Lebanon’s presidential office refutes Israeli claims that border discussions could lead to normalization, emphasizing continuity under UN Resolution 1701. Tensions mount as local leaders express concerns over security implications and the effect of potential agreements, while discussions aim to resolve border disputes and establish working groups for future diplomacy.
On Wednesday, sources from Lebanon’s presidential office clarified that discussions concerning a permanent border with Israel will not lead to normalization between the two nations. These discussions, held in Naqoura, are part of the ongoing implementation of UN Resolution 1701, which focuses on resolving contentious issues, including border disputes and the status of prisoners. The officials asserted, “Any claims that these committees serve as a prelude to normalization are false.”
Earlier in the day, an Israeli official suggested that Israel aims to normalize relations with Lebanon, stating that recent changes in Lebanon could facilitate this process. The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office had announced meetings involving representatives from Israel, the United States, France, and Lebanon. According to their statement, Israel had agreed to release five Lebanese detainees as a gesture toward the new Lebanese president.
In the Naqoura meeting, it was resolved to form three joint working groups to stabilize the region, with topics including disputed areas in southern Lebanon and discussions on Lebanese detainees. The discussions marked a significant shift, indicating that future conversations would also include Israeli government representatives. The Israeli official expressed hopes that facilitating these talks would strengthen the Lebanese president against opposing factions within Lebanon.
Concerns surrounding these negotiations emerged from local leaders, such as David Azoulay, who warned against compromising security for the residents in northern Israel. Azoulay emphasized that the agreements should not be weak or risk jeopardizing public safety, particularly in light of previous security incidents. He criticized the decision to release detainees without adequate assurance of security from Lebanon.
Furthermore, Moshe Davidovich, head of a regional council, echoed similar sentiments, stating that agreements relying solely on UN Resolution 1701 have proven ineffective in the past. Both leaders argued for maintaining a strong Israeli presence at the borders to ensure resident safety and stability. Sources close to Hezbollah indicated that the release of detainees was not merely a goodwill gesture, but rather a result of prior negotiations, and noted that Lebanon might have faced embarrassment due to Israel’s delayed response to requests for release.
In summary, Lebanon’s presidency has firmly denied any implications that current border discussions with Israel may lead to normalization. Despite Israeli aspirations for improved relations, local leaders voice significant security concerns, emphasizing the necessity of a robust Israeli presence to ensure regional stability. As negotiations progress, Lebanon’s responses and the socio-political dynamics within both countries remain paramount to future interactions.
Original Source: www.ynetnews.com
