The United States intends to employ Israel’s military actions in Lebanon as an opportunity to weaken Hezbollah and establish a new presidential election. While Saudi Arabia shows support for the U.S. effort, Egypt and Qatar express doubts regarding its realism. Political divides and regional complexities further complicate the possibility of effective governance reform in Lebanon.
The United States is reportedly attempting to leverage Israel’s military actions against Hezbollah in Lebanon as an opportunity to reshape the country’s political landscape, aiming to diminish Hezbollah’s influence and facilitate a new presidential election. According to a Wall Street Journal report, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has engaged with leaders from Qatar, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia in pursuit of support for this initiative. The U.S. seeks the removal of Hezbollah’s veto power over the election of a new Lebanese president, with the U.S. Special Envoy Amos Hochstein tasked to convey the strategic importance of this endeavor. While Saudi Arabian officials reportedly express support for the American initiative, Egypt and Qatar are skeptical, deeming the plan unrealistic. They argue that the destruction of Hezbollah is not achievable and that the organization should remain part of any political resolution. Concerns have been voiced regarding the potential for international interference in Lebanese governance to exacerbate residual tensions from the country’s civil war, which concluded in 1990. Political analysts caution that any faction perceived as seizing power amid Israeli hostilities would likely face rejection from the Lebanese populace. Support from prominent Lebanese figures, such as Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, is vital for the success of the American initiative. Although both leaders have endorsed the notion of new presidential elections, they also acknowledge Hezbollah’s role in resisting Israeli aggression. Hezbollah’s Deputy Secretary-General Naim Qassem has dismissed the prospect of altering political dynamics, attributing the group’s focus to the ongoing conflict with Israel. Moreover, the U.S. has a history of attempting to implement political reforms in Lebanon without tangible success, as the nation remains deeply divided along sectarian and political lines. Challenged by a lack of prominent leaders capable of steering the country toward meaningful change, voices like Ibrahim Mneimneh, a reformist parliament member, underscore the dire state of Lebanese governance, stating, “We lack any leadership to at least initiate a course where we can see a light at the end of the tunnel.”
The article addresses the geopolitical complexities surrounding Lebanon and Hezbollah in light of recent military actions by Israel. The response from U.S. officials reflects a broader strategy to diminish Hezbollah’s power, considering the group a significant obstacle to Lebanese political reform. The piece further illustrates the divided sentiments among regional players—while allies like Saudi Arabia express willingness to support U.S. initiatives, others, notably Egypt and Qatar, caution against the implications of such actions in a historically volatile region. Additionally, it highlights the significant internal divisions within Lebanon that complicate any potential shift in political dynamics.
In summary, the United States is strategically working to utilize the current conflict in Lebanon as a catalyst for political change, aiming to reduce Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanese governance. However, support from key regional players is mixed, with skepticism about the feasibility of the plan. The internal divisions within Lebanon, alongside the sensitive political landscape, pose significant challenges to the U.S. initiative. Without a unified and effective leadership to navigate these challenges, achieving substantial reform remains uncertain.
Original Source: www.haaretz.com
