Lebanon, plagued by war and divisions, faces a long list of challenges following the ceasefire agreement

BEIRUT (AP) — Just hours after a U.S.-brokered ceasefire ending the war between Israel and Hezbollah took effect, Lebanon woke up to celebratory gunfire rather than Israeli airstrikes and drones buzzing overhead.

It was a rare moment of respite for Lebanon as bombs stopped falling after a year of war. Thousands of displaced people joyfully returned to their towns and villages in the south and east of Lebanon.

But it quickly became clear what lay ahead of us. One city after another in the south and east, as well as parts of Beirut, were destroyed, entire border villages were leveled and thousands of buildings were damaged. The World Bank estimates losses at around $8.5 billion.

For the small and fractured Mediterranean country, which has been struggling with worsening disasters for more than half a decade, the ceasefire agreement has brought with it more questions than answers.

Which of them will foot the bill for reconstruction? Will Hezbollah completely withdraw its fighters and arsenals from the south and relocate them north of the Litani River – and how will the Lebanese army ensure it does this? And will Israel ultimately accept that the militants will be pushed back, defeated, but not destroyed?

Meanwhile, Lebanon’s political paralysis between Hezbollah-allied and anti-Hezbollah groups has only worsened during the war – raising the possibility of instability that could jeopardize the ceasefire. Anger has grown among some at what they see as the Iranian-backed group’s decision to provoke another catastrophic war with Israel.

Temporary calm or a step towards long-term security?

During the 60-day first phase of the ceasefire agreement, based on Security Council Resolution 1701, Hezbollah and Israeli forces are expected to withdraw from southern Lebanon and the Lebanese military is expected to intervene.

The Lebanese troops should ensure that Hezbollah dismantles its facilities and military positions and does not try to rebuild them. That’s a major point of tension that could potentially put the army in a dangerous confrontation with the more powerful militant group.

The army, largely funded by the United States and other Western governments, is a rare point of unity in Lebanon’s tense, sectarian political system. But it has always tried to avoid tensions with Hezbollah, which has the support of a large constituency of Lebanon’s Shiite Muslims.

Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah lawmaker, told reporters on Thursday that the group would work with the army to implement the ceasefire. But he also said the military was unable to defend Lebanon against Israel – a role Hezbollah has long claimed. He said the group would continue in that role.

“Can anyone say that we are watching when Israel attacks?” Fadlallah said. “If Israel attacks our country, we will fight and resist. That is our right.”

Mike Azar, a Lebanese commentator, said the army was “in an impossible position.”

“To claim that it can disarm or dismantle Hezbollah’s infrastructure is frankly absurd,” he said in an online post.

A Lebanese military official told the Associated Press that the deployment of troops to areas in the south would be gradual, including areas from which Israeli troops are withdrawing. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The US and France will also be involved in a monitoring mechanism to ensure that Resolution 1701 is implemented.

Its feasibility will be truly tested “if there will really be this commitment from all sides,” said Salman Shaikh, who served as political adviser to the U.N. special envoy to Lebanon during the 2006 war when the resolution was passed passed. Today he runs The Shaikh Group, a mediation and conflict resolution organization.

Critics of the deal fear that the pressure on Lebanon is far greater and that Israel has more leeway to attack Hezbollah – which it has vowed to do if it believes Hezbollah is not abiding by its terms.

With U.S. support, Israel has given itself “almost complete freedom to determine when it needs or wants to attack Lebanon again for any reason,” said Matt Duss, executive vice president of the Center for International Policy, a Washington-based think tank.

Financially strapped Lebanon needs support for its military and its struggling country

Lebanon has been mired in a crippling financial crisis since late 2019 that has pushed millions into poverty, devastated its banking system and limited the country to just a few hours of state electricity daily.

The Lebanese military has also suffered, with troops quitting or taking second jobs to pay the bills. However, the aim of the agreement is for Lebanon to recruit more and station an additional 10,000 soldiers south of the Litani River. Without significant funding, this would be impossible – especially given the enormous reconstruction costs Lebanon is currently facing.

The international community pledged $1 billion for Lebanon at a donor conference in Paris last month, including $800 million in humanitarian aid and $200 million in army support. But aid groups say none of that funding has materialized yet.

According to Mercy Corps, Lebanon’s gross domestic product fell by 6.4% – about $1.15 billion – in the last two months of the war alone. The organization is working to secure shelter and services for displaced people ahead of winter.

“The worst impacts on civilians may be yet to come,” Laila Al Amine, country director for Mercy Corps in Lebanon, said in a statement.

The question arises as to who will pay the bill. Iran has offered to help, but the country is strapped for cash and subject to Western sanctions. The oil-rich Arab Gulf states, which helped rebuild after the 2006 war, are tired of Lebanon’s political class and unwilling to intervene.

Growing tensions over Hezbollah in their own country

Even before the war, Hezbollah and its arsenal were a point of contention in Lebanon. Their allies say Hezbollah militants are crucial to protecting Lebanon, while critics say their weapons violate state sovereignty and are used to put pressure on political opponents. They have long been calling for Hezbollah to be disarmed.

Senior parliamentarian Alain Aoun said Lebanon had a long list of urgent matters to address, including electing a president after more than two years of vacuum, securing reconstruction funding and resolving a host of neglected economic problems.

“There are a number of challenges ahead,” Aoun told the AP.

Hezbollah’s opponents were also angered by its decision to unilaterally begin firing rockets into northern Israel on October 8, 2023. The group said it was acting in solidarity with its ally Hamas in the Gaza Strip and vowed not to stop until a ceasefire was reached there. Critics say it drew Lebanon into the war and resulted in Israel’s destructive bombing.

Even some of his allies expressed frustration.

Lawmaker Gebran Bassil, leader of a party that for years was Hezbollah’s main Christian ally in government, said in a video posted on X that Hezbollah “should be at the service of the state” and not the other way around.

Hezbollah’s main ally in parliament, Nabih Berri, who led the negotiating effort, has long pushed for Hezbollah to decouple its campaign against Israel from the war in Gaza. Now he is demanding that parliament vote for a president in January to ease Lebanon’s political deadlock – a move that could test Hezbollah’s political power.

International financing and political support would also be crucial here, says Shaikh.

He said the international community must “help the Lebanese resolve their problems that still exist and are not exclusively related to Israeli actions against them.”