Iran Cannot Be Part of the Solution When It Is the Problem: Five Points on Lebanon’s Sovereignty and the Mediation Illusion
The Qatari-Pakistani mediators speak of a “dispute resolution cell” and monitoring mechanisms — but Lebanon and Israel are absent from the table, and the war’s real cause goes unnamed. Elissa El Hachem cuts through the diplomatic theater.
In the Qatari-Pakistani mediators’ joint statement, and in a post by Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi, there is talk of establishing a “dispute resolution cell” along with committees and monitoring mechanisms between the parties, the Lebanese Republic, and the mediators. The language is diplomatic; the substance is dangerously misleading. Five points cut through the theater.
-
IThis Is a War — Not a Dispute
There is an ongoing war between Israel on one side, and the Revolutionary Guard and Hezbollah on the other. This is not a “chicken-and-egg” situation, nor merely a dispute or clash “to be defused.” It is a war — and framing it as anything less is a deliberate obfuscation that serves Iran’s interests.
-
IIThe Root Cause Is Iran’s Occupation of Lebanon
The causes of this war are not about demarcating a border point or a dispute over ownership. The reason is Iran’s occupation of Lebanon through force of arms and terrorism — and the use of Hezbollah in its wars against Israel, whether to support Gaza or in the recent war, as well as to intimidate the Lebanese people themselves. No “dispute resolution cell” addresses this.
-
IIIThe Two Key Parties Are Absent
The two most important parties in the war — Lebanon and Israel — are not participating in these negotiations and are absent from the table. Consequently, this talk is not binding on them. Add to that the central contradiction: Iran is the problem. How can it position itself as part of the solution?
-
IVLebanon and Israel Are Already Negotiating — Directly
Lebanon and Israel are holding direct negotiations on their own behalf, under the auspices of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington. They do not need agents or guardians to negotiate and strike deals in their name — and at their expense.
-
VThe Israeli Withdrawal Is Conspicuously Absent
These statements make no mention of the Israeli army’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon. Can we therefore infer that the “deal” sponsored by the mediators involves Iran receiving its money in exchange for Israel remaining in the south — with the Party retaining its weapons but keeping them inside and in a “dormant” state?
It would have been more fitting for Vance to spend his time and effort on ending Iran’s occupation of Lebanon — withdrawing its missiles, weapons, Revolutionary Guard leaders, mercenaries, and army from Lebanese soil, and stopping its use as a platform for launching attacks on Israel and on civilians in its north.
This includes halting the funding of the Party’s financial networks that operate in drug and organ trafficking — financing terrorism that has reached the heart of America itself.
“To Lebanon, to the Lebanese people: Help is on the way to you. Hezbollah has been terrorizing your country for a long time, but this is coming to an end.”
It remains for the Lebanese state to stick to the path of Washington negotiations with Israel, and to focus its efforts on reaching a lasting peace — not temporary solutions from which everyone benefits at the expense of the Lebanese people. The “dispute resolution cell” is not the answer. Sovereignty is not negotiated through surrogates.
About The Author
Discover more from Faith & Freedom News - FFN
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
