Lebanon at the edge of an imposed escalation
Lebanon at the edge of an imposed escalation?
BEIRUT—Amid escalating Israeli enemy rhetoric about widening the circle of confrontation and Washington’s clear shift toward imposing faits accomplis under the logic of “the law of the jungle,” Lebanon finds itself navigating an exceptionally sensitive political and security moment.
Against this backdrop, Nawaf Salam’s cabinet is set to convene on Thursday, dedicating a key portion of its session to reviewing the fourth and final report on the first phase of the plan to confine weapons south of the Litani River. The report is to be presented by Army Commander General Rodolphe Haykal.
Meanwhile, calls to withdraw confidence from Salam’s government are mounting after the fake “Saudi prince” Abu Omar scandal laid bare a web of deception and alleged foreign interference behind his nomination.
Besides, Thursday session comes at a time of heightened tension, particularly after Salam’s remarks late last year indicating a move toward the second phase of the plan—north of the Litani.
That direction, however, was met with a firm rejection by Hezbollah Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, who categorically ruled out any concessions on this front.
His position has effectively complicated the government’s ability to chart a clear course forward, given the potentially grave repercussions of such a step.
As a result, taking any concrete decision during Thursday’s session appears extremely difficult. The stance of the Resistance imposes a cautious approach on both the government and the Lebanese Army regarding any move north of the river.
According to information from participants in recent meetings, even the prime minister himself lacks a clear answer on how a transition to the second phase could occur, limiting expectations to a presentation of the army’s final report on the first phase.
The report is expected to provide a detailed account of developments on the ground, including weapons and equipment handed over to the army, as well as tunnels and facilities that were inspected or raided.
In this context, informed sources say General Haykal will reiterate the significant field obstacles hindering the army’s deployment in the south, foremost among them the continued Israeli enemy occupation of several points.
Regarding the second phase, the army leadership is expected to stress the necessity of reaching understandings with all concerned parties, firmly rejecting any attempt to place the army in a political or security confrontation, while also highlighting unmet logistical needs.
These needs constitute a central item on the agenda of the upcoming international conference to support the Lebanese Army, scheduled for February. Yet beyond logistics and military capabilities, the second phase—one of four remaining phases that would later extend to Beirut, the Bekaa, the North, and Mount Lebanon—represents, by all accounts, a first-order political dilemma.
Any miscalculation in handling this file could open the door to serious internal instability. Accordingly, prevailing assessments suggest the army will advise against setting fixed timelines, favoring instead a calm political track that avoids escalation, especially given daily Israeli enemy threats.
This uncertainty is compounded by US President Donald Trump’s remarks following his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about the “need to wait for the government’s efforts,” interpreted by some as a temporary reprieve.
Coupled with differing assessments by President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Salam on the likelihood of escalation, confusion prevails over Netanyahu’s intentions and the arena he may choose for his next gamble.
Parallel to these tensions, the Finance Ministry revealed plans to hold a government session in the south to announce the launch of reconstruction efforts.
It noted ongoing negotiations with France, which has offered a €75 million reconstruction loan, alongside talks with several Arab funds, including the Kuwait-based Arab Development Fund, which expressed readiness to provide $120 million.
On the eve of Thursday’s session, Tel Aviv delivered its message in fire. The Israeli enemy carried out airstrikes—after evacuation warnings—on several towns, claiming to target infrastructure linked to Hamas and Hezbollah, and launched overnight raids between Sarafand and Zahrani.
Simultaneously, Israeli media highlighted discussions within Netanyahu’s security meetings about preparedness for multi-front warfare, including Lebanon, with reports suggesting Washington may grant a green light for military action.
In such a landscape, Lebanon remains suspended between political pressure and military threat, where “avoiding war” risks becoming an achievement in itself, rather than a failure to defend sovereignty.
source: tehrantimes.com