Last edited Tue Dec 3, 2024, 10:53 AM - Edit history (1)
Upon reading further, one would discover, for instance, that "Lebanon’s caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati and Speaker of Parliament Nabih Berri, a close Hezbollah ally who negotiated the deal on behalf of Lebanon, spoke to officials at the White House and French presidency late Monday and expressed concern about the state of the ceasefire, the sources said."
This request, as the article doesn't neglect to point out, comes from the de-facto Hezbollah (a proxy of Iran) representative in Lebanon's Parliament, and allegedly the richest man in Lebanon with close political and financial ties to Bashar Assad (an ally of Iran), the dictator of Syria, and is not a formal request from Lebanon's government.
The same Berri, a Hezbollah representative, came up with the 54 alleged violations of the cease fire agreement by Israel.
The same two officials are instrumental in delaying the implementation of enforcement mechanism which is, as you mentioned, "has been behind the curve".
In the mean time, while the cease fire agreement is not being enforced, Israeli troops on the ground have to deal with Hezbollah's infiltration back into Southern Lebanon (https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-831777). Is this not a fundamental violation of the cease fire agreement? And who is left to deal with it but the IDF? The terms of the cease fire agreement certainly permit IDF, at their discretion, to do just that.
Or are you proposing Israel should withdraw its troops without the monitoring mechanism to enforce the terms of the agreement being put in place and take Hezbollah's word that they will be good boys and never ever move back into Southern Lebanon and will never ever again fire their Iran-funded missiles into Israel's civilian centers?
= new reply since forum marked as read