The Lebanese presidency handed a reply to US Special Envoy Tom Barrack on Monday over Hezbollah’s disarmament.
Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun received American diplomat Thomas Barrack in Beirut on Monday and gave him the Lebanese state’s reply to a proposal from the United States about disarming Hezbollah.
Barrack, ambassador to Turkiye and special envoy for Syria, said Lebanon’s response was “something spectacular” and that he was “unbelievably satisfied” by the reply, which has not been made public as of yet.
The visit comes amid continued Israeli attacks on alleged Hezbollah targets in Lebanon, which have killed civilians, since a ceasefire went into effect on November 27, 2024.
Here’s what you need to know about the visit and what it means for Lebanon and Israel:
Not for the summer weather.
Barrack went to receive the Lebanese state’s official response to a US proposal, delivered to Lebanon on June 19, to disarm the Hezbollah group.
Under the terms of a ceasefire deal with Israel from last November, Hezbollah was to withdraw its fighters from south of the Litani River – which runs across south Lebanon and up into the Bekaa Valley – and turn over military infrastructure and bases there.
However, according to diplomatic and political sources with knowledge of the agreement, the language was purposefully undefined, leaving it open to interpretation by both sides.
Over the past two years, Israel has waged war on Gaza, Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, with full US support.
Developments have often been touted as victories against Iran and its allies in the region.
The response has not yet been made public.
Why did the US envoy visit Lebanon?
But reports indicate the government demanded that Israel withdraw from all Lebanese territories, including five points it occupied during the recent ceasefire and areas it stayed in after the 2000 withdrawal from southern Lebanon.
It also reportedly called on the US to pressure Israel to:
“If you don’t want change, it’s no problem,” Barrack said, before adding: “The rest of the region is moving at high speed.”
Barrack did not specify if US support would be in the form of reconstruction financing – the World Bank says Lebanon needs $11bn for recovery following the latest Israeli aggression – or in terms of reining in Israel, which continues daily attacks on southern Lebanon and occasionally on Beirut and its periphery.
There are external and internal demands.
The external demands come mostly from the US and Israel. Before Hezbollah was battered in this latest war and lost much of its military leadership, Israel saw the group as a military threat.
Many Gulf states have also opposed Hezbollah and its benefactor Iran’s influence over Lebanon and the Levant.
Internally, Lebanon’s president and prime minister, as well as a variety of political parties and figures, want Hezbollah to disarm and for the Lebanese army and state to control the use of force and decisions of war and peace.
In much of Lebanon’s post-civil war period (1990 onwards), Hezbollah has been Lebanon’s political and military hegemon. Its support comes mostly from the Shia community, and most elected Shia officials are members of Hezbollah or their allies, the Amal Movement.
The group’s critics say the party has isolated Lebanon from good relations with regional and international countries and has grown from a party outside the corrupt Lebanese political system to that system’s protector.
