Israeli Defense Forces have largely withdrawn from southern Lebanon, retaining only five posts, prompting the Lebanese government to seek a full retreat. The Lebanese military has started occupying vacated areas despite ongoing clashes with Hezbollah. Israel claims it is temporarily holding these positions due to the Lebanese army’s slow response. Concerns grow over the Lebanese army’s ability to maintain order, while Lebanon calls for UN intervention against Israel’s continued military presence, which Hezbollah views as an occupation.
Israeli Military’s Withdrawal from Southern Lebanon
The Israeli Defense Forces have reportedly completed a significant withdrawal from southern Lebanon, leaving only five military posts near the border. In response, the Lebanese government has declared its intention to utilize all necessary means to ensure a full Israeli retreat.
Today marks the expiration of the extended deadline for Israeli troop withdrawal as stipulated in the ceasefire agreement. Although Israel has removed a substantial number of its soldiers, the decision to maintain five posts near the border contradicts the original terms of the agreement.
Lebanese Army Takes Control of Vacated Areas
The Lebanese military has announced its entry into regions previously occupied by Israeli forces, specifically in areas such as Abbasiya, Kfar Kila, Mardsch Ajun, and Bint Dschubail, among others. Despite this progress, clashes between Israeli soldiers and Hezbollah militants persist in southern Lebanon.
Israel has justified the retention of its military presence at these five locations, claiming that the Lebanese army did not act swiftly enough to occupy the areas, thus failing to meet its obligations under the ceasefire agreement. The arrangement stipulates that only the Lebanese army and UN peacekeeping forces (UNIFIL) should remain in southern Lebanon, with Hezbollah required to withdraw north of the Litani River, approximately 30 kilometers from the border.
According to an Israeli military spokesperson, this ‘temporary measure’ has been coordinated with an international commission, including representatives from the USA and France, aimed at overseeing compliance with the ceasefire. However, no independent confirmation of this arrangement has been provided.
The United Nations has expressed disappointment over the incomplete withdrawal, stating that further delays were not anticipated. UNIFIL and special coordinator Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert emphasized the need for both sides to adhere to their commitments to foster long-term peace and security.
Despite some progress since the ceasefire took effect in late November, the full implementation of UN Resolution 1701 remains a significant challenge, particularly with lingering doubts about the Lebanese army’s ability to manage Hezbollah effectively.
In Israel, concerns are mounting regarding the Lebanese army’s capacity to maintain order. Eliezer Marom, a former government coordinator for northern Israel, voiced skepticism about the Lebanese military’s role, suggesting that the Israeli army remains the primary guarantor of security in the region.
As a result of the ongoing tensions, many residents of northern Israeli border communities have been evacuated and are cautiously returning to their homes, many of which have suffered damage. Kiryat Shmona’s mayor, Avichai Stern, expressed discomfort over the situation, asserting that the Lebanese army should not be entrusted with the security of Israeli citizens.
On the diplomatic front, Lebanon has criticized Israel’s actions, stating that its military presence violates the ceasefire agreement. Key political figures, including President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nauaf Salam, have called for the UN Security Council to intervene and ensure a complete Israeli withdrawal.
Hezbollah leader Naim Kassim has issued a stark warning, stating that continued Israeli military presence beyond the specified deadline would be viewed as an occupation, emphasizing the group’s readiness to respond accordingly.