Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns

Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns
Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun shaking hands with Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Abdullah Ali Al-Yahya before their meeting at the presidential palace in Baabda, east of Beirut, on Jan. 24, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 24 January 2025

Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns

Israeli refusal to fully withdraw from Lebanon sparks regional concerns
  • President Aoun holds talks with US, French officials to urge Israel to meet ceasefire deal criteria
  • GCC, Kuwaiti officials hold talks with Lebanese counterparts

BEIRUT: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Thursday Israeli troops would not withdraw from the border area of southern Lebanon in accordance with the time frame set in the ceasefire agreement with Hezbollah, amid claims that the Lebanese Army has not fulfilled its obligations.
Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun held talks with France and the US to urge Israel to fully implement the agreement and withdraw within the stipulated timeframe to prevent the situation from deteriorating.
Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati also called on the US to “intervene to ensure the implementation of Resolution 1701 and Israel’s withdrawal.”
On Friday, Netanyahu’s office said that “the gradual withdrawal from Lebanon will continue in full coordination with the US administration.”
However, the Israeli Cabinet decided that “the Israeli Army will remain in its current positions,” warning that “the Israeli Army is prepared for any scenario and will respond harshly and immediately to any violations by Hezbollah.”
Israeli media reports said “Israel is requesting an additional one-month delay in the withdrawal of its army from Lebanon and an extension of the ceasefire agreement.”
The Israeli Broadcasting Corporation said that “the political leadership has instructed the army to remain in the eastern sector of Lebanon,” noting that “the additional period before the complete withdrawal from southern Lebanon may range from days to weeks.”
The development accompanied continued Israeli operations in the border region, particularly in the eastern sector.
Army spokesperson Avichay Adraee claimed Israeli forces “uncovered several underground tunnel routes belonging to Hezbollah in Wadi Saluki, intended for the party’s members to take shelter,” asserting that “these routes have been destroyed.”
Adraee spoke about “the discovery of a stockpile of weapons inside a mosque, as well as a vehicle loaded with weapons, and hundreds of mortar shells, improvised explosive devices, rocket-propelled grenades, rifles and other military equipment.”
He said: “In another operation by the Golani Brigade, trucks loaded with heavy rocket launchers were found, along with weapons depots that contained large quantities of rocket shells, mortars shells, shoulder-launched rockets, improvised explosive devices and military equipment.”
Calls intensified from border area residents following Israel’s announcement to gather on Sunday and demand to be allowed to return to their villages.
On Thursday, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri was informed by US Gen. Jasper Jeffers, head of the international committee monitoring the implementation of the ceasefire agreement, of “Israel’s intention to extend the presence of its forces in several locations in southern Lebanon,” according to information distributed about the meeting. Berri told the general “that people will head to their villages on Sunday.”
In a statement, Hezbollah said that “Israel’s failure to adhere to the 60-day deadline is an attack on sovereignty that requires the state to act and address it, using all international means and conventions to reclaim Lebanese territories and liberate them from the grip of occupation.”
At the political level, Lebanon received further Gulf support for its new leadership.
Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Abdullah Ali Al-Yahya and the Gulf Cooperation Council’s Secretary-General Jasem Mohamed Albudaiwi, along with a delegation from the Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry and the GCC, held meetings with Lebanese leaders in Beirut on Friday.
This visit, along with the visit of Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan less than 24 hours earlier to Beirut, where he met with Lebanese officials and emphasized the importance of implementing Resolution 1701, carry exceptional importance in light of the developments in Lebanon and the wider region.
During his meeting with Aoun, Al-Yahya reaffirmed Kuwait’s “support, endorsement and commitment to standing by Lebanon to provide all necessary aid in all fields.”
He stressed “activating the Lebanese-Kuwaiti joint committees to address the issues raised according to Lebanon’s needs” was of the utmost importance, recalling that Lebanon “was the first country to condemn the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait through the stance of late Prime Minister Salim Al-Hoss.”
Albudaiwi conveyed the GCC’s “unwavering support for Lebanon and its sovereignty,” emphasizing its commitment to “the non-interference in Lebanon’s internal affairs.”
He affirmed that “the GCC is moving toward helping Lebanon in terms of economic development projects after implementing the intended reforms,” noting that “a Gulf program for Lebanon is set to be developed in cooperation with the future Lebanese government.”
Aoun said he hoped “for Kuwaitis in particular and the Gulf people in general to come back and visit Lebanon,” stressing that “the Arab countries’ unity is the cornerstone for confronting current challenges.”
The president affirmed that “after forming the government, we will establish new foundations for cooperation with the Gulf countries,” adding that “the main titles of these new foundations were included in the inauguration speech, which set the rules for building the state.”
Both Gulf officials met with Prime Minister-designate Nawaf Salam, who affirmed “the importance of working to confront the internal challenges faced by Lebanon during this period.”
Salam stressed “the significance of restoring Lebanese-Gulf relations, which he sees as a priority in the near future.”
The Gulf officials also met with caretaker Mikati and Berri.
The Kuwaiti minister and the GCC secretary-general held a joint press conference with Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah Bou Habibi following a meeting.
Al-Yahya said: “We reaffirm our solidarity with Lebanon, and our firm commitment to supporting its sovereignty and territorial unity, as well as the importance of implementing the UN Security Council resolutions, including Resolution 1701, and the Taif Agreement.
“We look forward to building the best relations with Lebanon and strengthening security and stability in the region,” he added.
Al-Yahya affirmed that “the GCC had called for the full adherence to the ceasefire agreement and the cessation of Israeli hostilities against Lebanon and the UN peacekeeping forces,” pointing out “the importance of the role played by the army and the security forces to achieve security in the country.”
He said: “We encourage the implementation of the intended reforms. There’s a historical chance to overcome the past challenges and start the reconstruction and development process in a way that achieves the Lebanese people’s prosperity aspirations.”
Al-Budaiwi stated: “We are very pleased with what we heard from the Lebanese leadership and its keenness to achieve the needed reforms and the internationally-recommended programs to ensure the country’s stability.
“These reforms constitute the right path toward Lebanon’s recovery. We believe in the necessity to implement these mandatory reforms and the security council’s resolutions, namely Resolution 1701, and the Taif Agreement.”
He reiterated the final communique of the ministerial committee’s extraordinary meeting in regard to supporting the five-nation group on Lebanon.


Hezbollah says government ‘handing’ Lebanon to Israel with disarmament bid

Hezbollah says government ‘handing’ Lebanon to Israel with disarmament bid
Updated 25 min 27 sec ago

Hezbollah says government ‘handing’ Lebanon to Israel with disarmament bid

Hezbollah says government ‘handing’ Lebanon to Israel with disarmament bid
  • Hezbollah chief spoke in a televised address after meeting Iran’s top security chief
  • Hezbollah and the Amal movement decided to delay any street protests against a US-backed disarmament plan

BEIRUT: Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem on Friday accused Lebanon’s government of “handing” the country to Israel by pushing for the group’s disarmament, warning it would fight to keep its weapons.

Qassem spoke in a televised address after meeting Iran’s top security chief Ali Larijani, whose country has long backed the Lebanese militant group.

Hezbollah emerged badly weakened from last year’s war with Israel, and under US pressure the Lebanese government has ordered the army to devise a plan to disarm the group by the end of the year.

Iran, whose so-called “axis of resistance” includes Hezbollah, has also suffered a series of setbacks, most recently in the war with Israel that saw the United States strike its nuclear sites.

Opinion

This section contains relevant reference points, placed in (Opinion field)

He also warned the Lebanese government against confronting the militant group, saying there would be “no life” in Lebanon in that event.

Qassem said Hezbollah and the Amal movement, its Shiite Muslim ally, had decided to delay any street protests against a US-backed disarmament plan as they still see room for dialogue with the Lebanese government. But he said any future protests could reach the US Embassy in Lebanon.

“The government is implementing an American-Israeli order to end the resistance, even if it leads to civil war and internal strife,” Qassem said.

“The resistance will not surrender its weapons while aggression continues, occupation persists, and we will fight it... if necessary to confront this American-Israeli project no matter the cost,” he said.

Qassem urged the government “not to hand over the country to an insatiable Israeli aggressor or an American tyrant with limitless greed.”


Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation

Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation
Updated 15 August 2025

Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation

Libya to hold rare local vote in test for divided nation
  • Rare municipal elections are seen as a test of democracy in a nation still plagued by division and instability
  • Key eastern cities — including Benghazi, Sirte and Tobruk — have rejected the vote, highlighting the deep rifts between rival administrations

TRIPOLI: Libya is set to hold rare municipal elections on Saturday, in a ballot seen as a test of democracy in a nation still plagued by division and instability.
Key eastern cities — including Benghazi, Sirte and Tobruk — have rejected the vote, highlighting the deep rifts between rival administrations.
The UN mission in Libya, UNSMIL, called the elections “essential to uphold democratic governance” while warning that recent attacks on electoral offices and ongoing insecurity could undermine the process.
“Libyans need to vote and to have the freedom to choose without fear and without being pressured by anyone,” said Esraa Abdelmonem, a 36-year-old mother of three.
“These elections would allow people to have their say in their day-to-day affairs,” she said, adding that it was “interesting to see” how the areas affected by the clashes in May would vote.
Since the 2011 NATO-backed uprising that toppled longtime leader Muammar Qaddafi, Libya has remained split between Tripoli’s UN-recognized government, led by Prime Minister Abdulhamid Dbeibah and its eastern rival administration backed by military strongman Khalifa Haftar.
Khaled Al-Montasser, a Tripoli-based international relations professor, called the vote “decisive,” framing it as a test for whether Libya’s factions are ready to accept representatives chosen at the ballot box.
“The elections make it possible to judge whether the eastern and western authorities are truly ready to accept the idea that local representatives are appointed by the vote rather than imposed by intimidation or arms,” he said.
Nearly 380,000 Libyans, mostly from western municipalities, are expected to vote.
Elections had originally been planned in 63 municipalities nationwide — 41 in the west, 13 in the east, and nine in the south — but the High National Elections Commission (HNEC) suspended 11 constituencies in the east and south due to irregularities, administrative issues and pressure from local authorities.
In some areas near Tripoli, voting was also postponed due to problems distributing voter cards.
And on Tuesday, the electoral body said a group of armed men attacked its headquarters in Zliten, some 160 kilometers east of Tripoli.
No casualty figures were given, although UNSMIL said there were some injuries.
UNSMIL said the attack sought to “intimidate voters, candidates and electoral staff, and to prevent them from exercising their political rights to participate in the elections and the democratic process.”
National elections scheduled for December 2021 were postponed indefinitely due to disputes between the two rival powers.
Following Qaddafi’s death and 42 years of autocratic rule, Libya held its first free vote in 2012 to elect 200 parliament members at the General National Congress.
That was followed by the first municipal elections in 2013, and legislative elections in 2014 that saw a low turnout amid renewed violence.
In August that year, a coalition of militias seized Tripoli and installed a government with the backing of Misrata — then a politically influential city some 200 kilometers east of Tripoli — forcing the newly elected GNC parliament to relocate to the east.
The UN then brokered an agreement in December 2015 that saw the creation of the Government of National Accord, in Tripoli, with Fayez Al-Sarraj as its first premier, but divisions in the country have persisted still.
Other municipal elections did take place between 2019 and 2021, but only in a handful of cities.


Germany tells Israeli government to stop West Bank settlement construction

Germany tells Israeli government to stop West Bank settlement construction
Updated 15 August 2025

Germany tells Israeli government to stop West Bank settlement construction

Germany tells Israeli government to stop West Bank settlement construction
  • Germany ‘firmly rejects the Israeli government’s announcements regarding the approval of thousands of new housing units in Israeli settlements in the West Bank’
  • Germany has repeatedly warned the Israeli government to stop settlement construction in the West Bank

BERLIN: Germany on Friday called on the Israeli government to stop settlement construction in the West Bank after Israel’s far-right finance minister said work would start on a plan for thousands of homes that would divide the Palestinian territory.

Germany “firmly rejects the Israeli government’s announcements regarding the approval of thousands of new housing units in Israeli settlements in the West Bank,” said a foreign ministry spokesperson in a statement.

Plans for the “E1” settlement and the expansion of Maale Adumim would further restrict the mobility of the Palestinian population in the West Bank by splitting it in half and cutting the area off from East Jerusalem, said the spokesperson.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich announced on Thursday that work would start on the long-delayed settlement, a move that his office said would “bury” the idea of a Palestinian state.

In a statement, Smotrich’s spokesperson said the minister had approved the plan to build 3,401 houses for Israeli settlers between an existing settlement in the West Bank and Jerusalem.

Germany has repeatedly warned the Israeli government to stop settlement construction in the West Bank, which violates international law and UN Security Council resolutions.

Such moves complicate steps toward a negotiated two-state solution and end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank, said the spokesperson.


Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says

Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says
Updated 15 August 2025

Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says

Turkiye detains Istanbul district mayor in corruption probe, state media says
  • Turkish police detained 40 people including the mayor of Istanbul’s central Beyoglu district as part of a corruption investigation, state broadcaster TRT Haber said on Friday

ISTANBUL: Turkish police detained 40 people including the mayor of Istanbul’s central Beyoglu district as part of a corruption investigation, state broadcaster TRT Haber said on Friday, the latest wave in a crackdown on the opposition.
Beyoglu Mayor Inan Guney from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) was the 16th mayor to have been taken into custody in the crackdown, in which a total of more than 500 people have been detained in less than a year.
Among those currently in prison is Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, President Tayyip Erdogan’s main political rival, who is being investigated on charges of corruption and links to terrorism.
The CHP denies the charges and calls them an attempt to eliminate a democratic alternative, a charge the government rejects.
TRT Haber said those held in the latest operation are suspected of involvement in fraudulent activities at companies linked to the Istanbul municipality. Arrest warrants were issued for a total of 44 people, including the 40 detained, it said.
On Thursday, CHP mayor Ozlem Cercioglu from the western city of Aydin joined Erdogan’s ruling AK Party, citing disagreements with the CHP administration.
CHP leader Ozgur Ozel told reporters, without providing evidence, that AKP officials had threatened Cercioglu with legal investigations into her municipality and arrest unless she joined the ruling party.
AKP deputy chair Hayati Yazici called Ozel’s allegation “completely untrue.” Cercioglu also rejected the claim.


20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there

20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there
Updated 15 August 2025

20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there

20 years after its landmark withdrawal from Gaza, Israel is mired there
  • Twenty years ago, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, dismantling 21 Jewish settlements and pulling out its forces

TEL AVIV: Twenty years ago, Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip, dismantling 21 Jewish settlements and pulling out its forces. The Friday anniversary of the start of the landmark disengagement comes as Israel is mired in a nearly 2-year war with Hamas that has devastated the Palestinian territory and means it is likely to keep troops there long into the future.
Israel’s disengagement, which also included removing four settlements in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, was then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s controversial attempt to jump-start negotiations with the Palestinians. But it bitterly divided Israeli society and led to the empowerment of Hamas, with implications that continue to reverberate today.
The emotional images of Jews being ripped from their homes by Israeli soldiers galvanized Israel’s far-right and settler movements. The anger helped them organize and increase their political influence, accounting in part for the rise of hard-line politicians like National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
On Thursday, Smotrich boasted of a settlement expansion plan east of Jerusalem that will “bury” the idea of a future Palestinian state.
For Palestinians, even if they welcomed the disengagement, it didn’t end Israel’s control over their lives.
Soon after, Hamas won elections in 2006, then drove out the Palestinian Authority. Israel and Egypt imposed a closure on the territory, controlling entry and exit of goods and people. Though its intensity varied over the years, the closure helped impoverish the population and entrenched a painful separation from Palestinians in the West Bank.
Israel captured the West Bank, east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip in the 1967 Mideast war. The Palestinians claim all three territories for a future independent state.
A unilateral withdrawal enhanced Hamas’ stature
Israel couldn’t justify the military or economic cost of maintaining the heavily fortified settlements in Gaza, explained Kobi Michael, a senior researcher at the Misgav Institute and the Institute for National Security Studies think tanks. There were around 8,000 Israeli settlers and 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza in 2005.
“There was no chance for these settlements to exist or flourish or become meaningful enough to be a strategic anchor,” he said. By contrast, there are more than 500,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, most living in developed settlement blocs that have generally received more support from Israeli society, Michael said. Most of the world considers the settlements illegal under international law.
Because Israel withdrew unilaterally, without any coordination with the Palestinian Authority, it enhanced Hamas’ stature among Palestinians in Gaza.
“This contributed to Hamas’ win in the elections in 2006, because they leveraged it and introduced it as a very significant achievement,” Michael said. “They saw it as an achievement of the resistance and a justification for the continuation of the armed resistance.”
Footage of the violence between Israeli settlers and Israeli soldiers also created an “open wound” in Israeli society, Michael said.
“I don’t think any government will be able to do something like that in the future,” he said. That limits any flexibility over settlements in the West Bank if negotiations over a two-state solution with the Palestinians ever resume.
“Disengagement will never happen again, this is a price we’re paying as a society, and a price we’re paying politically,” he said.
Palestinians doubt Israel will ever fully withdraw from Gaza again
After Israel’s withdrawal 20 years ago, many Palestinians described Gaza as an “open-air prison.” They had control on the inside – under a Hamas government that some supported but some saw as heavy-handed and brutal. But ultimately, Israel had a grip around the territory.
Many Palestinians believe Sharon carried out the withdrawal so Israel could focus on cementing its control in the West Bank through settlement building.
Now some believe more direct Israeli occupation is returning to Gaza. After 22 months of war, Israeli troops control more than 75 percent of Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks of maintaining security control long term after the war.
Amjad Shawa, the director of the Palestinian NGO Network, said he doesn’t believe Netanyahu will repeat Sharon’s full withdrawal. Instead, he expects the military to continue controlling large swaths of Gaza through “buffer zones.”
The aim, he said, is to keep Gaza “unlivable in order to change the demographics,” referring to Netanyahu’s plans to encourage Palestinians to leave the territory.
Israel is “is reoccupying the Gaza Strip” to prevent a Palestinian state, said Mostafa Ibrahim, an author based in Gaza City whose home was destroyed in the current war.
Missed opportunities
Israeli former Maj. Gen. Dan Harel, who was head of the country’s Southern Command during the disengagement, remembers the toll of protecting a few thousand settlers.
There were an average of 10 attacks per day against Israeli settlers and soldiers, including rockets, roadside bombs big enough to destroy a tank, tunnels to attack Israeli soldiers and military positions, and frequent gunfire.
“Bringing a school bus of kids from one place to another required a military escort,” said Harel. “There wasn’t a future. People paint it as how wonderful it was there, but it wasn’t wonderful.”
Harel says the decision to evacuate Israeli settlements from the Gaza Strip was the right one, but that Israel missed crucial opportunities.
Most egregious, he said, was a unilateral withdrawal without obtaining any concessions from the Palestinians in Gaza or the Palestinian Authority.
He also sharply criticized Israel’s policy of containment toward Hamas after disengagement. There were short but destructive conflicts over the years between the two sides, but otherwise the policy gave Hamas “an opportunity to do whatever they wanted.”
“We had such a blind spot with Hamas, we didn’t see them morph from a terror organization into an organized military, with battalions and commanders and infrastructure,” he said.