A Fragile Pause Amid Uncertainty

President Joe Biden’s announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah has provided a much-needed pause in a conflict that has devastated Southern Lebanon and displaced thousands in northern Israel. The war, which erupted on October 8, 2023, as a series of cross-border hostilities, escalated into a destructive Israeli military campaign targeting Hezbollah positions. The ceasefire agreement, brokered by the United States, offers a temporary reprieve for Lebanon, a country already buckling under economic collapse and political dysfunction.

The agreement is largely a reaffirmation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 war between the two adversaries. However, this iteration seeks to address the weaknesses of the earlier resolution by introducing stronger monitoring mechanisms. Over the next 60 days, Israeli and Hezbollah forces are set to withdraw from Southern Lebanon, making way for a redeployment of the Lebanese army. For the approximately 60,000 Israelis displaced by the fighting in northern Israel, this means a return home. Both sides have emerged from the negotiations declaring victory: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims the ceasefire reflects a significant degradation of Hezbollah’s military capacity, while Hezbollah positions the withdrawal of Israeli troops as a testament to the effectiveness of its resistance.

Despite these public declarations of success, the ceasefire faces significant hurdles that could undermine its implementation. One of the most immediate challenges is whether Hezbollah will comply with the demand to withdraw north of the Litani River, a region deeply entwined with the militia’s identity and operations. Southern Lebanon has long been Hezbollah’s stronghold, where its fighters live and operate alongside the local population. Many of the villages in this area have relied on Hezbollah to fill the void left by Lebanon’s weak central government, which has struggled to provide basic services. While Hezbollah may agree to relocate weapons and equipment further north, expecting it to uproot its fighters from their homes and communities seems unrealistic. If Hezbollah’s withdrawal falls short of expectations, Israel will face a difficult choice: resume military operations, risking the collapse of the ceasefire, or adopt a more lenient stance that allows Hezbollah to maintain its foothold.

Another critical issue is the capacity of the Lebanese army to enforce the ceasefire and patrol Southern Lebanon to Israel’s satisfaction. Although the Lebanese army is one of the few institutions in the country that transcends sectarian divides, it is severely under-resourced. With an estimated 70,000 to 80,000 troops, the army is smaller and less capable than Hezbollah, and years of economic crisis have further strained its ability to function. U.S. military aid since 2006 has helped keep the army operational, but it lacks the advanced systems and equipment necessary for modern military operations. Some soldiers are forced to take second jobs to support their families. If the Lebanese army is unable to confront Hezbollah forces that remain in the south or prevent their return, Israel has made it clear that it will act unilaterally to address the threat, potentially reigniting the conflict.

The ceasefire also aims to provide a framework for resolving one of the most contentious issues between the two countries: the demarcation of the Israel-Lebanon border. While the pause in fighting is intended to create the conditions for this long-term goal, the complexity of the border disputes and the deep mistrust between the parties could derail the process. Any delay in reaching a resolution may heighten tensions and undermine the fragile peace.

Beyond its immediate impact, the ceasefire carries potential regional implications. Israeli officials hope that isolating Hezbollah through this agreement will weaken Hamas in Gaza by severing a critical source of support. The expectation is that with Hezbollah out of the fight, Hamas may reevaluate its own position. However, this assumption may prove overly optimistic. Hamas’s current strategy appears largely independent of Hezbollah, and its negotiating stance remains unchanged. Despite suffering devastating losses in the ongoing conflict with Israel, Hamas has not wavered from its demand that Israel withdraw entirely from Gaza and end the war unconditionally. The idea that Hamas will alter its calculations based on Hezbollah’s withdrawal seems more like wishful thinking than a plausible outcome.

While the ceasefire offers Lebanon a chance to begin rebuilding and restoring some semblance of stability, the path forward is fraught with uncertainty. Agreements on paper mean little without effective implementation, and the obstacles to success are significant. The long history of unresolved grievances and cyclical violence between Israel and Hezbollah casts a shadow over the current pause in hostilities. Any failure to uphold the terms of the agreement could lead to a rapid resurgence of conflict, undoing the progress made.

As both sides navigate the fragile dynamics of this ceasefire, Lebanon’s recovery and Israel’s security hang in the balance. Whether this truce marks the beginning of a more stable future or merely a brief interlude in a protracted conflict remains to be seen. For now, the region holds its breath, hoping that this time, peace can endure longer than the ink used to sign the deal.

Image Credit: Hassan Ammar/ The AP