Getty Images
Following the US, the EU, and 10 other countries’ call for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, the White House began efforts to generate support for its proposal.
During a late-night Zoom briefing attended by a crowded room of reporters, senior Biden administration officials hailed the announcement as a “breakthrough.”
Their achievement lay in securing agreement from key European countries and Arab states, alongside Washington, amidst the ongoing conflict.
However, it’s important to note that this was a call for a ceasefire, not an actual ceasefire agreement.
The statement called on both Israel and Hezbollah to halt hostilities immediately and observed a 21-day truce to allow for further negotiations. It also emphasized the need for a diplomatic resolution in line with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which aimed to end the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war but was never fully implemented, as well as the stagnant Gaza ceasefire deal.
Beyond the temporary truce, the statement outlined a series of long-standing regional goals that have proven elusive for diplomats over the past two decades.
The Americans leveraged the presence of world leaders at the UN General Assembly in New York to issue the agreed-upon text.
However, the “breakthrough” did not signify that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to the terms, as evident from continued violence on the ground.
The US officials’ attempt to portray progress in negotiations aimed to rally public support and pressure both sides into accepting the proposal.
Getty Images
When asked if Israel and Hezbollah had agreed, one official stated that discussions had taken place and the text shared with the parties, leaving the decision to them to accept the deal.
Despite the optimistic tone, subsequent events revealed that both sides had not yet signed on to the ceasefire plan.
The following days saw an escalation of violence with Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon and Hezbollah rocket attacks in Israel, resulting in significant casualties.
Can a ceasefire plan succeed this time?
The initial indications suggest a challenging road ahead for achieving a ceasefire, with conflicting statements from Israeli and Lebanese leaders.
While the joint statement sets a baseline for international pressure on Israel and Hezbollah, further negotiations are required to secure a lasting peace.
The US-led push for an “immediate ceasefire” signals a shift in approach, following previous reluctance to support such resolutions.
However, the complex objectives of both sides, including the return of displaced residents and security concerns, pose significant challenges to reaching a lasting agreement.
Despite ongoing diplomatic efforts, finding common ground between Israel and Hezbollah remains a formidable task.
The desire for a swift truce faces obstacles as the conflict intensifies on the ground, underscoring the complexity of the situation.
While the joint statement presents a framework for negotiations, the path to a sustainable ceasefire is fraught with challenges and uncertainties.
Getty Images
Específicamente, que las dos partes negocien para implementar la Resolución 1701, que implementa múltiples condiciones sobre Israel y Hezbollah. Estas incluyen la retirada del grupo de una franja del Líbano al sur del río Litani y, a largo plazo, el desarme de Hezbollah.
Desde 2006, cada lado ha acusado al otro de romper los términos de la 1701.
Todo esto significa que un objetivo, que ya ha eludido a los diplomáticos durante casi dos décadas, ahora se está envolviendo en el plan a corto plazo para la calma entre estas dos partes. A medida que continúan cayendo misiles, la diplomacia actual está pidiendo mucho.