\n
![](\"https:\/\/en.hamsonews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/5759566.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
BEIRUT \u2014 The recent talk of a \u201cnegotiation option\u201d announced by President Joseph Aoun has reignited one of Lebanon\u2019s most dangerous debates, that of normalization disguised as pragmatism.\u00a0<\/p>\n
His remarks came precisely as the Israeli enemy escalated its rhetoric to the highest level since 2006, while U.S. envoy Tom Barrack openly warned that any refusal to negotiate could \u201clead to civil conflict or a devastating Israeli offensive.\u201d<\/p>\n
In this tense context, Aoun\u2019s call to \u201cend the farce by picking up the phone and negotiating with the Israeli enemy\u201d sounded less like statesmanship and more like submission under duress.<\/p>\n
What the president and his entourage present as \u201crealism\u201d is, in fact, the abandonment of the deterrence equation that has protected Lebanon for nearly two decades.\u00a0<\/p>\n
By placing the resistance and the Israeli enemy on equal footing \u2014 both supposedly \u201cexhausted\u201d and \u201cready for compromise\u201d \u2014 Aoun dangerously undermines the very balance that has prevented open war.\u00a0<\/p>\n
His rhetoric echoes Western narratives portraying resistance as a burden rather than a shield.<\/p>\n
Reports confirm that Washington was quick to reprimand Aoun after his call for the army to \u201cconfront Israeli aggression.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Americans made their position explicit: the Lebanese army must not engage the Israeli enemy. Its mission, in their eyes, is to contain Hezbollah.\u00a0<\/p>\n
This exposes the real hierarchy of U.S. priorities \u2014 disarm the resistance, pacify the border, and secure Israel\u2019s northern front, all under the illusion of \u201cinternational obligations.\u201d<\/p>\n
Simultaneously, diplomatic efforts led by American and Egyptian envoys, including Barrack and General Hassan Rashad, are intensifying in Beirut.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Their proposal for \u201cdirect negotiations under international auspices\u201d excludes one essential condition \u2014 a ceasefire. Negotiations under fire are not diplomacy; they are coercion.<\/p>\n
The aim is to push Lebanon into a dialogue of surrender, not of sovereignty.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the Israeli press has been instrumental in shaping the pretext for escalation. Outlets like Maariv and Kan emphasize Hezbollah\u2019s \u201crecovery\u201d and the \u201crebuilding of the Radwan Force,\u201d suggesting that Israel is being provoked into preventive action.\u00a0<\/p>\n
This rhetoric, calibrated with Washington\u2019s political messaging, serves as psychological warfare to justify limited strikes, sustain public fear, and pressure Beirut into compliance.<\/p>\n
Washington\u2019s script and Lebanon\u2019s crisis of leadership<\/strong><\/p>\n Behind this orchestrated drama lies a broader U.S.-Israeli maneuver: to redraw the post-Gaza regional map by neutralizing Lebanon\u2019s resistance.\u00a0 When Barrack insists that \u201cdisarming Hezbollah is a prerequisite for peace,\u201d he merely repeats the Israeli regime\u2019s narrative in American diction.<\/p>\n President Aoun, meanwhile, appears motivated by personal and political calculations. By floating the notion of negotiation, he seeks to secure a legacy of \u201cstatesmanship\u201d at the end of his term, even if it means undermining Lebanon\u2019s last tool of deterrence.\u00a0<\/p>\n This opportunism, however, has isolated Aoun from his allies in the Free Patriotic Movement and deepened mistrust with resistance factions that view his rhetoric as a betrayal of national principles.<\/p>\n Speaker Nabih Berri has tried to moderate the discourse, calling for \u201ccessation of attacks before any talks.\u201d Yet even his cautionary tone reveals the corner into which Lebanon has been pushed: between the hammer of U.S. sanctions and the anvil of Israeli threats.<\/p>\n Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, for his part, projects the posture of a \u201cbalanced mediator,\u201d but his government lacks both the political authority and the economic stability to withstand the intense foreign pressure tied to \u201cconditional reforms\u201d and financial aid.<\/p>\n The deeper tragedy is that Lebanon\u2019s leadership seems trapped in a psychological dependency on Western legitimacy.\u00a0<\/p>\n Instead of reinforcing internal unity, it seeks validation from the very powers enabling Israel\u2019s aggression. The so-called \u201cnegotiation track\u201d is not a sovereign initiative. Rather, it is a managed path toward forced normalization.<\/p>\n Israel has never been swayed by diplomatic overtures or UN resolutions. It only understands the language of resistance and deterrence through strength and steadfastness. As Israeli jets continue to violate Lebanese airspace daily, it becomes clearer that peace cannot be negotiated from a position of submission.
Exhausted militarily, Israel seeks a symbolic political victory in Lebanon \u2014 a victory that Washington intends to translate into regional \u201cstability\u201d by integrating Lebanon into a security framework that benefits Tel Aviv.\u00a0<\/p>\n
For Lebanon, the true illusion is not in the promise of diplomacy, but in believing that the same forces undermining its sovereignty can guarantee its peace. Negotiation without power is not peace, it is surrender scripted in foreign capitals.
\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n