through its pressure and demands, to drag the Lebanese army into clashes with the resistance, considering that this is the real goal it is working on. However, he stressed that this will not happen, because the Lebanese realize the danger of being drawn into internal strife, and because the army and resistance will not be pushed to serve Israeli goals.
Regarding the framework agreement, Berri said that when he read it, he considered it a “sedition agreement,” and therefore he quickly expressed his position rejecting the country’s slide into division, stressing: “No to sedition, no to the street.” He stressed that the priority remains protecting internal stability and preventing the spread of political disagreement to the street, as this is the first line of defense for civil peace.
Regarding his message to the President of the Republic, Berri simply said that he does not currently have any message to send.
Regarding ways out of the crisis, Berri renewed his vision that Lebanon needs an international umbrella to help achieve the settlement, considering that this umbrella must include the United States of America, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, because, in his opinion, they constitute the basic guarantee for any viable settlement.
Regarding the ongoing Arab and international contacts, especially the Egyptian and Qatari ones, Berri welcomed all initiatives that help Lebanon overcome its ordeal, stressing that any Arab or international effort aimed at bringing the Lebanese together and banishing the specter of division is welcome.
Berri concluded by stressing that his position has not changed from the first moment, which is that protecting national unity, preventing strife, and preserving institutions remain the absolute priority at this delicate stage, because Lebanon’s stability, in his opinion, is the foundation on which any future political settlement must be built.
