A preparatory meeting for an international conference on military aid to Lebanon is scheduled for 16 and 17 September, as officials debate how strengthened armed forces could affect negotiations over the southern border.
A Lebanese ministerial source denied any connection between the preparatory meeting for the military support conference and the next round of negotiations in Rome, saying the September gathering is scheduled independently of the diplomatic track. The date of the Rome round has not yet been set.
Parliamentary foreign affairs committee chairman Fadi Allama said military support is now an urgent priority, particularly given potential gaps in the south if the UN peacekeeping force UNIFIL reduces or ends its presence. He stressed that Lebanese demands centre on maintaining and reinvigorating UNIFIL, but noted that if there is international movement toward scaling back UNIFIL operations, Lebanon must know the alternatives and provide serious support to enable the army to assume new responsibilities.
Allama emphasised that relying on the military must be accompanied by concrete and tangible support, not merely conferences and initiatives. The army needs actual capabilities to carry out additional tasks it may be assigned.
Allama said Rome negotiations have shown no positive results or clear progress so far, and suggested delays may be linked to regional developments or other factors.
A political source familiar with the negotiations argued that results from the military support track could strengthen Lebanon's position in future Rome talks, since building up the army's capacities directly affects what it can accomplish in the south.
The source said Lebanon's approach rests on the argument that the military is ready to fulfil its duties but needs the means to do so, and that any support provided will translate into actual capability. Holding the military support conference before Rome could serve as leverage, the source added, since Lebanon would enter Rome negotiations with clarity about what the army can actually do in the south.
Paris-based professor Mohieddine Al-Shehimi offered a broader view, framing the relationship between the two tracks not as a matter of sequencing but as turning on Lebanon's capacity to move from negotiating principles to implementing commitments on the ground.
Al-Shehimi said the real issue is whether Lebanon has the executive capacity and international backing to advance based on facts on the ground. He described a shared process involving Rome, Paris and other capitals seeking solutions to Lebanon's crisis, rather than viewing the military as a gateway to the eighth round of negotiations.
He argued that the military is a legitimate institution but not a political authority, rather a tool of the executive branch that makes decisions and assigns tasks.
The next phase requires more than traditional military support, Al-Shehimi said. It demands building an operational framework that moves from negotiating principles to negotiating implementation, especially in the south, where questions arise about verification mechanisms, pilot zones, army deployment and the scope of its role.
International actors want to understand three things, Al-Shehimi said: the army's capacity for monitoring, border control and movement; the nature of tasks required, especially preventing weapons outside state institutions and securing specific areas; and the political price, since higher levels of international support raise expectations of both the army and the state.
Success in the next phase requires Lebanese institutions capable of honouring their commitments while three interdependent elements materialise in the south: Israeli withdrawal from occupied villages, army deployment to the international border, and the launch of reconstruction efforts.
