LEILA FADEL, HOST:
With a temporary ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon and direct negotiations, is there hope for a lasting peace? The two nations and the region have been here before, only for things to fall apart. To understand the history behind this moment, I spoke to Kim Ghattas. She's a journalist and author who has covered the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy for over 20 years. She's also a visiting professor at Dartmouth College.
KIM GHATTAS: Lebanon is part of the region and part of, historically, the Arab-Israeli conflict. So it's not a separate conflict. It's part of what we're seeing unfold in the region since the creation of Israel in 1948 and the successive wars that we've seen between Israel and several of its neighbors, Lebanon being one of them. But it's important to note that between 1949 and 1969 there was an armistice between Lebanon and Israel, which held for - up until 1969, when an accord was signed, known as the Cairo Agreement, that turned Lebanon into the launchpad of attacks against Israel by the Palestinian Liberation Organization. And the reason why Lebanon became the launchpad is because no other Arab country wanted to be in that role anymore. And then in 1982, the big Israeli invasion, all the way up to Beirut, which eventually led to the eviction of the PLO, gave us the birth of Hezbollah.
FADEL: Let's talk about that. I mean, Hezbollah came to be in 1982. What was happening that created sort of the factors that allowed for this group to be, which is now this very strong paramilitary group in Lebanon?
GHATTAS: The Iranian Revolution of 1979 is what happened just before the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. And the collision of these two inflection points in Middle East history is what created dynamics that have engulfed the region in successive conflicts up until today. Two days after the Israelis invaded Lebanon in June of 1982, Iran sent a contingent of Iranian Revolutionary Guards to Lebanon via Syria to fight Israel, realized it could not do that head-on, would not have the military equipment, etc., and so instead turn to the formation of a group which becomes known as Hezbollah, which is its first export - is the Islamic Republic's first successful - not a judgment value, but a tactical assessment of the success of proxy militias that fight on behalf of Iran in countries far away from Iran's territory.
FADEL: So let's bring it to today. We're in 2026. There are direct negotiations between the Lebanese government and the Israeli government, which we haven't seen in decades. But again, we are seeing condemnation and rejection of these talks by Hezbollah and their supporters. Can this negotiation process be successful without the entirety of Lebanon on board here?
GHATTAS: There are several factors why the chances of success this time, if not for a peace agreement, but at least a security agreement or an armistice agreement, are higher than in 1983, when they came undone. And one of those reasons is the fact that next door to Lebanon, in Syria, there is no longer an Assad regime working hand in hand with Iran and Hezbollah. So that's one. Second, we have a Lebanese president who is strong, a Lebanese prime minister who has a lot of popular support and generally a Lebanese population that is fed up with being stuck between Israel and Iran.
FADEL: Well, how does the general population - I mean, obviously, it's not a monolith, but how does the general population in Lebanon feel?
GHATTAS: I think generally, the mood is one of being fed up with war and fed up of being used as a battleground. I have been surprised by how much support I'm seeing and hearing and reading in the media, but also speaking to people in Beirut, for this initiative by the Lebanese president and the prime minister to engage in negotiations with Israel. And so there is a general feeling of timid hope.
The counterargument, or what some in the Shia community may feel - that there is no one to protect them other than Hezbollah because the Lebanese army is too weak - the counterargument to that is what is happening on the ground, which is that Israel has invaded Lebanon, has destroyed 54 villages in the south of the country, has bombed Beirut and many other places in the country without Hezbollah being able to put an end to that.
FADEL: Israel has made clear that it wants to occupy a part of southern Lebanon more long term to create what it calls a security buffer zone. Is that something that the U.S. should endorse as, you know, sort of a path to a peace plan?
GHATTAS: No Lebanese will accept that - that there should be yet again a buffer zone in southern Lebanon, as we've seen in the past with Israeli-occupied territory for 18 years in southern Lebanon - people unable to return to their homes, unable to rebuild their houses. That is actually a scenario that will give Hezbollah renewed raison d'etre as resistance against occupation. There may not be an immediate Israeli withdrawal from south Lebanon, but it has to be part of the negotiation.
FADEL: Does Hezbollah have to be part of any type of lasting peace plan in the sense that, yes, it is backed by Iran, it has done some of Iran's bidding, but it is a group that is Lebanese and has backing from parts of Lebanon society, is part of the government, is in the Parliament? How do you ultimately disarm a group while continuing to say the Lebanese that supported this group are still part of Lebanon?
GHATTAS: You neutralize their raison d'etre. That is the best approach. And the best way to neutralize Hezbollah's raison d'etre is to come to an agreement with Israel that allows people from south Lebanon to go back to their villages to rebuild and keeps peace on both sides of that border.
FADEL: Kim Ghattas is a journalist and author and a visiting professor at Dartmouth College. Thank you so much for your time and your insights.
GHATTAS: Thanks for having me.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR鈥檚 programming is the audio record.
