Israel pushes region toward broader war as US rejects UK and France ceasefire call

The US has thwarted an attempt by France and the UK to secure a 21-day ceasefire in Lebanon at the UN Security Council, presumably to protect Israel from an equivalence of blame, with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken asserting that Israel faces a legitimate security threat from Hezbollah’s ongoing rocket attacks, amid Israel’s announcement of a ground offensive.

Washington has been reluctant to support language that could suggest an equivalence of blame for the escalating crisis in Lebanon, which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds. The Biden administration is keen to avoid framing that implies shared responsibility between Israel and Hezbollah for the violence, particularly in the wake of rocket fire from Hezbollah into Israel following a major attack by Hamas on Israel on 7 October.

Blinken's position has aligned with the US reluctance to endorse any ceasefire in Lebanon that could impede Israel's military efforts against Hezbollah. While diplomats initially hoped that a consensus could be reached on a joint Security Council statement, those hopes were fading as it became clear that an agreement was unlikely.

In response to the escalating situation, the United Kingdom and France have issued a call for a 21-day temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. This ceasefire, they argue, is necessary to create space for broader diplomatic negotiations.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres also expressed concern over the deteriorating situation in Lebanon, describing the conditions as catastrophic during a meeting with the Security Council.

Despite these calls, Israel's military leadership has indicated that it is preparing for a possible ground operation in Lebanon, following three days of intense bombing that has left more than 600 people dead. The prospect of a regional conflict has become increasingly alarming as the violence continues.

The temporary ceasefire proposed by the UK and France has gained the backing of several countries, including Australia, Canada, the European Union, Germany, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. The call for de-escalation aims to allow civilians to return to their homes in both Israel and Lebanon.

US President Joe Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron, who met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, have emphasised the need for diplomacy to succeed in averting further conflict. Both leaders have underscored that the ceasefire does not extend to the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, highlighting the distinct nature of the violence in different parts of the region.

However, there are significant obstacles to achieving a ceasefire. The US remains sensitive to Israeli concerns, particularly around any language that could be seen as hindering its military objectives against Hezbollah.

Diplomatic sources have indicated that the US has been working on a more complex proposal that addresses Israeli concerns while also aiming for de-escalation in Lebanon. During a round of television interviews, Blinken refrained from explicitly calling for a ceasefire in Lebanon, instead focusing on the need for a diplomatic agreement that could enable displaced civilians to return home.

Tensions were also evident during discussions among G7 leaders, where France and the United Kingdom publicly called for a ceasefire to halt the fighting. These calls reflect growing international concern over the potential for the violence to spread across the region.

The situation in Lebanon has been further complicated by Hezbollah’s demands, which include a ceasefire in Gaza as a precondition for ending its own military actions. This stance has been a significant roadblock in negotiations, as the conflict between Israel and Hamas remains unresolved.

While the US has remained firm in its refusal to link the conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon, it has faced criticism from other regional actors. Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq have accused Israel of pushing the Middle East toward a broader war.

Lebanon’s foreign minister, Abdallah Bou Habib, has voiced frustration with the US approach, arguing that Washington is the only power capable of making a meaningful difference in resolving the conflict in Lebanon. Despite these criticisms, the US remains focused on addressing the violence through diplomatic means, while continuing to support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hezbollah.

As diplomatic efforts continue, the situation in Lebanon remains dire. The humanitarian toll is mounting, with widespread displacement and significant damage to civilian infrastructure. Despite international efforts to bring about a ceasefire, the prospect of an immediate halt to the violence appears unlikely as tensions persist.

Regional leaders continue to press for a resolution that would prevent further escalation, but the complexities of the conflict, combined with the divergent priorities of the involved parties, have made a ceasefire elusive.