<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-top-anchor"></div>
<div id="gmail-toolbar" class="gmail-toolbar-container">
<span name="selected"></span>
</div>
<div class="gmail-container" lang="en-US" dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-header gmail-reader-header gmail-reader-show-element">
<a class="gmail-domain gmail-reader-domain" href="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/the-lebanon-conspiracy-massacres-negotiations-normalization-and-a-new-order/">palestinechronicle.com</a>
<div class="gmail-domain-border"></div><h1 class="gmail-reader-title">The Lebanon Conspiracy: Massacres, Negotiations, and a New Order</h1>April 9, 2026</div>
<hr>
<div class="gmail-content">
<div class="gmail-moz-reader-content gmail-reader-show-element"><div id="gmail-readability-page-1" class="gmail-page"><div>
<img src="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/nawaf_oun_lebanon_almayadeen.png" alt="" title="nawaf_oun_lebanon_almayadeen" class="gmail-moz-reader-block-img" width="533" height="358" style="margin-right: 25px;">
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (R) and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam. (Photo: Al Mayadeen)
<p><strong>By <a href="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/writers/ramzy-baroud" title="Display all articles for Ramzy Baroud">Ramzy Baroud</a></strong> </p>
<blockquote>
<h3>Massacres and negotiations converge as Beirut aligns with Israel\u2019s
strategy to isolate Hezbollah and undermine Iran\u2019s regional position.</h3>
</blockquote>
<p>Israel\u2019s latest war on Lebanon is not only being waged from the air.
It is being reinforced politically from within, as Beirut moves in step
with US-Israeli efforts to isolate Hezbollah and weaken Iran\u2019s
negotiating position.</p>
<p>In a previous article, we examined the <a href="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/seven-messages-can-israel-survive-defeat-without-setting-the-region-ablaze/">seven messages</a> that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sought to communicate through mass killings in Lebanon.</p>
<p>These messages were aimed at reshaping regional dynamics, asserting
deterrence, and forcing new political realities on the ground.</p>
<p>Those massacres have already resulted in hundreds of Lebanese killed
and more than a thousand wounded, alongside vast destruction of civilian
infrastructure, according to Lebanese civil defense figures.</p>
<p>The scale and intensity of the violence were not incidental, however.
They were meant to create urgency, fear, and ultimately, compliance.</p>
<p>At the time, we argued that Israel\u2019s actions were part of a broader
attempt to impose a new regional order through blood. Since then, new
developments have confirmed that this military escalation was
coordinated with parallel political moves\u2014specifically, an effort to
separate the Iran-US negotiation track in Pakistan from the war on
Lebanon.</p>
<p>This separation is not a technical detail. It is the core of the current geopolitical struggle.</p>
<p>As Israeli bombs continue to fall across Lebanon, Netanyahu announced
that he had instructed his government to begin direct negotiations with
Lebanon \u201cas soon as possible,\u201d emphasizing that these talks would focus
on disarming Hezbollah and establishing \u201cpeaceful relations.\u201d</p>
<p>This shift did not occur in a vacuum. It followed one of the
deadliest waves of Israeli attacks on Lebanon in years, and it came at a
moment when Iran had explicitly linked its participation in the
Islamabad talks to a ceasefire in Lebanon.</p>
<p>In other words, Israel escalated militarily while simultaneously
opening a political channel designed to bypass Iran\u2019s conditions.</p>
<p>What makes this strategy particularly consequential, however, is not Israel\u2019s role alone\u2014but the response from Beirut.</p>
<p>From the outset of the Israeli war on Lebanon, the government of
Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has taken steps that align closely with US
and Israeli objectives.</p>
<p>Rather than framing the conflict primarily as Israeli aggression, key
Lebanese officials have emphasized the need to rein in the resistance,
repeatedly raising the issue of Hezbollah\u2019s weapons and the necessity of
placing all arms under state control.</p>
<p>This position is not neutral. It reflects a political choice. More
importantly, it creates the very framework that Israel seeks to impose:
one in which the central issue is no longer occupation, aggression, or
civilian massacres, but rather the \u201cproblem\u201d of resistance itself.</p>
<p>The Lebanese government\u2019s willingness to engage in direct
negotiations with Israel\u2014something historically avoided outside the
narrow framework of indirect or mediated contacts\u2014marks a dangerous
precedent.</p>
<p>Even if framed as conditional or tactical, such engagement
constitutes an implicit political recognition of Israel at a moment when
Lebanese civilians are still being buried under the rubble of Israeli
strikes.</p>
<p>This contradiction is not lost on domestic actors.</p>
<p>According to Al Mayadeen, figures affiliated with Hezbollah have
sharply criticized the government\u2019s direction, with some describing it
as a betrayal of the highest order. The criticism reflects a deeper fear
that Lebanon is being pulled into a political track that will
ultimately serve to delegitimize the resistance and reshape the
country\u2019s internal balance of power.</p>
<p>This concern is reinforced by the sequence of events itself. Lebanon
has not yet received a formal date from the United States to begin
negotiations, according to Al Mayadeen\u2019s correspondent in Beirut.
Lebanese officials have insisted that a ceasefire must precede any
talks, yet Israel has made clear that its objective is precisely the
opposite: to use negotiations as a tool to impose new realities,
including Hezbollah\u2019s disarmament.</p>
<p>At the same moment, Iran has made its stance unmistakably clear. Its
delegation has conditioned participation in the Islamabad talks on
linking any ceasefire to a full halt of Israeli operations in Lebanon.
Iranian officials have gone further, emphasizing that no long-term
arrangement is possible without ending Israeli aggression altogether.</p>
<p>This creates a direct clash of political visions. On one side, Iran
is attempting to integrate Lebanon into a broader regional settlement
that preserves the role of resistance as a central actor. On the other
hand, the United States, Israel, and their regional allies are working
to fragment that framework\u2014isolating Lebanon, sidelining Hezbollah, and
reasserting a US-led order.</p>
<p>In this context, the behavior of the Lebanese government cannot be understood as independent.</p>
<p>Beirut\u2019s political establishment has long operated within a system
shaped by external pressures, particularly from Washington and its
regional allies. The current moment is no exception. The push toward
negotiations, the emphasis on disarmament, and the political framing of
the conflict all reflect a broader alignment with the pro-American camp.</p>
<p>This camp is facing a strategic dilemma. Its inability to impose a
decisive outcome on Iran\u2014whether militarily or economically\u2014has already
shifted the balance of power. The Strait of Hormuz crisis, the
resilience of the Iranian state, and the failure to neutralize Hezbollah
have all exposed the limits of US influence.</p>
<p>Allowing Lebanon to be included in an Iran-led negotiating framework would deepen that shift.</p>
<p>It would effectively marginalize pro-Western actors in Beirut and
open the door to a new regional arrangement in which Iran holds
significant leverage. For Washington, Tel Aviv, and their allies, this
is an unacceptable outcome.</p>
<p>Thus, the current strategy: bombard Lebanon, then rush into negotiations with the Lebanese government itself.</p>
<p>This dual approach is not contradictory. It is deliberate. The
massacres create pressure. The negotiations create an alternative
political pathway\u2014one that excludes Iran and reframes the conflict
around disarmament and normalization.</p>
<p>Crucially, both Israel and segments of the Lebanese political
establishment share a common objective: the weakening, and ultimately
the defeat, of Hezbollah. Direct talks are only the first step.</p>
<p>In the ideal scenario envisioned by the US and Israel, this process
would evolve into an international consensus\u2014possibly through the United
Nations\u2014that formally delegitimizes Hezbollah and, by extension, all
forms of armed resistance. Such a shift would not only reshape Lebanon
internally but would also strike at the core of the broader resistance
axis.</p>
<p>But such scenarios rarely unfold as planned.</p>
<p>The main obstacle remains Iran\u2019s insistence on linking Lebanon to any
broader agreement. As long as this linkage holds, attempts to isolate
Lebanon will face significant resistance\u2014not only from Tehran but from
actors within Lebanon itself.</p>
<p>The outcome of this struggle will not be confined to Lebanon.</p>
<p>It will determine whether the region moves toward a fragmented order
dominated by US-backed states, or toward a new balance in which
resistance movements and their allies retain a decisive role.</p>
<div>
<p><br></p>
<p><span><i><span>\u2013 Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the
Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of eight books. His
latest book, \u2018</span></i><a href="https://www.sevenstories.com/books/4779-before-the-flood?srsltid=AfmBOorgPOepR8fLBeCXLViw_awRDNTNNerbwDJ4V2X5Jza-ajlZ6_bm"><i><span>Before the Flood</span></i></a><i><span>,\u2019
was published by Seven Stories Press. His other books include \u2018Our
Vision for Liberation\u2019, \u2018My Father was a Freedom Fighter\u2019 and \u2018The Last
Earth\u2019. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center
for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is </span></i><a href="http://www.ramzybaroud.net/"><i><span>www.ramzybaroud.net</span></i></a></span></p></div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div></div>
</div>
<br></div>