The Israeli army continued to violate the ceasefire agreement in southern Lebanon. On Thursday, its aircraft carried out strikes, while troops blew up and set fire to homes in the towns of Majdal Zoun and Al-Mansouri, as well as in nearby valleys. Israeli infantry units moved between Aita al-Jabal and Beit Yahoun, while drones and reconnaissance aircraft actively patrolled the areas around Baalbek, Tyre and their surroundings. Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam described the events as “systematic demolition and destruction” and a serious violation of international law.
The escalation followed a statement by Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz that Israel intends to maintain a military presence in “security zones” in Lebanon, Syria and the Gaza Strip. During a visit to Lebanon, Katz said he had instructed the army to prepare for a prolonged presence in the region. The remarks came amid efforts by the ruling Likud party, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, to strengthen its image as the guarantor of security ahead of Israel’s parliamentary elections, scheduled for October 27.
The United States rejected the idea of a permanent Israeli military presence in southern Lebanon. A State Department spokesperson said such a policy was inconsistent with the obligations set out in the agreement and would not contribute to long-term peace and security for either country. Washington reaffirmed its support for Lebanon’s unity and sovereignty, stressing that the agreement provides for the phased redeployment of forces, contingent on verified Hezbollah disarmament and the dismantling of its military infrastructure.
Salam described Katz’s statements about keeping Israeli troops in the occupied areas of southern Lebanon as completely unacceptable. He said they contradicted the framework agreement between Lebanon, Israel and the United States. The Lebanese prime minister also welcomed Washington’s position. A new meeting between Lebanese and Israeli representatives is scheduled for early September, but the talks will take place against a backdrop of continuing attacks and mutual accusations of violating the agreement.
Lebanese Army Commander Rudolf Haykal said the armed forces would not abandon their main mission—to defend every part of the country’s territory. Speaking at a live-fire exercise in the Breital area, he emphasized that the army sought to preserve Lebanon’s security and internal stability. The military must also ensure its full deployment in the south and in parts of the Bekaa Valley, so that it becomes the country’s sole armed force in accordance with domestic decisions and international agreements.
Amid the crisis, Beirut and London signed a memorandum of understanding under Britain’s program to support Lebanon’s security. The document provides for strengthening the capabilities of the army, internal security forces, and the ministries of defense and interior; combating terrorism and criminal violence; modernizing facilities and digital infrastructure; and training personnel. Despite the agreement brokered by the United States on June 26, Israel continues the military campaign it launched on March 2. According to the figures cited, 4,335 people have been killed and 12,277 wounded; the agreement provides for a gradual Israeli withdrawal in exchange for the deployment of the Lebanese army and the disarmament of armed groups.
Comments on the News
What role does the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) play in monitoring compliance with the agreement in the south, and why does its presence not prevent all violations? — UNIFIL monitors the situation, patrols the area, records alleged violations and helps maintain communication between the parties. However, its mandate is limited: peacekeepers are not an independent combat force, do not control the entire territory and generally operate jointly with the Lebanese army. They also depend on the parties’ political consent and therefore cannot fully prevent the actions of armed groups or retaliatory strikes.
Why are the Bekaa and Baalbek areas strategically important to the confrontation between Israel, Lebanon and Hezbollah, even though they are located far from the Lebanese-Israeli border? — The Bekaa Valley connects Lebanon with Syria and has historically served as an important route for the movement of people, weapons and material resources. Baalbek is considered one of Hezbollah’s key centers of political and social influence. Strikes or increased control in these areas could therefore disrupt supply lines and command links, even if the immediate fighting is taking place in the south.
How are responsibilities divided among the Lebanese army, the internal security forces and Hezbollah, and why is transferring control of the south to the army such a serious political challenge? — The Lebanese army is responsible for national defense and the deployment of forces in the south, while the internal security forces mainly handle policing and domestic order. Hezbollah maintains its own armed structure and security network, as well as considerable political influence. Giving the army full control of the south is difficult because Hezbollah considers its weapons necessary to deter Israel, while its opponents demand a single state monopoly on the use of force. In addition, the army faces a shortage of resources, and any attempt to disarm or displace Hezbollah could trigger an internal conflict.
Full version: Israel confirms it will remain in Lebanon amid condemnation from Beirut and a warning from Washington