9/7/2025–|Last update: 10:58 (Mecca time)
The visit of the American presidential envoy ended Thomas Barak The second to the Lebanese capital, Beirut, yesterday, Tuesday, without achieving any actual breakthrough, especially in the file of Hezbollah.
Beirut did not approve an American proposal paper that Barak handed over last June, including the disarmament of Hezbollah.
On October 8, 2023, Israel launched an American support on Lebanon on September 23, 2024, into a widespread war, which resulted in more than 4,000 dead and about 17,000 wounded.
Since the war has ended, American pressure on Beirut has increased to disarm Hezbollah, which is the most prominent demand for Barak’s paper, which visited Beirut on Monday and Tuesday.
Instead of ratifying the paper, Beirut presented “ideas for a solution” that Washington will respond later, and the official Lebanese position remained foggy towards the American paper.
And the two, Barak expressed his “gratitude and satisfaction” about the Lebanese response to the American paper.
This response did not include, according to the Anatolia correspondent Litani River (Southern Lebanon) within a time program.
This came after Hezbollah Secretary -General Naim Qassem announced, through a speech in the Ashura celebration, that his party would not respond to the calls to surrender his weapon before the departure of the Israeli “aggression” from Lebanon.
Convention and breach
On November 27, 2024, a ceasefire agreement began in force Hezbollah And Israel, but Tel Aviv violated him more than 3 thousand times, which resulted in at least 235 dead and 534 wounded, according to official data.
And challenging the agreement, it continues Israeli army The occupation of 5 Lebanese hills in the south was controlled during the recent war, in addition to other regions it has occupied for decades.
Barack received the response of Beirut during his tour to Lebanese officials, on Monday, starting with the President of the Republic Joseph Aoun In Baabda Palace.
The presidency announced, in a statement, that Aoun delivered Barak “Lebanese ideas for a comprehensive solution.”
As for the Speaker of Parliament, Nabih Berri, who met Barak for more than an hour, he considered that the meeting was “good and constructive, and he took great care of the interest of Lebanon, its sovereignty and all the Lebanese concerns, as well as the demands of Hezbollah.”
While the Prime Minister stressed Nawaf Salam However, “the steps must be a syndrome between Israel’s withdrawal and the inventory of weapons.”
He stressed the necessity of the complete Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, the complete stopping of hostilities, the start of the reconstruction process, and the release of the prisoners.
Negotiating window
A Lebanese source is familiar with the content of the meetings.
The source added, preferring not to disclose his identity, that “the Lebanese response is still in the context of exchanging ideas, and it has not yet been presented to the cabinet table for approval, nor has any timetable for the final negotiations around him.”
“The American side promised to study the response and return with additional observations at a later time,” according to the source.
As for the writer and political analyst Youssef Diab, he says in an interview with Anatolia that “the diplomatic calm that Barak has shown does not reflect the truth of the American position.”
Diab stressed that “the United States is still adhering to the request to disarm Hezbollah and all illegal armed groups.”
He considered that “the absence of any timetable in the Lebanese response will weaken Beirut’s position, and give Tel Aviv an opportunity to escalate.”
Diab added that the American president Donald Trump “It may build a new firm position based on the Lebanese position.”
Trump received at the White House Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is visiting Washington from Sunday to tomorrow, Thursday.
Diab quoted sources that what Barak said “does not mean that the American administration is lenient with Lebanon regarding the issue of weapons and its removal, as this issue is very essential.”
He stressed that “there is a great fear that the matter will negatively be reflected in Lebanon, because the Lebanese answer did not include a timetable for disarmament from Hezbollah and Palestinian factions, and left things blurry.”
Without security guarantees
As for the political writer Ghassan Rifi, he saw that “the American envoy seemed more pragmatic than many Lebanese politicians who rushed to draw negative scenarios before his arrival,” noting that Barak described the Lebanese response as positive and constructive, and stressed that the issue of weapons is an internal matter, and the Lebanese must find the appropriate formula to address it.
Rifi warned that the American side did not provide any commitment to stop the Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon, which raises legitimate concern among the Lebanese about the real intentions behind the American offering, according to his statements.
According to political analyst Tony Paul, Barak carried with him a clear American message that “Lebanon has two options: either to catch up with a project The Middle East The new one who is redrawing its balances, or staying in the quagmire of conflicts and backwardness, “as he put it.
He added that “the American envoy held the Lebanese state responsible for managing the weapon file,” and explicitly said that his country “is not responsible for what Israel might have made in the next stage if it is not achieved clear progress.”
Paul considered that “the current opportunity may not be repeated, and Lebanon must choose between integrating into the regional stability project, or to remain on the margin.”