English

On 20 April 2026, the Lebanese press described a Lebanon suspended from a fragile truce, with destruction in the South, state initiatives, Hezbollah pressure and crucial negotiations in Islamabad. Ormuz, Israel and Washington-Téhéran together shape the precarious balance that still holds the ceasefire in Lebanon today.

The cease-fire in Lebanon is increasingly devoid of its practical scope. Since the night of 20 April, the reported incidents have led to a continuation of Israeli violations, including the destruction of buildings in Chamaa, Naqurah and Bayyada, the attack on Tayri, a house targeted at Borj Qlaouiyah, the low-altitude drones over Tyre, Baalbek, Beirut and the southern suburbs, and the search for two bodies in Qasmiyeh. For the inhabitants, the truce still exists on paper, but it no longer creates a real civilian space.

The major risk for Lebanon is not only an increase in oil if the Ormuz crisis worsens. The main danger is the breakdown of the truce on the Lebanese front. The current ceasefire remains short, fragile and dependent on a regional balance between Washington, Tehran and Israel. If this balance breaks, South Lebanon could once again become a field of military pressure, with displaced people back in wait, a halted reconstruction and a Lebanese state still unable to control tempo alone.

Israel confirms that the soldier striking a statue of Jesus in southern Lebanon is one of his own, reviving the question of sanctions.

In the Gulf, the last few hours have turned an already fragile truce into a phase of acute tension. The reported shootings against merchant ships, the resumption of strict military control in Ormuz and, above all, the seizure of the Iranian cargo ship Touska by the United States weigh heavily on the diplomatic sequence. In Islamabad, Pakistani mediation is not officially dead, but now lacks a clear timetable, while Tehran refuses to validate a new meeting under pressure.

The filmed destruction of a statue of Christ in Deir Siryan deeply shocked Christians in southern Lebanon. But for these border villages, the case far exceeds religious emotion. It adds to a series of tragedies that include the death of Abbé Pierre al-Rahi, the isolation of localities such as Rmeish, Debel and Ain Ebel, as well as the new threat of a return prevented by the yellow line imposed by Israel. It is a Christian presence in the South that is now feeling humiliated, vulnerable and threatened.

The yellow line imposed by Israel in southern Lebanon is already redefining the terms of the ceasefire. Presented as an advanced line of defence, it effectively prohibits the normal return of dozens of localities, maintains an Israeli military presence inside Lebanese territory and increases tension with Hezbollah as with the Lebanese State. Behind the route is the sovereignty, the reconstruction of the South and the future of 100,000 to 150,000 potential displaced persons.

The yellow line imposed by Israel in southern Lebanon threatens UNIFIL's access to its area of operations and is difficult to achieve under resolution 1701. By limiting the freedom of movement of peacekeepers, it undermines the ceasefire, the return of civilians and Lebanese sovereignty.

In Lebanon, corruption does not disappear: it returns in fragments, between the file of the Casino of Lebanon, suspicions about emergency aid and collapse of institutional trust. In the absence of clear judicial closures, each case feeds into a system where opacity, public waste and unfinished responsibilities remain the norm.

Opinion: Lebanon must emerge from a system where war, sacrifice and death serve as political language. The issue is not only safe. It is existential: to rebuild a State capable of protecting, integrating, giving a future and making life credible to all.

In Bkerké, the Maronite Patriarch Bechara Rai gave his homily a clearly political reach. In front of delegations from the South, he denounced a war "imposed", rejected by both the population and the State, and recalled that no lasting peace can be built outside the State framework. His message links the end of the fighting, the return of the displaced, the reconstruction of sovereignty and the need for a negotiated settlement that leaves neither the South nor the State at the margin.

Naim Kassem claims that Hezbollah has not been defeated and rejects any reading of the cease-fire that would put his movement in a backward position. In a text combining military challenge, political openness and denunciation of American mediation, he said he was ready to open a "new page" with the Lebanese state. The issue goes beyond rhetoric: it affects the future role of Hezbollah, the return of displaced persons, reconstruction and the very definition of sovereignty in Lebanon.

With the end of the ceasefire between Washington and Tehran approaching, the signals contradict each other. Pakistan and Iran claim that no date is set for the next round of negotiations, which weakens the idea of a rapid resumption of dialogue. At the same time, a U.S. daily says the U.S. Army is preparing to board Iran-related ships, while Washington continues to show optimism. This combination of diplomatic uncertainty and naval pressure places the truce in its most sensitive hours.

Hezbollah denied any involvement in the attack that claimed the lives of a French UNIFIL soldier in southern Lebanon. This denial, published by the National Information Agency, comes after Emmanuel Macron's accusations and when the Lebanese authorities have multiplied the sentences. Joseph Aoun assured that those responsible would be prosecuted, while Nabih Berri denounced the attack and offered his condolences. The Lebanese military inquiry is now becoming the centrepiece of a security, diplomatic and political affair