Afrasianet - Laila Takola - After the new U.S. administration takes office, it will be in the interest of the Americans to pressure Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon, in order to consolidate the political gains they want to achieve through the ceasefire agreement.

Despite the passage of a month since the signing of the ceasefire agreement, sponsored by the United States of America, to stop the war on the Lebanon front, Israeli violations and violations are increasing, so the occupation army penetrates into villages and areas that it did not reach during the war, blowing up houses and bulldozing, and taking revenge on southern villages and towns, which have a painful history and memory for the Israelis.

An Israeli entry into Wadi al-Hujair, known during the July 2006 war, was the site where Israel's "Merkava massacre" was recorded, before the Israeli army withdrew again after placing earth mounds between Wadi al-Hujair and Wadi al-Saluki. After the intervention of the committee guaranteeing the agreement, the occupation "army" withdrew, and the Lebanese army, which conducted patrols in the area, deployed.

The Israeli media talked about the intention of "Israel" to delay its withdrawal from southern Lebanon, after the sixty-day deadline, the newspaper "Yedioth Ahronoth", quoting sources, that "the Israeli army does not deal with the date set for withdrawal from Lebanon as a sacred date."

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that the Israeli occupation army intends to remain in southern Lebanon after the expiration of the sixty-day deadline stipulated in the ceasefire agreement, which entered into force on November 27.

Israeli military sources said that staying in Lebanon was linked to "the inability of the Lebanese army to fulfill its obligations, contained in the agreement, by extending its control over the entire south." The newspaper added that  the Israeli army has begun laying the infrastructure to establish military posts along the northern border, noting that some points will be established on the Lebanese side of the border.

What will be the consequences of Israel's failure to withdraw from Lebanon?

The ceasefire agreement in Lebanon stipulated that the Lebanese state – through its various security forces – monopolizes the possession, use and production of weapons in Lebanon, and that there should be strict enforcement of Resolution 1701, which talks about the absence of weapons outside the framework of Lebanese legitimacy, in the southern Litani area.

Hezbollah agreed to the understanding, which sets out the mechanisms by which the UN resolution will be implemented. However, the continued presence of the Israeli occupation army in Lebanese territory will make it impossible to implement the ceasefire agreement on the exclusive arms and the absence of resistance in those areas, based on the right of the Lebanese to self-determination and their right to liberate their occupied territories through all available means.
 
Legal

The right of peoples to resist occupation and liberate the land has been affirmed in international conventions and resolutions, as well as in all divine laws, which speak of the right to self-defense.

International law recognized the right to resist occupation in the context of the right to self-determination of all peoples under foreign and colonial rule, a peremptory principle of international law.

Although UN General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, they reflect international legal opinion on a matter, as do advisory opinions and decisions of the International Court of Justice. Accordingly, among the most important United Nations resolutions that affirmed the right to resist, we mention, but are not limited to, the following:

- United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (1974), affirmed the right to self-determination, liberty and independence of all "peoples subject to colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination" and affirmed "the right of these peoples to struggle for this end, to seek and to receive support".

-  United Nations General Assembly resolution 37/43 (1982), which affirmed the legitimacy of "the struggle of peoples for liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation, through all available means, including armed struggle".

On the other hand, international humanitarian law expanded its recognition of the "right of resistance" and the "right to use force against occupation", especially in Protocol I Additional (1977) to the Fourth Geneva Convention (1948), so that the Protocol recognized that its provisions apply to "armed conflicts, in which peoples fight against colonial domination and foreign occupation, and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right to self-determination", which gave legal legitimacy to resort to force and weapons (without prejudice to the basic principles of international humanitarian law). Within the framework of the right of peoples to struggle against domination, colonialism and the liberation of the occupied territory.

politically

In the calculations of political profit and loss in Lebanon, keeping the "army" of occupation soldiers or centers inside Lebanon will crowd American allies inside Lebanon and embarrass any future Lebanese government, so that it will not be able to prevent the Lebanese from exercising one of their legitimate rights, which is to "liberate the land and resist the occupation."

No international party, except the United States, can impose on Israel the obligation of a ceasefire and withdrawal from Lebanese territory. However, this current administration (Joe Biden's administration) is not expected to exert any pressure on the Israelis in this regard, as it has either completely surrendered to what Netanyahu wants, or is his partner.

After the new US administration takes office, it will be in the interest of the Americans to pressure Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon, in order to consolidate the political gains they want to achieve through the ceasefire agreement and the political settlement they are making.

Any Israeli occupation (of any part of Lebanese territory, whatever its size) will restore the legislation of Lebanese resistance action, and thus restore things to previous periods, where the Lebanese resisted Israel and expelled the Israeli army from Lebanon, after inflicting heavy losses.