Report by Yazbek Wehbe, English adaptation by Yasmine Jaroudi
When asked about the timing of any negotiations regarding the fate of the southern front, Hezbollah's response is clear: they await the outcome of the agreement between Hamas and Israel.
They will abide if the agreement merely announces a truce, but negotiations will not commence.
However, if the agreement leads to a calm return to the Gaza Strip, it stops the fighting and signals negotiators to resume talks.
The world, along with Hezbollah, witnessed the outcome of the truce between the two sides from November 24 to 30.
Since it did not yield real solutions, it collapsed once the prisoner exchange was completed. This should serve as a lesson to the world and Hezbollah about the difference between such a truce and the one Lebanon made with Israel in 1949.
Back then, the goal was to halt Arab wars against Israel, prompting the UN Security Council to issue a resolution urging states not to resort to military force to settle the Palestinian cause.
Based on this resolution, Lebanon signed it, which lasted for many years. This is the difference and the lesson.
Today, negotiations are not aimed solely at achieving a ceasefire but at restoring calm to the Gaza Strip. The name of the agreement, which Israel rejects but Hamas insists on, is not necessary; what matters is that the war will stop with international guarantees, the most important of which is Washington's assurance.
If this agreement is reached, should it be a reminder of something?
It should be a reminder of the ceasefire that ended the July 2006 war with the announcement of Resolution 1701. It did not contain any mention of a ceasefire but referred to the cessation of hostile acts, which is even less than a ceasefire, and it has lasted for 17 years without any formal peace agreement
In conclusion, there are many terms that the Lebanese people have become familiar with in every confrontation with Israel, from ceasefire to the Syrian-Israeli disengagement in 1974, which was also based on the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 338, to the ceasefire announced multiple times in the Israeli conflict with Palestinian factions.
The names may vary, but the result remains the same: no one has sought a final solution to the Palestinian cause; perhaps its name is the two-state solution.