Despite the military escalation… signs of the possibility of resolving land border disputes in southern Lebanon
Despite the recent increase in the frequency of exchanges of bombing and escalation between the Lebanese group Hezbollah and Israel, through the targeting of sites of Israeli military leaders or Israel’s monitoring and assassination of the group’s leaders, other indicators show the possibility to talk about the controversial points regarding the land borders in southern Lebanon and address them.
According to the Arab World News Agency, the diplomatic movement in Lebanon, at the beginning of the fighting on October 8, warned against the expansion of the war, underlining the need to adhere to International Resolution 1701, and then began to raise the possibility of moving to end the conflict along the border between Lebanon and Israel, waiting for the next visit of the American presidential envoy Amos Hochstein and whether this man will bring with him a vision and proposals to resolve it.
Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah said last week in a speech at a memorial ceremony for one of the party’s members: “Today in Lebanon we face a historic opportunity to completely liberate every inch of our occupied land, from point (B1) to the rest. of Shebaa farms after… Stop the aggression against Gaza.
Retired Brigadier General Mounir Shehadeh, former Lebanese government coordinator for the International Emergency Forces (UNIFIL), believes that Nasrallah’s speech is not the result of the war in Gaza and battles in southern Lebanon alone.
Shehadeh told the Arab World News Agency: “The issue dates back to Amos Hochstein’s visit to Lebanon last August, as his visit was aimed at addressing land border differences, because the US administration thought that after demarcating maritime borders, why not address the problem of land borders”.
Resolution of controversial points
Shehadeh added: “Israel agreed and started to agree to talk about the point (B1), which is the first beach point between Lebanon and Palestine in the Naqoura area, which Israel had refused to talk about before the maritime demarcation”.
He continued: “But after the American envoy’s visit, Israel was ready to talk about this point and the northern part of Ghajar village and Shebaa farms; The reason is due to the two tents that Hezbollah set up in the Bastara area, in the Shebaa farms, in the south, to put strong pressure on Israel.
He believed that “the Israelis were not ready to seize the two tents, because they realized that (Hezbollah) was fully prepared for military confrontation, so they tried by diplomatic means to resolve the issue until Hockstein came with ideas to deal with the land border. “
Brigadier General Shehadeh added: “What Nasrallah said did not come out of nowhere, but rather is the result of Israeli willingness to resolve the land border issue represented by the 13 reserved points, the Shebaa farms and the Kafr Shuba hills.” .
Shehadeh explained the conditions that Nasrallah highlighted in his speech regarding the southern border issue, stating that “the first condition is that there is no cessation of operations in the south before stopping the aggression against Gaza; The second condition is to resolve land border disputes and recover all Lebanese lands. The third is to prevent air, sea and land violations, so flying spy planes or using Lebanese airspace to bomb military sites in Syria is prohibited.
He added: “We don’t know where developments are going, especially with the continued escalation of Israeli targeting in recent days. But if we assume that the aggression against Gaza ends, then Israel was ready to deal with the issue of land borders in advance, and then what about the intensification of battles?!
Regarding the issue of Shebaa farms, which some see as a controversial issue, both Syrian and Lebanese, Brigadier General Shehadeh explained that the American envoy proposed that “among the treatment of land borders we talk about Shebaa farms.” .
He continued: “Land borders have been demarcated since 1923, when 38 points were defined between Naqoura and the Wazzani River. Then there was the armistice agreement in 1949 between Lebanon and Israel, which confirmed the international borders between Lebanon and Palestine. They planted 105 new points between the previous ones, forcing Israel to retreat behind them. But the Blue Line (Israel’s withdrawal line in 2000) does not coincide with it in 13 points, which are the controversial points.”
Implementation of resolution 1701
For his part, MP Ashraf Baydoun, member of the Development and Liberation Bloc, declared: “Lebanon respects international resolutions; The problem is the Israeli occupation of our lands, the violation of our sovereignty in various forms and the violation of all international resolutions.”
He added in an interview with the Arab World News Agency: “All those who call for the implementation of resolution 1701 realize that Israel is the one that must start implementing it, because it includes 19 clauses, including more than 10 clauses that oblige Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory and hand over the Shebaa farms to the international emergency forces, allowing the population to return there and benefit from their rights and arming the Lebanese army so that it can carry out its tasks together with international forces, in addition to the daily attacks on Lebanese sovereignty.”
He continued: “It is clear that there is a path led by Israeli Prime Minister (Benjamin) Netanyahu in which he is trying to throw everyone into the quagmire of war. The Americans are trying in parallel, within the framework of the diplomatic option, to avoid the escalation of events, because its consequences will be negative for everyone, and no one wants a negative development, and the price to pay will be the Israeli side. , because it will be limitless.”
Baydoun states: “Faced with these two lines, we hope for the victory of the option of stopping the aggression against Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon until the process of resolving the controversial points in the south begins.” Starting from the 13 reserved points of the Blue Line, up to the Lebanese village of North Ghajar, recognized by Resolution 1701, and at point B1 (B1) in Naqoura up to the Shebaa Farms, which the occupation must hand over to the international emergency forces in compliance with the international resolution.
Data for the field
Rola Berro, a researcher in international humanitarian law, underlines that the data on the field imposes the possibility of moving towards the reserved points in the south.
Berro told the Arab World News Agency: “The Israeli side wants the party fighters to retreat beyond the Litani River, a request rejected by the party and Netanyahu, under pressure from residents of the northern settlements, who have been displaced in cause of Hezbollah’s attacks.” This difficult atmosphere could lead to the opening of a wider war or the search for a final solution. But it is certainly unlikely that we will return to the previous phase.”
He added: “We all realize that what happens behind the scenes is not necessarily reflected in the media; The historical experiences are clear in the July 2006 war, as the Israeli goal was to eliminate Hezbollah, but this did not happen.
The legal researcher emphasizes that “it may be too early to talk about the establishment of land borders and Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories, as long as (Hezbollah) talks about it with the cessation of aggression against Gaza. But if a discussion were to open up about it, perhaps it would not be with the current Israeli government, but rather it would require a change from the other side, which is what has begun to emerge from disagreements within the (Israeli) government and the possibility of solve them with an internal decision or American pressure.”
He said: “If we consider the possibility of completing the border processing, what guarantees will be provided so that Israel does not violate the agreement (i.e. the border demarcation agreement) in the future? This central question requires an answer from the American side, and then the Lebanese discussion about arming the Lebanese army and developing a defense policy begins, because many parties will say that there is no need for the weapons to remain in the hands of (Hezbollah) provided that the reason for its existence has ceased. Therefore, we will face a different phase at local and regional level in the years to come.”
2024-01-10 15:59:17
#teams #examined #cases #arising #Israels #internationally #banned #weapons