Pilot zone: Israel fire near Lebanese Army

The Lebanese army accused Israeli forces of having opened fire near its units during their deployment to Zutr al-Gharbiyah, Nabatiyah district. The incident occurred on Tuesday, 21 July, when the Lebanese military entered the locality after the announcement of an Israeli withdrawal. Zutr el-Gharbiyé is one of three villages selected to launch the pilot areas programme in southern Lebanon, with Fron and Srifa. The Army Command believes that Israeli fire may directly impede the implementation of this mechanism. It should allow for the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces, followed by the deployment of the Lebanese army, the security of the localities and the return of the inhabitants. The incident, however, revealed the gap between the political agreement and the military situation on the ground from day one.

Israeli fire during army entrance

The Lebanese Army command announced that Israeli forces had fired near its units at the time of their deployment to Zutr al-Gharbiyé. He described the assault incident as likely to hinder the planned stages in the pilot areas.

The army did not report any death or injury in its statement. It did not specify the nature of the weapons used, the number of firings or the exact distance between the impact and Lebanese soldiers.

The absence of a victim does not reduce the scope of the incident. Lebanese units were entering an area whose transfer was to have been coordinated with Israeli forces, under the supervision of the Lebanese Military Coordination Group.

The shots show that the relay passage was not completely secure. They exposed Lebanese soldiers to the risk of direct confrontation with an army that had just announced its withdrawal from the locality.

The initial information available does not indicate whether the deployment was interrupted. They also do not indicate whether the Israeli forces provided an explanation to the American mediators or the military mechanism responsible for supervising the operation.

The incident occurred when the deployment of Zutr el-Gharbiyah was to be the first visible application of the agreement reached under American mediation. It transforms this step into an immediate test for the parties’ ability to respect agreed movements. (Reuters)

Zutr el-Gharbiyé, first town taken over

On Tuesday morning, Lebanese Army units began entering Zutr al-Gharbiyah after the announced withdrawal of Israeli forces. The soldiers were to take a position, inspect the roads and search for unexploded ordnance.

The army asked the inhabitants not to return immediately to the village. The purpose of this instruction is to allow engineering teams time to examine buildings, terrain and traffic routes.

The danger remains significant in a locality marked by shelling and ground operations. Shells, mines or other devices may be found in homes, roads or agricultural land.

According to the president of the municipality, more than half of the village was destroyed. The inhabitants must therefore wait for both the end of military inspections and an initial assessment of the condition of the dwellings.

The Lebanese deployment does not yet mean that the area is open to civilians. It is the first step in a process that must include securing, clearing, restoring services and preparing for return.

The situation remains complicated by the Israeli presence in neighbouring areas. Zutr el-Sharqiyah, located on one of the main access routes, remains at the heart of local concerns. Municipal officials had already warned that a safe return to Zutr al-Gharbiyah would remain difficult as long as Israeli forces controlled the surrounding roads.

A pilot area launched in three villages

On Monday, 20 July, the United States announced the start of pilot operations in Fron, Srifa and Zutr el-Gharbiyé. These localities are to serve as the first application of the framework agreement signed on 26 June.

The programme envisages a phased Israeli withdrawal. The Lebanese Armed Forces must deploy in parallel in the evacuated areas and exercise exclusive security control.

It must also search for weapons and infrastructure belonging to non-State groups. This aspect directly concerns Hezbollah, even though the movement did not participate in the agreement and rejects it.

Once Lebanese control is verified, the inhabitants must be able to return. The reconstruction work must then begin with international support.

The device concerns a space heavily destroyed south of the Litani. Dozens of villages have suffered major damage and tens of thousands of inhabitants remain displaced.

Fron and Srifa have a different situation than Zutr el-Gharbiyé. The Lebanese Army was already present in these two localities before the official announcement of the launch of the pilot zones.

In Zutr al-Gharbiyah, the deployment depended directly on an Israeli withdrawal. The locality is therefore the first real test of the transfer of control provided for by the agreement.

The first test immediately turns to the incident

The programme was to show that Israeli forces could leave an area and allow the Lebanese army to enter without confrontation. The shots reported on Tuesday weaken this demonstration.

The problem is not only the risk to the soldiers. It concerns the reliability of military coordination. The timetables, roads and positions had to be known to the parties.

If the Israeli units were unaware of the arrival of the Lebanese army, the mechanism suffered a serious failure. If they knew about this movement, the shots appear as an attempt to intimidate or obstruct.

In both cases, the incident requires clarification. The Military Coordination Unit must establish the location of the forces, the origin of the fire and the reason why they were triggered.

Lebanon must also be assured that its units will be able to continue their missions without being targeted. Without this guarantee, each new deployment will expose soldiers to a similar incident.

Pilot zones are based on a series of verified steps. Inaccuracy on an uncoordinated map or movement is enough to delay the entire calendar.

The Zutr al-Gharbiyah incident is therefore not an operational detail. It directly affects the mechanism chosen to extend Lebanese State control in the South.

An Israeli presence still extended in the South

Pilot zones concern only a limited part of the occupied territory. Israel maintains its forces in a band that it presents as a security zone about ten kilometres deep along the border.

Lebanon calls for a complete withdrawal and considers this presence an occupation. Israel claims that it will not leave the territory as long as Hezbollah retains its weapons and military infrastructure.

This divergence remains at the heart of the negotiations. Beirut wants the Israeli withdrawal to allow its army to deploy. Israel wants to condition its withdrawal on the results achieved against Hezbollah.

The pilot areas try to reconcile these two positions through gradual implementation. A locality is transferred, inspected and placed under the control of the Lebanese Army.

The process must then be replicated in other sectors. However, no full Israeli withdrawal schedule has been made public.

The presence of Israeli forces near Zutr al-Gharbiyah already limits the scope of the transfer. The Lebanese army can control the interior of the village while remaining exposed to units on nearby heights or roads.

This situation has partial sovereignty. It allows Israel to leave a locality while maintaining the ability to intervene militarily in its immediate environment.

The deployment related to Joseph Aoun’s visit

The incident occurred on the day of the scheduled meeting between Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and his US counterpart Donald Trump in Washington.

This visit gives the deployment a strong diplomatic dimension. Joseph Aoun is seeking American pressure for an Israeli withdrawal and increased support for the Lebanese army.

The White House wants to present the pilot zones as the beginning of a concrete application of the agreement signed in June.

The deployment to Zutr el-Gharbiyé was therefore to provide a first result at the time of the meeting between the two Presidents.

Israeli fire complicates this message. They show that the withdrawal is not proceeding smoothly and that the Lebanese army remains exposed even when it applies the Washington-supported mechanism.

Joseph Aoun can use this incident to ask for more stringent guarantees. In particular, he may demand more direct American control over Israeli schedules, maps and movements.

The Lebanese president must also obtain additional resources for the army. Deployment to destroyed villages requires engineering teams, demining equipment, vehicles and monitoring capabilities.

The meeting in Washington comes at a time when the credibility of the programme depends less on political statements than on the real security of the soldiers on the ground.

The return of the inhabitants remains suspended

The inhabitants of Zutr el-Gharbiyé cannot yet return freely. The army must first complete its inspections and confirm that the roads are practicable.

Destruction makes this work difficult. Buildings can collapse, while unexploded ordnance can remain hidden under rubble.

Electricity, water and telecommunications must also be restored. A military presence is not enough to make the village habitable.

Israeli fire adds additional uncertainty. The inhabitants can hardly consider the area safe if the national army itself reports fire near its units.

The pilot programme was to combine security, return and reconstruction. A blocked or limited deployment therefore delays all other steps.

Municipal teams cannot undertake important work as long as movements remain dangerous. Companies and humanitarian organizations also need guarantees.

The return will depend mainly on the situation on the roads between Zutr el-Gharbiyeh and Nabatiyah and neighbouring villages. As long as these routes remain exposed to Israeli forces, the inhabitants may be able to make only short visits.

The first indicator of success will therefore not be the photograph of Lebanese soldiers in the village. It will be the sustainable return of families and the reopening of services.

Fron and Srifa also concerned

The other two pilot localities, Fron and Srifa, are in a situation less directly related to an immediate Israeli withdrawal.

The Lebanese Army already has positions and is conducting patrols. The operations announced must above all strengthen its control and allow for wider inspections.

Fron has approximately 2,200 inhabitants and has suffered considerable destruction. Local authorities estimate that the damage is about 80 per cent of the village.

Srifa, more populated, has nearly 12,000 inhabitants. More than 300 dwellings were reported to have been completely destroyed, while the majority of buildings were damaged.

In these two villages, the pilot zone must now show what it brings in relation to the already existing army presence.

The inhabitants are awaiting reconstruction work, road rehabilitation and guarantees against further strikes.

The Zutr al-Gharbiyah incident may affect their situation. If the mechanism is suspended to review the security situation, operations in Fron and Srifa could also slow down.

The programme is based on a coordinated package. Blockage in the most sensitive locality may therefore delay the three areas.

The question of Hezbollah remains central

The agreement provides for the Lebanese Army to search for and seize weapons held by non-State groups in pilot areas.

This mission focuses on Hezbollah. Israel views disarmament as an essential condition for any lasting withdrawal.

The Shiite movement rejects the agreement with Israel and challenges the direct or indirect negotiations conducted by the Lebanese government.

This opposition creates another source of tension. The army must deploy against Israel while implementing a mechanism that requires it to act against Hezbollah’s infrastructure.

Tuesday’s incident may weaken the government’s position. Opponents of the programme can argue that Israel demands the disarmament of Hezbollah while continuing to threaten the Lebanese army.

Beirut must therefore show that the obligations are reciprocal. The Lebanese army cannot be the only party required to produce verifiable results.

Every Israeli withdrawal must be real, complete in the area concerned and accompanied by a stoppage of fire. Otherwise, the government will find it difficult to defend the program before public opinion.

The incident thus strengthens the link between the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons and that of the Israeli occupation. Both files remain intertwined despite the American willingness to deal with them in stages.

What the incident changes immediately

The first effect concerns the security of deployment. The Lebanese army must check whether its units can continue their movements without further firing.

The second concerns coordination. The mediators must summon the military representatives and reconstitute precisely the course of the incident.

The third concerns the calendar. Any delay in Zutr el-Gharbiyé could delay the entry of the demining teams and the return of the inhabitants.

The fourth concerns the next areas. No new transfers can be considered safe until the rules applied on Tuesday have been corrected.

The fifth effect is political. President Joseph Aoun now has a concrete example to ask Washington to ensure that Israeli commitments are respected.

The incident can also alter the perception of the program in Lebanon. Presented as a step towards sovereignty, pilot areas may appear as areas where Israel retains a capacity for intervention.

The American response will therefore be followed closely. A simple call for calm would not meet the concerns of the Lebanese army.

Washington will have to determine whether the fire is a violation of the mechanism and what measures will be taken to prevent its recurrence.

A mechanism now tried on the facts

The launch of the pilot zones was to open a new phase in the South Lebanon. On the first day, the mechanism was confronted with the question that it had to solve precisely: how to organize a real Israeli withdrawal without exposing the Lebanese army?

Zutr el-Gharbiyé is officially the first town transferred. The Lebanese army has begun its deployment and security operations there.

But Israeli fire shows that control of the area is not yet fully established. A foreign force remains able to intervene in the vicinity of national units.

The next few hours will have to determine whether the incident is closed or whether it results in a suspension of deployment.

The Lebanese command will also need to clarify whether its troops have reached all positions and whether the engineering teams can continue their inspections.

Mediators will be required to announce the results of their audit. Without a clear answer, pilot areas may lose their credibility even before they are extended.

The first test will therefore no longer focus solely on Israeli withdrawal or the search for weapons. It will address the possibility for the Lebanese army to enter a Lebanese village without firing.

In Zutr al-Gharbiyah, the immediate follow-up now depends on three concrete elements: continued deployment, secure roads and an Israeli commitment not to open fire near Lebanese units.