Achieving a sustainable and durable peace in the Levant region seems quite a hard nut to crack. This region has been a victim of turmoil and instability since decades, owing to either personal ambitions of stakeholders or foreign involvement and occupation; directly or indirectly. The recent ceasefire that came into effect on November 27, 2024, is a hard-earned effort after a 13-months old border conflict and bloodshed that spiraled into an all-out-war between Hezbullah and Israeli forces in Southern Lebanon.  Following destruction and appalling suffering of Gaza, Lebanon became second on hit-list of Israel. The ceasefire in Lebanon, though brokered by international committee but vulnerable to Israel’s expansionism, questions its longevity and durability in the face of already occurring ceasefire violations. In any case, if the fragility of ceasefire remains there, then what efforts should pave the way out of this conflict?

The recently brokered truce between Hezbollah and Israel marks a critical juncture in Lebanon’s prolonged conflict. The deal is based on UN Resolution 1701 that ended last war between the same rivals in 2006. The deal entails that there will be a 60-day cessation of hostilities, if it remains a success, it will become foundation of lasting ceasefire. According to this peace deal, Hezbullah fighters will retreat to approximately 40km while Israel will pull out its troops from Lebanese territory. It also holds that Lebanese government will show rigorous supervision of Hezbullah’s movement and curtail its regrouping in the territory. Nevertheless, Israel will act stringently if Hezbullah violates the ceasefire, but to whom Israel will be accountable, is uncertain.

The ceasefire in Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel surfaced mainly from strategic exhaustion on both sides. For Hezbollah, the sustained Israeli bombardments inflicted severe damage to its leadership and operational capacities, alongside devastating effects on Lebanese civilian areas. This weakened Hezbollah’s resolve to continue the fight particularly given the mounting humanitarian and economic crises in Lebanon. As for Israel, it has drawn criticism from international media and human rights watchdogs for its inhumane practices in Gaza and Lebanon, faced rising military casualties in ground operations and increasing economic costs from prolonged conflict. The pressure to stabilize northern Israel and refocus on other threats, such as from Iran, further motivated its willingness to negotiate.

International diplomacy played a decisive role in securing the ceasefire. Both parties were also influenced by international diplomatic pressure with the U.S. and France leveraging their influence to push for the agreement as part of regional stabilization efforts. The immense humanitarian toll, with over 1.4 million displaced in Lebanon and significant destruction of infrastructure, added to global calls for immediate cessation of violence. Moreover, international stakeholders including the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) emphasized the need for a pause to prevent the conflict from drawing in other actors like Hamas or escalating into a wider regional war. This convergence of domestic and international pressures created the environment for a temporary halt in hostilities. However, both sides remain deeply skeptical of the other’s intentions as violations of ceasefire are persistent from both sides thus, making its long-term viability uncertain.

If the truce between Hezbollah and Israel sustains, it could lead to a period of stability in southern Lebanon, which might bring some ease to Gaza as well while allowing displaced populations to return and reducing the humanitarian toll. This stability might also enable the Lebanese government to assert greater control over its territory potentially curbing Hezbollah’s unchecked influence. However, a collapse could reignite hostilities with severe regional spillovers and involve more actors like Iran and Hamas. Also, the economic and humanitarian crises in Lebanon would worsen which would potentially destabilize neighboring Levant states including Syria and Jordan and complicating ongoing peace efforts in Gaza.

The Lebanon-Israel ceasefire is a time of hope but it is also a time to see whether regional and international actors are capable of shifting their perspective from the vested political interests. Many challenges are its way, but a united and integrated strategy shows a way not only to save Lebanon but also to promote the creation of a more stable Middle East. If this window is missed the consequences will reverberate for decades across a region that is already on the brink. The implications and the possibilities are as high as they can get.

The way-out of this conflict is simple yet complicated. The involvement and invasion of foreign entities in the matters of states should stop in middle east now. It has taken a huge toll on human lives, toppled the region’s security and socio-economic condtions, but as mentioned, it is complicated, due to vested interests of the stakeholders. It is nearly impossible to hold this ceasefire for quite a long time, especially when the aggressor is Israel but efforts to de-escalate the conflict is a must. The international community must also maintain active involvement with robust mechanisms for monitoring ceasefire compliance and holding violators accountable. UNIFIL and human rights organizations could provide the neutral oversight needed to prevent immediate escalations. Regional stakeholders including Gulf states and Turkey should also play their constructive roles in mediating between Iran-backed Hezbollah and Israel, recognizing the mutual benefits of a stable Lebanon. Lastly, efforts to decouple the Lebanon-Israel conflict from Middle Eastern rivalries such as the Iran-Israel axis will be essential for sustaining peace.