Beirut- At a time when the Lebanese are focused on the details of their daily crises amid continuing economic and political deterioration, deeper questions loom on the horizon related to the future of the state and its position in a regional phase whose features are taking shape after the ceasefire agreement in Gaza.
Lebanon, which has always been a mirror of the region’s fluctuations, finds itself today at a delicate crossroads: either engaging in a new political path that redefines its role in the region’s equations, or remaining in a cycle of stagnation that makes it hostage to tension and isolation.
Official Lebanon is accompanying the implementation of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza, amid anticipation of its repercussions on the southern front, which remained on fire despite the November 2024 truce. Despite Lebanon’s commitment at the time to the terms of the agreement, Israel refrained from implementing it completely, which kept the southern border in a fragile state in which the cautious calm oscillated between repeated Israeli violations and intermittent raids.
Possible paths
As a result of this scene, two different readings intersect in Beirut:
- The first believes that the Gaza agreement could constitute an entry point to a new negotiating path that opens the door to long-term stability in the south, and rearranges security and political priorities in Lebanon.
- As for the second, it is likely that the ceasefire will be a temporary phase that precedes a more complex phase with the possibility of escalating tensions on both sides of the border.
In this context, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun condemned the Israeli raids that followed the ceasefire in Gaza, wondering if Tel Aviv was seeking to expand the scope of the confrontation, stressing that “protecting civilians is a national priority that should not be tolerated.”
Aoun stressed that Israel’s commitment to halting military operations constitutes a basic condition for creating a balanced negotiating climate, pointing out that “the course that the region is witnessing should not be opposed by Lebanon.”
The Lebanese President recalled the experience of demarcating maritime borders in 2022, which was completed under American and UN sponsorship, considering it an example of the possibility of achieving understandings that preserve sovereignty and national interests within clear legal frameworks, adding, “Negotiation is not a concession, but rather a means to protect rights in a time of major transformations.”
Pressures and balances
On the other hand, an American approach is advancing on the other side, calling for restricting weapons to the Lebanese state within the post-war arrangements in Gaza, while the Lebanese forces are trying to reconcile the requirements of internal security with the calculations of the regional role.
Observers who spoke to Al Jazeera Net believe that Lebanon is walking on a thin line, as it is trying to stabilize the south without sliding into a wide confrontation, and at the same time it is seeking not to lose its position in any expected political settlement in the region.
Between the realism of the dialogue and the fears of escalation, Lebanon appears to be entering a new political testing phase, testing its ability to manage the delicate balances between inside and outside in a way that ensures the protection of fragile stability and prevents the country from sliding again to the brink of confrontation.
Writer and political analyst, Johnny Mounir, says that the recent regional developments will inevitably affect Lebanon, considering that Beirut cannot remain aloof from what is happening in Gaza, “by virtue of the interconnectedness between the two fronts,” as he put it.
About 10 months after the ceasefire agreement between… #Lebanon And Israel… Thousands of displaced Lebanese families are waiting for the start of reconstruction, and Hezbollah says that political conditions are delaying the financing of the operation | Report: Catherine Hanna#News pic.twitter.com/wl5Sd6XyRC
– Al Jazeera Channel (@AJArabic) October 15, 2025
Mounir explained in his interview with Al Jazeera Net that US President Donald Trump was clear in his recent statements when he praised the President of the Lebanese Republic and called for the completion of the disarmament process towards Hezbollah, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – who is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of committing war crimes in Gaza – expressed a completely different position, according to Mounir.
He indicated that Netanyahu may resort to escalation in Lebanon, in light of the increasing internal pressures he faces. He believed that his recent statements, in which he affirmed that the war is not over and that new groups are rebuilding themselves, reflect the possibility of a return of tension from the Lebanese gate, considering that the escalation may represent for Netanyahu a way out of his political and judicial crises.
Regarding the Lebanese position on negotiations with Israel, Mounir explained that this position is not new, “There is a tripartite committee that discusses the situation in the south and the truce, and it is an indirect Lebanese-Israeli negotiating committee under the auspices of the United Nations, and the United States may join it later.”
He concluded by saying that “the goal of these negotiations is focused on Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory, stopping the attacks, restoring the prisoners, and establishing sovereignty over the borders,” stressing that “the Lebanese presidency sees no objection to the continuation of this path as long as it remains confined to the security and military framework, and does not go beyond it to any form of normalization.”
Escalation without war
For his part, the writer and political analyst, Tawfiq Shoman, said, “We are actually facing an attempt at a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, but it is still fragile, as the violations have not stopped yet,” explaining that “today witnessed a new violation, and so did yesterday, as if the Lebanese and Syrian models were being applied to Gaza in terms of what can be described as a long-handed policy, which keeps the tension present without reaching a comprehensive confrontation.”
Speaking to Al Jazeera Net, Shoman believes that the situation in southern Lebanon will not witness “large-scale Israeli aggression,” even if the pace of attacks is likely to increase, but he rules out that things will develop into a comprehensive war like the one that broke out between September and November 2024.
According to his reading, Israel seeks to achieve three goals without being drawn into a major war:
- The attacks continue to maintain military pressure.
- Preventing the return of residents to their border villages.
- Obstructing the reconstruction process and keeping people in a constant state of fear and displacement.
Schuman continues, “Achieving these goals makes Netanyahu needless to expand the war, as he does not want to bear additional military and political burdens,” noting at the same time that “the United States is still holding on to the Lebanese economic joints, especially those related to financial flows within the framework of its calm management of the Lebanese scene.”
Conditional calm
For his part, the writer and political analyst, Khaldoun Al-Sharif, considered that what happened in Sharm El-Sheikh regarding Gaza undoubtedly constituted a step towards a ceasefire, but he described this truce as “fragile” and did not secure real or sustainable peace.
Regarding the Lebanese President’s statement about possible negotiations with Israel, Al-Sharif explained to Al Jazeera Net that the conversation was related to the negotiations on demarcating the maritime borders that took place through an American mediator, that is, within a limited and clear political framework.
He concludes that everything Aoun proposed falls within Lebanon’s natural political approach towards Israel, noting that Israel still occupies part of Lebanese territory, and continues its daily attacks, including assassinations and destruction, the most recent of which was the destruction of about 300 vehicles in the Al-Musaylih area, which, according to Al-Sharif, calls for international action to stop the attacks, with the United States of America at the head of the influential countries.
Al-Sharif points out that this commitment has historical roots, recalling the Arab summit that was held in Beirut and produced the Arab Peace Initiative, which was adopted by Lebanon at the time and the Arab League. This initiative is based on the two-state solution, with the Palestinian state as its capital, Jerusalem.
The political analyst confirms that Lebanon, within the path of regional peace, is committed to this day to the Arab initiative, and any political steps decided by the Arabs, Lebanon is committed to them as well.