The contours of a US attempt to pass a “legislative” measure allowing the Israeli occupation forces to remain in Lebanon for an extended period are becoming clearer. The goal is to solidify the Israeli enemy’s presence in five border points for an indefinite period.

According to media sources, US efforts began approximately ten days ago, with reports emerging that the Israeli enemy intends to request an extension of the 60-day withdrawal deadline, citing “logistical considerations” related to the situation south of the Litani River.

Israeli Strategy in Southern Lebanon: Military Presence as a Political Tool

Retired Brigadier General Dr. Hasan Jouni confirmed that the Israel enemy’s insistence on holding onto the heights in southern Lebanon, which it still occupies, is not necessarily about the strategic value of these areas themselves. Instead, it is part of a broader strategy aimed at maintaining a permanent military presence in the region.

In an exclusive statement to Al-Manar Website, Dr. Jouni explained that the primary goal of this military presence is political. “The Israeli enemy seeks to pressure the Lebanese state to implement UN Security Council Resolution 1701 in a way that guarantees its security and military superiority in the region,” he said. He added that “Israel” is considering normalization and possibly signing a treaty with Lebanon before its eventual withdrawal.

Jouni pointed out that with the strategic shifts in the region following US President Donald Trump’s administration, the Israeli enemy’s goals have expanded beyond security, seeking broader political objectives amid ongoing regional tensions.

Israeli Hold on Border Heights: Strategic or Symbolic?

Regarding the Israeli enemy’s persistent presence in the border heights, Brigadier Jouni emphasized that these areas do not hold significant strategic value on their own. However, he noted that “Israel” might focus on retaining nearby villages, such as Addaisseh and Kfar Kila, as part of its broader efforts to impose military and political dominance in the area.

Lebanese Resistance Forces Pressure IOF to Withdraw

Jouni also highlighted the key role of local movements in the south, which have seen a strong surge of residents pushing towards their villages and the border. This public momentum, coupled with support from the Lebanese Army, forced the Israeli occupation forces to withdraw from more than 12 Lebanese villages.

“This popular surge, backed by the Lebanese military, forced Israel to rethink its strategy. The Israeli enemy was left with two options: either commit atrocities against civilians or pull out of some villages it deemed unnecessary for its occupation,” Jouni explained.

Uncertainty in Lebanese Official Position

Brigadier Dr. Jouni further noted that there remains ambiguity in Lebanon’s official stance, particularly after statements from the Lebanese government calling for an extension of the ceasefire until February 18. He also pointed out that Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Sheikh Naim Qassem, rejected the extension of the ceasefire agreement, arguing that there was no justification for the Israeli enemy’s continued occupation.

Meanwhile, for the fourth consecutive day, southern Lebanese residents are attempting to return to their villages and towns still occupied by Israeli forces, despite the expiration of the 60-day deadline for withdrawal under the ceasefire agreement, which came into effect on November 27, 2024. While Israeli forces continue to occupy certain border regions in southern Lebanon, this represents a clear violation of the ceasefire agreement.

Source: Al-Manar Website