Sohaib Jawhar

The announcement of the Lebanon–Israel Framework Agreement in June 2026 did not constitute merely another negotiating round in the long-standing conflict between the two countries. Rather, it reflected a significant shift in the strategic approach adopted by both the United States and Israel toward Lebanon. The document was not conceived simply as an instrument to consolidate a ceasefire or establish…

The U.S.–Iranian understanding announced under Pakistani sponsorship has reopened the door to a new political phase in the Middle East. However, the Lebanese arena quickly emerged as the first practical test of this understanding’s ability to endure and translate into realities on the ground. While the agreement was expected to reduce tensions across the various fronts linked to the U.S.–Iran…

The Lebanese-Israeli negotiations have entered, after the third round, an entirely different phase from anything Lebanon has experienced since the April 1996 Understanding and the arrangements that followed the July 2006 war. The issue is no longer confined to localized security arrangements or the management of limited confrontations along the southern border. Instead, it has become part of a broader…

Lebanon today does not appear to be standing at the threshold of a political settlement so much as it is embedded within an intensive phase of crisis management—one in which balances are being carefully regulated to prevent explosion, while the conditions for a genuine resolution remain absent. The intersecting political and field-level indicators suggest that the key regional and international…

The announcement by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of the launch of direct negotiations with Lebanon, in parallel with U.S. efforts to convene a preparatory meeting in Washington, marked a turning point in the course of the ongoing war. It shifted the Lebanese file from the framework of open military confrontation to the threshold of an unstable negotiating track. This…

In a development that reveals the scale of transformation underway in the Lebanese file, the discussion is no longer confined to how to contain the war or mitigate its repercussions. It has shifted to a deeper level concerning the redefinition of Lebanon’s regional position, the limits of its actual sovereignty, and the shape of the internal balance possible amid the…

The ongoing war in Lebanon can no longer be understood as a limited military round between Israel and Hezbollah, nor even as a subsidiary extension of the U.S.–Israeli confrontation with Iran. Recent developments indicate that the conflict has shifted to a new level, where immediate military objectives are intertwined with broader strategic stakes related to reshaping Lebanon’s strategic environment and…

The ongoing escalation on Lebanon is no longer a security event that can be managed through the conventional tools the state has relied on in previous phases. The open confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah, occurring alongside the broader war on Iran, not only signals Lebanon’s transition into a more dangerous field phase, but also reveals the country’s entry into a…

The issue of parliamentary elections in Lebanon at the present moment does not appear to be a crisis of the electoral law or a problem related to a special district for expatriates as much as it appears to be a crisis of political timing within a turbulent regional context. The debate surrounding the sixteenth district (related to the election of…

The executive order issued by U.S. President Donald Trump[1] designating the Muslim Brotherhood-including its Lebanese branch-as a terrorist organization represents a pivotal moment in Washington’s approach to political Islam in the Middle East. The decision goes beyond immediate security considerations, reflecting a broader shift in the United States’ assessment of the role of Islamist movements in fragile environments, their connections…