IDF won’t withdraw from southern Lebanon without effective ceasefire deal — source

The IDF won’t withdraw from southern Lebanon unless there is an effective and realistic ceasefire in place, an Israeli source told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.

“I do not see the army exiting until there is a permanent ceasefire and an effective solution” that would prevent Hezbollah from regrouping along Israel’s border, the source explained.

The source spoke amid reports that the IDF was close to completing its military objectives in southern Lebanon and that work was advancing toward a ceasefire arrangement.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held security consultations on Tuesday night, while the Biden administration and others made a diplomatic push for a deal.

There is broad agreement that United Nations Security Resolution 1701 would be the basis of any ceasefire arrangement that would end the year-long IDF-Hezbollah war. That resolution, which set the terms of the ceasefire that ended the Second Lebanon War (2006), mandates that the Iranian proxy group Hezbollah cannot operate in southern Lebanon between the Israeli border and the Litani River.

Hezbollah entrenched

It has, however, never been implemented. Hezbollah was able to entrench itself in that area and launch attacks at Israel from the nearby villages, despite the presence of UN peacekeepers.

The IDF entered Southern Lebanon at the start of October to push Hezbollah back to the Litani River so that northern residents who were evacuated from their homes over a year ago could safely return.

US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters on Tuesday night that the full implementation of 1701 must be part of any diplomatic resolution between Israel and Hezbollah.

“That means Hezbollah withdrawing north of the Litani River,” Miller said. It also means that the IDF must withdraw from southern Lebanon.

As part of such an arrangement, the Lebanese Armed Forces should be bolstered “to ensure that they can provide security” and “stability in southern Lebanon.”

US special envoy Amos Hochstein was in Lebanon last week, and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Lebanese caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati in London on Friday.

Blinken has clarified that, at present, a Lebanon deal would be separate from any possible Gaza ceasefire and hostage deal.

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told Parliament on Monday that Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz had “reassured” him “that the targeted operation by the Israelis that is underway would come to an end shortly, as he put it.”

Lammy told Parliament, “We understand that it is important that Israelis who cannot be in their homes in northern Israel are able to move back.

“That can be the case only when Hezbollah has moved back beyond the Litani River and Resolution 1701 is properly implemented.

“We want to see that happen, and it is for that reason that we continue to support the Lebanese armed forces and the work of UNIFIL,” he said.

A source told the Post that the US wants to see a deal that would keep UNIFIL in that border area and the Lebanese Army behind the Litani River. Hezbollah, the source said, would not be able to operate in either area, so effectively it would be pushed back further than 1701 had originally dictated.

The IDF’s goals in Lebanon have been much more limited than they were in Gaza. The aim of that war has been to totally destroy Hamas, whereas in Lebanon the goal has been to weaken Hezbollah and push it out of the southern Lebanon area by Israel’s border.

“We have not said that we will destroy Hezbollah,” the source said, adding, “Lebanon is a sovereign nation.”

“Our objective is to push Hezbollah [and] its Radwan forces back behind the Litani River so that Hezbollah will not be on the border,“ the source said.