US-mediated negotiations between Israel and Lebanon entered their second day Wednesday with minimal progress and deepening disagreement over a pilot program that would allow Lebanese forces to deploy in southern Lebanon — a critical test of whether diplomacy can end Israel's military presence and prevent the return of Hezbollah to the border region. The talks, now in their fifth round, are shadowed by Israeli leaders' public insistence that troops will not withdraw, raising questions about whether Washington can broker a deal that meets Lebanon's sovereignty demands while addressing Israel's security concerns.
Pilot Program at Center of Dispute
The core issue is where to begin a trial deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces. Lebanon, with US backing, is pushing for the initiative to start in areas currently occupied by Israeli forces, while Israel prefers to begin in parts of southern Lebanon where the IDF is not deployed. An Israeli official said, "We first need to see whether they can meet the objective and clear the area of Hezbollah's presence. If that works, the model can also be implemented in areas where the IDF is currently stationed." Two officials familiar with the discussions said no significant progress was made during the first day of talks Tuesday, though they described the atmosphere as positive and expected a joint statement by the end of talks Thursday, along with agreements on launching the Lebanese Army pilot program.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the disputed buffer zone between Israel and Lebanon was "at the core of" the negotiations. He said the aim was for the Lebanese government to "continue to be able to control and secure more and more of their own territory." Rubio added, "The more of that area the Lebanese armed forces is able to secure, the less of it is in Hezbollah's control, and the less Israel will be in Lebanon."
Israeli Leaders Reject Withdrawal
Even as diplomats met in Washington, senior Israeli officials publicly ruled out any withdrawal from Lebanon. At the municipalities conference in Tel Aviv, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, "We will remain there." Defense Minister Israel Katz went further, saying Israel would not withdraw from southern Lebanon even if the US requested it. He said, "Two hundred thousand residents will not return. There are no civilians and no terrorists there. We will not leave the security zones in Syria and Lebanon – this is our security doctrine. The IDF must remain on the enemy's side of the border and defend Israeli communities from within the territory itself." Katz continued, "Because in the past, security zones that included civilian populations became the site of roadside bombs and attacks against our soldiers. We will not allow that to happen again. Soldiers inside, civilians outside. The infrastructure has been destroyed, the houses are damaged and dangerous. We are not withdrawing."
The statements underscore the political constraints facing Israeli negotiators and the human cost of the stalemate: two hundred thousand Lebanese residents displaced from their homes, unable to return as long as Israeli forces occupy their towns and villages.
Iran Factor Complicates Diplomacy
Two sources familiar with the matter said Iranian involvement in the Lebanese issue, following the memorandum of understanding signed between the United States and Iran last week, had complicated the negotiations. They said both sides were expected eventually to reach an understanding because Israel and Lebanon both had strong incentives to do so. One official said, "Lebanon has an interest in demonstrating that it does not take orders from Iran and that Tehran does not control Lebanon. Israel, for its part, has no interest in handing Iran any achievements related to Lebanon."
Israeli Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter warned before Tuesday's talks, "This is the fifth round of talks, and I must say, we are heading toward a train wreck... that train is in danger of derailing." He said Iran-funded Hezbollah might be given "a new lease on life" under the recently signed US-Iran memorandum of understanding, warning that it may allow Tehran to continue to funnel resources to the Lebanese terrorist group.
US Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told the Shas-affiliated newspaper Haderech that he believed Israel should not withdraw from Lebanon. Graham said, "In my opinion, the chance of a real agreement between Israel and Lebanon is almost zero as long as Iran is negotiating on behalf of Hezbollah with the United States." He added, "I will take a very tough line against any agreement that would be seen as limiting freedom of action with Hezbollah."
Talks Seen Regressing
US Ambassador to Lebanon Michael Issa reportedly told Lebanese news outlet Al-Jadeed TV that some difficulties arose on the first day of talks, but said he hoped the sticking points would be resolved through further discussions. According to an Axios report Wednesday, the first day of talks ended with no progress, and two sources briefed on the negotiations told Axios that there was a sense the discussions resulted in more regression than steps forward.
The talks included an Israeli delegation headed by Leiter, a Lebanese delegation led by Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh Maawad, and former Lebanese ambassador to Washington Simon Karam.
Why This Matters:
The failure to advance a withdrawal framework leaves two hundred thousand Lebanese civilians in limbo — unable to return to homes destroyed or occupied by Israeli forces — and extends Israel's military presence in a neighboring sovereign state indefinitely. The dispute over where to pilot Lebanese Army deployment reveals the fundamental trust deficit: Israel demands proof that Lebanon can contain Hezbollah before withdrawing, while Lebanon argues it cannot assert sovereignty over territory Israel continues to occupy. The public rejection of withdrawal by Netanyahu and Katz, even as diplomats negotiate in Washington, signals that domestic Israeli politics may override diplomatic progress. If the talks collapse, the risk is not only continued displacement and the erosion of Lebanese state authority, but also the possibility that Hezbollah — weakened but not destroyed — reconstitutes itself in the vacuum, restarting the cycle of conflict. The involvement of Iran, through last week's US memorandum, adds another layer of complexity, raising the question of whether any Israel-Lebanon arrangement can succeed without addressing the broader regional architecture that sustains Hezbollah. For now, the gap between diplomatic language and political reality remains wide, and the human cost continues to mount.