Berri to Asharq Al-Awsat: Resolution 1701 Only Tangible Proposal to End Lebanon Conflict

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and US envoy Amos Hochstein in Beirut. (AFP file)
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and US envoy Amos Hochstein in Beirut. (AFP file)
TT

Berri to Asharq Al-Awsat: Resolution 1701 Only Tangible Proposal to End Lebanon Conflict

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and US envoy Amos Hochstein in Beirut. (AFP file)
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and US envoy Amos Hochstein in Beirut. (AFP file)

Politicians in Beirut said they have not received any credible information about Washington resuming its mediation efforts towards reaching a ceasefire in Lebanon despite reports to the contrary.

Efforts came to a halt after US envoy Amos Hochstein’s last visit to Beirut three weeks ago.

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri dismissed the reports as media fodder, saying nothing official has been received.

Lebanon is awaiting tangible proposals on which it can build its position, he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

The only credible proposal on the table is United Nations Security Council resolution 1701, whose articles must be implemented in full by Lebanon and Israel, “not just Lebanon alone,” he stressed.

Resolution 1701 was issued to end the 2006 July war between Hezbollah and Israel and calls for removing all weapons from southern Lebanon and that the only armed presence there be restricted to the army and UN peacekeepers.

Western diplomatic sources in Beirut told Asharq Al-Awsat that Berri opposes one of the most important articles of the proposed solution to end the current conflict between Hezbollah and Israel.

He is opposed to the German and British participation in the proposed mechanism to monitor the implementation of resolution 1701. The other participants are the United States and France.

Other sources said Berri is opposed to the mechanism itself since one is already available and it is embodied in the UN peacekeepers, whom the US and France can join.

The sources revealed that the solution to the conflict has a foreign and internal aspect. The foreign one includes Israel, the US and Russia and seeks guarantees that would prevent Hezbollah from rearming itself. The second covers Lebanese guarantees on the implementation of resolution 1701.

Berri refused to comment on the media reports, but told Asharq Al-Awsat that this was the first time that discussions are being held about guarantees.

He added that “Israel is now in crisis because it has failed to achieve its military objectives, so it has resorted to more killing and destruction undeterred.”

He highlighted the “steadfastness of the UN peacekeepers in the South who have refused to leave their positions despite the repeated Israeli attacks.”



ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Hamas Officials

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses lawmakers in the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem. Monday Nov. 18, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses lawmakers in the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem. Monday Nov. 18, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
TT

ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Hamas Officials

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses lawmakers in the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem. Monday Nov. 18, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses lawmakers in the Knesset, Israel's parliament, in Jerusalem. Monday Nov. 18, 2024. (AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)

The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants on Thursday for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defense minister and Hamas officials, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity over the war in Gaza and the October 2023 attacks that triggered Israel’s offensive in the Palestinian territory.

The decision turns Netanyahu and the others into internationally wanted suspects and is likely to further isolate them and complicate efforts to negotiate a cease-fire to end the 13-month conflict. But its practical implications could be limited since Israel and its major ally, the United States, are not members of the court and several of the Hamas officials have been subsequently killed in the conflict.
Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders have condemned ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan’s request for warrants as disgraceful and antisemitic.

US President Joe Biden also blasted the prosecutor and expressed support for Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas. Hamas also slammed the request.

But the ICC said Thursday that Israel's acceptance of the court's jurisdiction was not required.

Israel launched its war against Hamas after militants stormed into southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducting another 250. Around 100 hostages are still inside Gaza, at least a third of whom are believed to be dead. Most of the rest were released during a cease-fire last year.

Health officials in the Gaza Strip said Thursday the death toll from the 13-month-old war has surpassed 44,000.

The Israeli offensive has also caused heavy destruction across wide areas of the coastal territory and displaced 90% of Gaza's population of 2.3 million people.

The court issued a warrant for Mohammed Deif, head of Hamas’ armed wing, over the Oct. 7 attacks that triggered Israel’s offensive in Gaza. It said it found reasonable grounds to believe Deif was involved in murder, rape, torture and the taking of hostages amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Khan withdrew his request for warrants for two other senior Hamas figures, Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh, who have both since been killed. Israel says it also killed Deif in an airstrike, but Hamas has never confirmed his death.

The warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant were issued by a three-judge panel in a unanimous decision.
The panel said there were reasonable grounds to believe they “intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival,” including food, water, medicine, fuel and electricity.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry said in September that it had submitted two legal briefs challenging the ICC’s jurisdiction and arguing that the court did not provide Israel the opportunity to investigate the allegations itself before requesting the warrants.