Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun has delivered a forceful defence of his government’s decision to pursue direct peace talks with Israel, pushing back sharply against Hezbollah’s characterisation of the negotiations as treason and surrender, and turning the accusation squarely back on the group.
In a series of pointed statements, Aoun made clear that his administration had set a firm precondition for any formal negotiations with Israel, telling Washington from the outset that a ceasefire must come first before broader talks could begin.
He dismissed claims by Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem that Lebanon was entering negotiations from a position of weakness, saying critics should wait for the talks to begin and judge the outcome before passing verdict.
On the treason accusation, Aoun was direct. He said what his government was doing was not treason, and that real treason was committed by those who take their country to war to serve foreign interests. He asked a pointed rhetorical question that struck at the heart of Hezbollah’s political standing, questioning whether those who dragged Lebanon into war had sought any national consensus before doing so. He also asked how long the people of southern Lebanon would continue paying the price for wars fought on behalf of others, referencing both the conflict tied to Gaza and the more recent campaign linked to support for Iran.
Hezbollah fired rockets into Israel on March 2, two days after the United States and Israel struck Iran. The fighting since then has killed more than 2,500 people, wounded over 7,000 and displaced more than one million Lebanese.
Laying out his ultimate objective, Aoun said his goal was to formally end the state of war with Israel through an armistice agreement similar to the 1949 accords that brought decades of relative calm to the border without requiring full normalisation of relations.
He challenged critics who viewed any such deal as a defeat, asking whether the 1949 armistice was a humiliation. He added that he would not accept a humiliating deal but was equally resolute that the path of continued armed resistance was not one he could accept.