In 2006, after a bruising month-long war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted for a resolution to end the conflict and pave the way for lasting security along the border.
But while relative calm stood for nearly two decades, Resolution 1701’s terms were never fully enforced.
Now, figuring out how to finally enforce it is key to a US-brokered deal that brought a ceasefire Wednesday.
In late September, after nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiralled into all-out war and an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets pound deep inside Lebanon and Hezbollah fires rockets deeper into northern Israel, UN and diplomatic officials again turned to the 2006 resolution in a bid to end the conflict.
The international community anchors its hopes in a UN resolution
Years of deeply divided politics and regionwide geopolitical hostilities have halted substantial progress on its implementation, yet the international community believes Resolution 1701 is still the brightest prospect for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.
Almost two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States led shuttle diplomacy efforts between Lebanon and Israel to agree on a ceasefire proposal that renewed commitment to the resolution, this time with an implementation plan to try to reinvigorate the document.
In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon along a UN-demarcated “Blue Line” that separated the two countries and the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights, which most of the world considers occupied Syrian territory. UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, increased their presence along the line of withdrawal.
Read moreLive: Lebanese army says reinforcing presence in country’s south as ceasefire holds
Resolution 1701 was supposed to complete Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure Hezbollah would move north of the Litani River, keeping the area exclusively under the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers.
Up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers would help to maintain calm, return displaced Lebanese and secure the area alongside the Lebanese military.
The goal was long-term security, with land borders eventually demarcated to resolve territorial disputes.
The resolution also reaffirmed previous ones that call for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon – Hezbollah among them.
Hezbollah-Israel ceasefire : déjà-vu ?
The current Lebanon ceasefire initially appears to be “a republication of the 2006 scenario”, Bachir El Khoury, head of the Middle East service at the French weekly newspaper Courrier International, told FRANCE 24’s “The Debate” show. “We ended a war in 33 days at the time, while today the war has lasted almost three months, and neither side has accomplished its strategic objectives.”
The status quo [of sporadic fighting between the two sides] will likely remain, with Hezbollah re-arming and reorganising itself after the enormous blows the Israeli army inflicted upon it, the Lebanese journalist said.
“The real test will be the Hezbollah’s withdrawal north of the Litani River,” General Dominique Trinquand said on FRANCE 24, noting that even though the Lebanese army was deployed in the area in 2006, Hezbollah never retreated.
For years, Lebanon and Israel blamed each other for countless violations along the tense frontier. Israel said Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and growing arsenal remained, and accused the group of using a local environmental organization to spy on troops. Lebanon complained about Israeli military jets and naval ships entering Lebanese territory even when there was no active conflict.
“You had a role of the UNIFIL that slowly eroded like any other peacekeeping with time that has no clear mandate,” said to AP Joseph Bahout, the director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They don’t have permission to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”
UNIFIL for years has urged Israel to withdraw from some territory north of the frontier, but to no avail. In the ongoing war, the peacekeeping mission has accused Israel, as well as Hezbollah, of obstructing and harming its forces and infrastructure.
Hezbollah’s power, meanwhile, has grown, both in its arsenal and as a political influence in the Lebanese state.
It has an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided missiles pointed at Israel, and has introduced drones into its arsenal.
Hezbollah’s waning influence
Yet the influence of the group over the Lebanese Shiite population has diminished since 2006, certain observers say. “The Shiite community blames Hezbollah for the disastrous situation it finds itself in today [. . .] even though it supports Hezbollah in the war,” Georges Malbrunot, a journalist and Middle East specialist, said on FRANCE 24.
“The war in 2006 ended with a tie between Israel and Hezbollah, except Hezbollah had the advantage. Hezbollah today finds itself in a much weaker position, after having suffered huge losses but without being destroyed,” he added.
Watch moreHezbollah’s military capabilities ‘weakened’ but not ‘down and out in confrontation with Israel’
The end of 60-day ceasefire will coincide with President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration. This could be “a tactical truce for Netanyahu to revive [his army] and resume the conflict with even greater intensity once Trump is settled in,” El Khoury said.
Hezbollah will also try to use the pause in hostilities to reconstitute its army and eventually gain the upper hand over its enemy, noted El Khoury. Its inner circles and medias outlets on Tuesday night were already hailing the truce as a “victory”, like when Hezbollah claimed “divine victory” in 2006 when the ceasefire was announced, he added.
A fragilised Lebanese government
Despite the existing parallels between the ceasefire of today and the UN Resolution 1701 of 2006, another element has changed: the Lebanese government.
“We have a different and significantly weakened Lebanese government today,” Rina Bassist, an Israeli radio correspondent in Paris told FRANCE 24. “[The ceasefire] will be a huge test for it and for whatever remains of Lebanon’s democracy.”
Read moreLebanon faces deepening crisis as lawmakers fail 12th attempt to elect president
The Lebanese government, supported by the international community, should take advantage of Hezbollah’s fragilised political influence and shrinking support among the Shiite population to try to reverse the roles in Lebanon, Trinquand said.
International mediators hope that by boosting financial support for the Lebanese army – which was not a party in the Israel-Hezbollah war – Lebanon can deploy some 6,000 additional troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. Under the deal, an international monitoring committee headed by the United States would oversee implementation to ensure that Hezbollah and Israel’s withdrawals take place.
Read moreLebanon’s army looks on as fighting intensifies between Israel and Hezbollah
It is not entirely clear how the committee would work or how potential violations would be reported and dealt with.
The circumstances now are far more complicated than in 2006. Some are still sceptical of the resolution’s viability given that the political realities and balance of power both regionally and within Lebanon have dramatically changed since then.
“You’re tying 1701 with a hundred things,” Bahout said. “A resolution is the reflection of a balance of power and political context.”
Now with the ceasefire in place, the hope is that Israel and Lebanon can begin negotiations to demarcate their land border and settle disputes over several points along the Blue Line for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.
(FRANCE 24 with AP)
Leave a Comment