Israel-Lebanon Agreement Offers Political Gains but Leaves Ground Realities Unchanged

The recent agreement signed between Israel and Lebanon in Washington provides both sides with political and diplomatic benefits, yet it does little to alter the actual situation on the ground. Despite the detailed border demarcations favored by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Lebanese army remains incapable and possibly unwilling to control areas dominated by Hezbollah. The physical presence of troops is less significant than the political dynamics influencing both parties.

On the positive side, Lebanon's official commitment to reducing Hezbollah's influence is renewed, supported by promised U.S. aid to the Lebanese army. However, skepticism remains about the sustainability of this support, especially after potential American casualties. The internal pressures restraining Hezbollah, which represents Lebanon's Shiite community politically, have been crucial in limiting its actions until March 2026. These pressures stemmed from Hezbollah's weakened state after Israeli strikes in 2024 and warnings from Iran about a possible Israeli-American offensive.

However, the situation has deteriorated since then. Iran emerged stronger following the attack, and the physical threat posed by Israel and the U.S. has proven ineffective when isolated. The Trump administration's desire to exit the Middle East quickly frames the Israel-Lebanon deal as part of a broader, flawed agreement with Iran. While the U.S. can compel Lebanon to sign a document tacitly accepting continued Israeli occupation in the south, Lebanon does not control the resistance against this occupation.

The harsh reality in southern Lebanon remains unchanged: ongoing Israeli occupation, widespread destruction, and displaced refugees with no return prospects. The current Lebanese government and the Israeli military now have official justification to maintain this status quo. This results in an extended "security zone" in southern Lebanon that neither protects northern Israel from Hezbollah attacks nor prevents guerrilla infiltrations. It strains Israeli military resources and allows Hezbollah to regain domestic legitimacy by opposing the occupation and refugee displacement, reminiscent of the period between 1982 and 2000.

From November 2024 to March 2026, a relatively stable situation prevailed with Israeli freedom of operation in Lebanon, a restrained Hezbollah, limited Iranian influence, and a stronger Lebanese government. Yet, this stability was disrupted by the Israeli-American strike on Iran and Hezbollah's retaliatory actions. Israel now faces a familiar stalemate that may please proponents of southern Lebanese settlements but clearly limits the Israeli Defense Forces' effectiveness. The Washington agreement has not changed this grim outlook.

Ofer Shelah, head of the National Security Policy Program at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), authored this analysis.