The U.S. Mandate to Israel and Its implications for Lebanon’s Sovereignty
In a recent interview with Liban Dibitte, journalist and political analyst George Alam shed light on the U.S. management’s policy toward Lebanon, particularly its alignment with Israel’s security interests.Alam argues that the Trump administration has granted Israel an “absolute mandate” to shape the situation in southern Lebanon, raising concerns about the region’s future.
Alam warns that Israel’s potential refusal to withdraw from the eastern sector of southern Lebanon after the 18th of this month could be part of a broader strategy to expand its occupation in the Golan Heights. “This may be part of a strategy to expand its occupation in the Golan Heights,which reached Jabal Al-Sheikh and large areas that are only a few kilometers away from the capital,” he explains. This move could create an “occupied bridge” extending from Tel Aviv to the eastern sector in the south, further threatening Lebanese sovereignty.
The analyst emphasizes the gravity of this advancement, stating, “This will be a very risky matter.” He highlights the risks to Lebanon’s internal civil peace and the potential for widespread resistance. “The occupation justifies the existence of wide Lebanese resistance, not only to Hezbollah, but also all official and popular lebanon that rejects any kind of occupation,” Alam asserts.
To counter this, Alam calls for urgent diplomatic action. “There must be a government, foreign minister, and official administration capable of exploiting the rest of the time before the 18th of this month, to implement the widest diplomatic campaign at the international level to pressure Israel to force it to withdraw from all Lebanese lands, and to implement Resolution 1701,” he says. He also stresses the importance of U.S. mediation, particularly through American intermediary Morgan Ortigos, who has taken over negotiations in Beirut.
However, Alam remains skeptical about the intentions of both the U.S. and Israeli governments. “The two parties, whether in the American administration or in the Israeli government, do not work in the interest of Lebanon in the matter of ceasefire or implementation of Resolution 1701,” he notes. He warns that the ultimate goal may be to impose a new reality on Lebanon, one that could lead to normalization with Israel—a scenario Lebanon vehemently rejects.
Key Points Summary
| Aspect | Details |
|———————————|—————————————————————————–|
| U.S. Mandate to Israel | Trump administration grants Israel authority in southern Lebanon. |
| Israeli Strategy | Potential expansion into Golan Heights, creating an “occupied bridge.” |
| Risks to Lebanon | Threat to sovereignty, civil peace, and potential widespread resistance. |
| Diplomatic Action Needed | Urgent international campaign to pressure Israel to withdraw. |
| U.S. Mediation | Role of Morgan Ortigos in negotiations. |
| Long-term Concerns | Imposition of a new reality,potential normalization with Israel. |
Alam’s analysis underscores the precarious situation in Lebanon and the urgent need for diplomatic intervention.As tensions escalate, the international community’s role in safeguarding Lebanese sovereignty remains critical.
