Israel Defies Ceasefire Agreement, Refuses Full Withdrawal from Lebanon

Beirut, Lebanon – Israel has refused to fully withdraw its troops from Lebanese territory, defying a ceasefire agreement that came into effect on November 27, 2023. The agreement, brokered to end hostilities between Israel and the Lebanese group Hezbollah, required both parties to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and United Nations peacekeepers to take control. However, Israeli forces remain stationed in five strategic locations along the border, sparking concerns of a potential long-term occupation and reigniting tensions in the region.

Why is Israel in Lebanon?

The conflict traces back to October 2023, when Israel launched a military incursion into Lebanon following a year of low-intensity clashes with Hezbollah. These clashes began after Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups attacked southern Israel on October 7, 2023, prompting Israel’s war on Gaza. Hezbollah, aiming to pressure Israel to end its Gaza offensive, escalated its attacks on northern Israel, leading to Israeli airstrikes and a full-scale invasion of southern Lebanon.

Israel justified its actions as necessary to secure its northern border and allow displaced Israelis to return home. However, the invasion resulted in nearly 4,000 Lebanese deaths, predominantly civilians, and displaced hundreds of thousands. Despite the ceasefire agreement, Israel has failed to meet the initial January 26 deadline for withdrawal and a subsequent February 18 extension, maintaining its presence in five key hilltops: al-Aziyah, al-Awaida, el-Hamames, Jabal Bilat, and Labbouneh.

Why is Israel Refusing to Withdraw?

Israel claims its continued presence is a “temporary measure” until the Lebanese army fulfills its obligations under the ceasefire agreement. However, experts argue that no Lebanese force currently has the capability to compel Israel to leave if it refuses. The ceasefire monitoring mechanism, led by the United States and France, has also failed to pressure Israel into compliance. The U.S., Israel’s closest ally, has historically allowed Israel to disregard international commitments, and its inaction now suggests tacit approval of Israel’s stance.

Lebanon’s government has vehemently opposed Israel’s presence, insisting on full withdrawal as per the agreement. Lebanese President Joseph Aoun expressed skepticism about Israel’s intentions, stating, “the Israeli enemy cannot be trusted.” Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem echoed this sentiment, calling on the Lebanese government to enforce the agreement and warning that any remaining Israeli troops would be considered an occupying force.

International Reactions and Legal Implications

The United Nations peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon (UNIFIL) expressed disappointment over Israel’s delay, noting it violates UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006). European diplomats, particularly France, have proposed replacing Israeli troops with UN peacekeepers to preserve the ceasefire. However, Israel has rejected such proposals, insisting on maintaining its strategic positions.

Legal experts are divided on the legality of Israel’s actions. Srinivas Burra, a legal scholar, argued that Israel’s invasion and continued presence are illegal under international law. Michael Becker, an international law professor, suggested Israel might have a legal basis to remain if it argues that Lebanon has failed to fulfill essential obligations under the agreement. However, he emphasized the need for clear benchmarks to facilitate Israel’s eventual withdrawal.

What Happens Next?

Israel has warned of resuming hostilities if necessary, while Hezbollah, significantly weakened by the war, appears reluctant to provoke further conflict. The stalemate poses a significant challenge for Lebanon’s newly formed government, which is working diplomatically with the U.S., France, and UNIFIL to resolve the issue.

Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Joe Rajji proposed UNIFIL take control of the five occupied points, but the idea was rejected. As tensions simmer, the international community faces mounting pressure to mediate a solution that respects Lebanon’s sovereignty and prevents another devastating conflict. For now, Israel’s refusal to withdraw remains a contentious obstacle to lasting peace in the region.