Amid a fragile ceasefire in Lebanon, President Joseph Aoun is preparing for what some claim would be a “historic trip” to Washington. It appears that United States President Donald Trump may pressure him into meeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. If this summit takes place, it would be the first in history.

But a symbolic meeting would not be enough to resolve the conflict in Lebanon, which has deep historical roots and a wide geopolitical reach. Despite the ceasefire, Israel continues to occupy parts of southern Lebanon. The aim of the ongoing operation, as declared by Defense Minister Israel Katz, is to establish a “security zone” over the entire area south of the Litani River – which represents 10 percent of Lebanon’s national territory.

The civilian population has been barred from returning to their homes while Israeli forces have continued bombing and mass demolition. Netanyahu appears to be using the narrative of “destroying Hezbollah” to cover up what is really a campaign of mass destruction and human relocation. It is important to note that the occupation of lands south of the Litani River is not just a military objective for Israel; it is a historical aspiration.

In 1918, Yitzhak Ben-Zvi and David Ben-Gurion published a book describing “our country” as stretching from the Litani River to the Gulf of Aqaba. In 1919, during the Paris Conference, the World Zionist Organization presented a memorandum for a Jewish state extending to the Litani River. During the 1948 war, the Israeli army conquered the village of Hula, killing over 80 defenseless villagers. Many villages like Qadas and Saliha witnessed similar massacres and deportations. As a result of the Nakba, 100,000 Palestinian refugees were forced to move to Lebanon.

In the 1960s, many Shia areas in southern Lebanon lacked running water, electricity, and non-religious schools, as the state invested only 0.7 percent of public spending in the region. This neglect became the basis for the politicization and mobilization of the Shia population. The Lebanese Civil War in 1975 was driven by internal divisions and the destabilizing presence of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). In March 1978, Israel launched Operation Litani, invading southern Lebanon to cripple PLO bases and establish a buffer zone.

When Israel invaded again in 1982, it soon became clear that it had no intention of leaving. This accelerated the political mobilization of the Lebanese Shia – Hezbollah being one of its main consequences. Hezbollah developed a close relationship with Iran, which considers it its most effective regional asset and the first line of defense against Israel’s expansionist goals.

While Hezbollah has constituted a threat to Israel, the disparity in firepower cannot be overlooked. Between 2007 and 2022, Air Pressure documented 22,355 illegal violations of Lebanese airspace by Israeli forces. Since October 7, 2023, Israeli attacks in Lebanon outnumbered Hezbollah’s 5 to 1. In the year since the November 27, 2024 ceasefire, UNIFIL documented almost 7,800 air violations by Israeli forces.

There are at least four conclusions that can be drawn. First, there is no military solution to what is really a political problem; using force can only make things worse. Second, there are powerful actors pushing for more conflict. Third, Iran was not attacked because it possessed nuclear weapons; rather, it was targeted because it did not have them. Fourth, outsourcing security will never bring a formal, lasting peace in Lebanon and the broader region.

Source: www.aljazeera.com