Can the Israeli-Hezbollah cease-fire survive its vulnerabilities? Mideast experts weigh in

Read the Full Transcript

• William Brangham:

  Welcome to the "News Hour."

  For the first time in nearly 14 months, the guns along the Israel-Lebanon border are set to fall silent early tomorrow morning. The Israeli security cabinet approved the cease-fire by a 10-to-1 vote. Lebanon's government says it will ensure Hezbollah abides by the deal. And, at the White House, President Biden said the U.S. will monitor the cease-fire.

  Nick Schifrin is here with more — Nick.

• Nick Schifrin:

  William, in those nearly 14 months, Lebanon says more than 3,500 Lebanese have been killed, close to a million displaced, nearly one-fifth of the country.

  Israel says more than 70 have been killed and more than 60,000 fled their homes since Hezbollah opened fire on October the 8th. Today's cease-fire requires that, within 60 days, Hezbollah and Israel stop all attacks, Israeli troops leave Lebanon in phases, Hezbollah move fighters and weapons north of the Litani River, Lebanese armed forces return to Lebanon's borders, eventually numbering 10,000.

  And the U.S. will chair a mechanism to monitor and judge violations. This afternoon, President Biden portrayed the deal as lasting.

  Joe Biden, President of the United States: Effective at 4:00 a.m. tomorrow local time, the fighting across the Lebanese-Israeli border will end, will end. This is designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities. What is left of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations will not be allowed.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, if Hezbollah did not live up to the agreement, Israel maintained the right to act.

• Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Prime Minister (through interpreter):

  The length of the cease-fire depends on what happens in Lebanon. In full cooperation with the United States, we retain complete military freedom of action. Should Hezbollah violate the agreement or attempt to rearm, we will strike.

• Nick Schifrin:

  And before the announcement, Israel pounded Lebanon with a wave of airstrikes, including this one that hit a residential building in Central Beirut. And, inside Israel, Hezbollah launched a barrage of rockets and drones, most of which were intercepted by Israeli air defense.

  For perspective on the cease-fire, we turn to Randa Slim from the Middle East Institute and Aaron David Miller from the Carnegie Endowment, who's also been a State Department official in both Democratic and Republican administrations.

  Thanks very much. Welcome, both of you, back to the "News Hour."

  Aaron David Miller, let me start with you.

  Do you think the cease-fire agreement will work? Will it stick?

  Aaron David Miller, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: I mean, I'd ask you, and I'm not trying to trivialize this, ask me in 30 days.

  The reality is that this agreement has been concluded largely because Netanyahu wanted it and Hezbollah needed it. The question is, can the agreement survive its vulnerabilities? How much discretion has the U.S. given to the Israelis to respond to violations? Will the Lebanese armed forces enforce and deploy in a way that they will preempt or prevent Hezbollah violations?

  I think there's a reasonable chance, largely because there's some sense of urgency on the part of Netanyahu and Hezbollah to do this deal. But by no means, I think, can we safely say that, 30 days from now, this deal will have achieved the kind of traction that will make it last months, if not longer.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Randa Slim, do you think this agreement will last?

• Randa Slim, Middle East Institute:

  I totally agree with Aaron that it's going to need — it's going to encounter severe challenges in the next 60 days.

  But, also, both sides, Israel and Hezbollah, for their own reasons, want this agreement. And, like in 2006, the Israelis were the ones who basically pushed for 1701. I think today…

• Nick Schifrin:

  1701, the Security Council resolution that ended the war in 2000.

• Randa Slim:

  Exactly.

  Today, again, I think it's Israelis that are pushing for this because they have realized that the military option has exhausted its usefulness in terms of achieving their objective of returning the 70,000-plus Israeli citizens to the north.

  And so the question is the challenge for Israel, will it be able to leverage its military battlefield tactical successes into a durable political settlement? And the challenge for Hezbollah and for Lebanon is what to do with Hezbollah's weapons once and with Hezbollah force once they move north of the Litani River.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Let me zoom into one of the main differences between this agreement and the agreement that ended that war that Randa Slim just mentioned in 2006 enshrined by Security Council 1701 is a U.S.-chaired mechanism.

  That is a new feature of this agreement, a mechanism chaired by the United States that will both judge and monitor any kind of violations.

  Aaron David Miller, let me start with you. How important is it and will it work?

• Aaron David Miller:

  I think it's very — look, we wouldn't be having this conversation if the United States has not dedicated to resources and the will and the skill of Amos Hochstein, the president's special representative, to do this deal.

  The fact is they have created or at least continued something called the tripartite mechanism, which wasn't a part of 1701, but it was included as a monitor mechanism. And the U.S. will chair it. And it will be, I think, under the control of CENTCOM. There will be an actual military representative, U.S. No boots on the ground. The president made that very clear.

  But I think it's possible with the side letter that the Americans have given to the Israelis, haven't seen the text, don't know how committing it is, that in fact there may be enough discretion that the U.S. has given to the Israelis to satisfy them that if in fact there are violations, that there will now be a credible monitoring force on the ground in order to enforce it.

  But, again, we shouldn't delude ourselves. This is a transaction. It's not a transformation. I think Randa makes an excellent point. The IDF is exhausted. Israel has a small standing army, relies largely on its reserves, some of whom haven't been extended weeks and months.

  So I think this was a critically important factor in why the Netanyahu government signed up for this.

• Nick Schifrin:

  So, Randa, that is absolutely part of why Israel felt comfortable with this deal, that the U.S. is inserting itself right in the middle of any monitoring or judgment. Why does Lebanon believe that that's an OK thing and why is Hezbollah willing to accept an agreement that does just that, put the United States as judge and monitor of any future violations?

• Randa Slim:

  One, they have no other option. Two, neither Lebanon nor Hezbollah is in a position to dictate terms here. I mean, Lebanon, the Lebanese government really needs this deal. And Hezbollah needs this deal.

  They are going to be facing severe challenges going forward. Even after implementation of the deal, they are going to face severe challenges with reconstruction. Remember, you have more than one million displaced people. You have whole neighborhoods in Southern Lebanon that have been decimated, whole neighborhoods in southern suburbs of Beirut that have been decimated; 37 villages in Southern Lebanon have been totally decimated.

  And these are mostly inhabited by Shia, Lebanese Shiite, many of whom are core constituents of Hezbollah. They are going to have a severe challenge in helping their constituents rebuild their lives. They are going to have a severe challenge in helping themselves rebuild their internal control mechanisms, in dealing with their leadership challenges, now that their leadership pretty much political and military has been wiped out.

  And they are going to have severe challenges answering to the rest of the Lebanese about the need for their weapons outside the control of the Lebanese state.

• Nick Schifrin:

  I have just got only about a little over a minute left, so let me just quickly ask both of you.

  A senior U.S. official in announcing this deal said that the fact that Hezbollah was delinking its strikes into Israel isolates Hamas and therefore could create momentum toward a cease-fire in Gaza.

  Aaron David Miller, is that a faith that's actually possible?

• Aaron David Miller:

  It's an incredible analytical point. The cavalry is not coming to rescue Hamas. But, at the same time, think about it. Netanyahu could do this deal because it did not and would not and cannot strain his coalition.

  The Israel-Hamas deal is not that way. Hamas will demand an asymmetrical number of Palestinian prisoners, many who have been convicted or charged with killing Israelis, and they will want a cessation of the war. I don't think Benjamin Netanyahu can do that right now. It would be fascinating to see whether or not within 60 days, the president-elect, what equities, pressures, and incentives he brings to this to see if, in fact, he can wrap up Gaza, which is critical to what he really wants, which is Israeli-Saudi normalization deal.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Randa Slim, just in the 30 seconds we have left, do you see progress in Gaza, whether under Biden or Trump?

• Randa Slim:

  Hamas has one strong trump card in order to extract concessions from Israel, and these are the Israeli hostages. I don't think Prime Minister Netanyahu is ready to give them the concessions they need in return for this trump card.

• Nick Schifrin:

  Randa Slim, Aaron David Miller, thank you so much to you both.

• Randa Slim:

  Thank you.

• Aaron David Miller:

  Thank you.