Israel and Lebanon have denied reports that Israeli forces have withdrawn from any part of southern Lebanon, contradicting comments from a U.S. State Department official who said Israel had taken a step back from part of its buffer zone as a goodwill gesture.
The disagreement emerged as Washington continues to broker talks between Israel and Lebanon on a proposal that could see some occupied territory transferred to the Lebanese military under a phased security arrangement.
Israel and Lebanon Reject Withdrawal Claims
A U.S. official said Israel had already pulled back from part of its buffer zone and described the move as a significant sign of good faith toward Lebanon’s government.
However, a senior Israeli defence official rejected the claim, stating that Israel’s policy remains unchanged and that its military is not withdrawing from the buffer zone in southern Lebanon.
A senior Lebanese military official also disputed the U.S. assessment, saying recent developments on the ground indicate the opposite and that Israeli forces continue enforcing control over the area.
US Pushes Pilot Zone Plan
The dispute comes amid discussions over a U.S.-backed “pilot zone” proposal that would allow the Lebanese army to assume control of selected areas currently occupied by Israeli forces.
According to U.S. officials, the plan aims to ensure the destruction of Hezbollah weapons and infrastructure while strengthening Lebanese state authority in the south.
Washington hopes the model could eventually be expanded across southern Lebanon, allowing displaced residents to return and helping restore Lebanese sovereignty.
Lebanon Talks Complicated by Iran Diplomacy
The negotiations are taking place as Lebanon has become increasingly linked to broader U.S.-Iran diplomacy. Tehran has pushed for Lebanon to be included in discussions surrounding regional ceasefires and security arrangements.
This has complicated direct Israeli-Lebanese negotiations, with regional powers increasingly influencing the outcome.
Why It Matters
Conflicting accounts over Israeli troop movements highlight the fragility of ongoing diplomacy. Any verified withdrawal could serve as a confidence-building measure between the two sides, while continued military presence risks undermining negotiations and raising tensions.
The outcome of the talks could shape security arrangements along the Israel-Lebanon border and determine whether a broader and more durable ceasefire takes hold.
Stakeholders
- Israel
- Lebanon
- U.S. State Department
- Lebanese Armed Forces
- Hezbollah
- United States
- Displaced civilians in southern Lebanon and northern Israel
Future Outlook
Talks in Washington are expected to continue focusing on security arrangements, troop deployments and mechanisms to limit Hezbollah’s military presence in southern Lebanon. Any agreement will likely require verification measures and guarantees from both sides.
For now, the contradictory statements regarding Israeli troop movements underscore the lack of trust between the parties and suggest that significant obstacles remain before any territorial handover can occur.
The conflicting narratives reveal a deeper challenge facing U.S. mediation efforts. Washington appears eager to demonstrate progress and build momentum for the pilot zone initiative, while both Israel and Lebanon remain cautious about making public concessions.
Israel wants to preserve military flexibility against Hezbollah, while Lebanon seeks a full withdrawal rather than partial arrangements. The disagreement over whether a withdrawal has already occurred suggests that even symbolic confidence-building measures remain politically sensitive, highlighting how difficult a lasting border settlement will be despite ongoing diplomatic engagement.
With information from Reuters.
