Written by Joyce houeiss for JNews Lebanon
Amid the frantic race against time to cement regional understandings, Washington is intensifying its behind-the-scenes diplomatic maneuvering to sustain the technical momentum of the indirect Lebanese-Israeli negotiations. The primary objective, according to well-informed sources speaking to Jnews Lebanon, is to prevent any breakdown in current communications while marketing a comprehensive ceasefire formula. However, the devils hidden within the details of this proposal are sparking grave concerns among prominent parliamentary and political circles in Beirut due to the trap of “experimental zones.”
Read also Exclusive- Gold Never Ages: The $100K Lesson That Could Have Saved Lebanese Depositors
Behind Washington’s Secret Plan: Deployment Phases and the “Yellow Line”
Data leaked from diplomatic corridors to Jnews Lebanon reveals that the current proposal, driven by direct American sponsorship, relies on a geographical and security architecture split into five core axes that map out the field’s logistics:
-
- 1. The Field Testing Phase: Designating the area known as the “Yellow Line” as the primary experimental zone, from which technical field operations will gradually expand to other border towns and villages.
- 2. Simultaneous Mutual Withdrawal: Immediately following the declaration of a comprehensive ceasefire, the party will withdraw from the “Yellow Line” zone, and Israel will begin a gradual pullback from certain villages. This will occur in tandem with the Lebanese Army’s deployment and its initiation of dismantling military installations to prepare for the return of residents.
- 3. Temporary Security Depth: In the second phase, as the Lebanese Army expands its presence across the Yellow Line villages, the Israeli military will remain stationed at newly established security outposts along the border, reaching a depth of two kilometers inside Lebanese territory.
- 4. The “Ruling Points” Formula: In the final phase, the Israeli army will position itself in strategic security outposts it describes as “Ruling Points.” The occupation intends to remain there for years or until full compliance with all terms of the concluded agreement is verified.
- 5. Blurring “North of the Litani”: The proposal leaves the fate and trajectory of areas located north of the Litani River completely ambiguous and deferred until the security arrangements for the southern sector of the river are fully finalized.
Read also Exclusive- Gold Never Ages: The $100K Lesson That Could Have Saved Lebanese Depositors
Political Warnings: A “Local Anesthetic” Blocking the Return of Displaced Civilians
This proposal, marketed within Lebanese diplomatic circles as a mere technical solution, faces absolute rejection from influential parliamentary forces who spoke to our desk. While these factions hold the “party side” fully responsible for dragging Lebanon into devastating wars and obstructing state-building, they simultaneously flatly reject any fragmentation of the ceasefire or the legitimization of Israeli preconditions.
These political circles consider relying on Israeli intentions to be a form of political suicide, recalling the massive volume of UN resolutions that remained dead letter. They emphasize that the failure to strictly enforce Resolution 1701 in the past paved the way for the recent rocket escalations, carried out under the banner of “avenging trans-border regional files.”
According to these political warnings, the danger of relying on “experimental zones” or “yellow lines” lies in their potential to transform into a permanent status quo lasting for years. Consequently, displaced residents would be barred from returning to their homes and villages. This effectively renders the American plan a mere “local anesthetic” for the crisis, especially given the operational freedom of action granted to Tel Aviv by the U.S. administration, all while offering no resolution for Lebanese regions north of the Litani.
