US Presidents Joe Biden and President-elect Donald Trump are the main winners in the deal between Israel and Lebanon. Their combined pressure bent the two governments in war, but also terror group Hezbollah and Iran.
Biden sought to finish his presidency with at least one diplomatic success in the Middle East, while Trump wanted to have a clean table on his advent.
French President Emmanuel Macron is a partial winner, after months of zig-zagging in his policy vis-a-vis Israel. France's role in implementing the ceasefire in Lebanon is an exchange for Macron's suggested immunity for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from the International Criminal Court .
Netanyahu is also partial winner since he likely gained Biden’s approval for the transfer of weapons and munitions deliveries to Israel. Netanyahu is betting on Trump for much-needed support in a future clash with Iran and to challenge the Iranian regime's nuclear project. Why is there a Lebanon-Israel ceasefire now? "The first reason is to focus on the Iranian threat, and I won't expand on that,” Netanyahu declared in his statement after accepting the deal. However, Netanyahu could pay a political price for this move, opposed by many military experts, opposition political leaders, many in the public opinion, and even within his political “base.”
Netanyahu’s other reason for accepting the deal was to separate the fronts and isolate Hamas. There are seemingly signs that Hamas is more flexible to negotiate the liberation of the hostages, but the price remains high and depends on Israel’s acceptance of the retreat from Gaza.
The Israeli army has had a series of extremely successful attacks against the Hezbollah military and political leaders, including Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, hits on huge missiles and drone arsenal, and dismantling part of the network of Hezbollah tunnels in the border-adjacent villages.
But after 14 months of fierce fighting in Gaza and in southern Lebanon, the Israel Defense Forces needed to “give its forces a breather and replenish stocks,” Netanyahu said.
Read More: Why Aren't Ceasefire Negotiations in Sight Despite the Elimination of Sinwar and Nasrallah?
While Hezbollah has become a "great loser" in the military field, the Iran-backed terror group still holds strategic arsenal, including precise long-range missiles and suicide drones to rebuild its military apparatus. Thus Hezbollah remains the main military arm of the Tehran regime against Israel. Iran pushed what remains from Hezbollah's leadership to accept the present defeat in hopes of future.
For more than a year, Hezbollah staged an exhaustion war, which provoked the evacuation of more than 70,000 citizens from northern Israel and caused widespread urban and rural devastation. The Israeli government has promised the “internal refugees” that the deal would permit their return home as well as rebuilding what's been destroyed. But most displaced residents do not believe that the deal will bring them security and some refuse to return.
A great part of the Lebanese political parties and non-Shia communities hoped that the agreement would be based on the 2004 UNSCR 1559, which asked for the complete disarmament of all militias in Lebanon, the most single important element in the neutralization of Hezbollah’s military predominance and political influence in the state.
However, the agreement is based on UNSCR 1701, which refers only to the retreat of Hezbollah south of the Litani River.
The Lebanese Army (LAF) must deploy there 10,000 soldiers, tasked “to dismantle all existing unauthorized facilities involved in the production of arms and confiscate all unauthorized arms.” It remains to be seen whether the LAF will have the capabilities and will to do this in 90% of the territory not dried yet by the IDF. The LFA did not disarm Hezbollah despite the binding provisions of Resolution 1701.
There are many more gaps in the agreement and part of its secret provisions will be known only after the elapse of the 60 days provided for its implementation.
Dr. Ely Karmon is a Senior Researcher at The International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) and a lecturer at the Reichman University, Herzliya, Israel