Mahmoud Qmati, deputy chief of Hezbollah's political council, said the party will pursue diplomacy aimed at Israeli withdrawal but will respond firmly to any new Israeli military advance.
Hezbollah has decided to give the political process a chance to achieve Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, according to Mahmoud Qmati, deputy chief of the party's political council. At the same time, Qmati stressed that the party will respond with a firm stance to any attempt at renewed Israeli military progress. His remarks come as diplomatic efforts continue to address the situation in southern Lebanon, including negotiations over ceasefire mechanisms and the terms of any Israeli pullout.
Qmati said Hezbollah is studying all options relating to the Tal al-Tahir file, indicating that this issue remains under review as conditions evolve both militarily and politically in the south. The file has been a point of contention in discussions over territorial arrangements and the final status of disputed areas between Lebanon and Israel.
On the question of Iranian fighters in Hezbollah's ranks in southern Lebanon, Qmati denied the presence of any Iranian combatants within the party's formations in the region. The denial addresses repeated claims by Israel and others about the extent of Iranian military involvement in Hezbollah operations south of the Litani River.
Regarding potential contact with the United States, Qmati indicated that Hezbollah has not closed the door completely on the possibility of direct communication with Washington. He cited the range of pending issues and the accelerating pace of political developments as reasons the party remains open to such engagement. The statement suggests a shift from earlier positions in which the party rejected dialogue with the Americans as a matter of principle.
The political track focused on southern Lebanon continues to move forward through various channels. Discussions are centred on mechanisms to consolidate any ceasefire, secure Israeli withdrawal, and resolve outstanding disputes through diplomatic means. The pace of these talks has quickened as pressure mounts from regional and international actors to stabilize the situation.
Hezbollah's decision to prioritize diplomacy reflects the costs of the military conflict and the reality of Israeli military capabilities arrayed against it. At the same time, the party's insistence on reserving the right to respond to any renewed Israeli offensive preserves its deterrent posture and keeps leverage in the negotiations. The balance struck between these two positions will shape the terms any agreement might take.
The Tal al-Tahir issue remains one of the more complex questions in the broader negotiations. Hezbollah's statement that it is still studying options suggests the party has not yet settled on a final position, leaving room for movement as talks progress. The fate of this territory could affect both the credibility of any ceasefire and the broader military balance between the parties.
What happens next depends on whether the political process can deliver terms both sides can accept. For Hezbollah, the test will be whether diplomacy produces a sustainable Israeli withdrawal and recognition of Lebanese sovereignty. For Israel, the question is whether any agreement can ensure the security of its northern communities without continuing military operations.
The coming weeks will show whether the current diplomatic moment can narrow the gap between the parties or whether military pressure will resume. Hezbollah's willingness to talk does not mean a deal is at hand, and the fundamental issues that triggered the conflict remain unresolved. How each side interprets the other's commitment to the process will largely determine whether this opening leads to a lasting settlement or breaks down.
