Security zone within Lebanon was ‘fantasy,’ the goal was never to destroy Hezbollah, says US envoy Hochstein

In a series of interviews on the day the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah came into effect, the deal’s main architect, White House Middle East envoy Amos Hochstein, revealed and clarified numerous details about the agreement and the way it was reached.

“The moment was right. It culminated in about a week before the elections in the United States, at the end of October, Netanyahu asked for me to come out. We met, we decided this was the right time,” Hochstein told representatives of American Jewish communities.

During the call, Hochstein said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to the deal, which has been criticized by both coalition and opposition leaders, because the aim was never to dismantle Hezbollah, but create conditions for the northern residents’ safe return.

Talking to Channel 12, the envoy said that the IDF’s successes in southern Lebanon made Hezbollah rethink its previous demand of a stop to the Gaza War to agree to a ceasefire.

In the same discussion, Hochstein was confronted with criticism by former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who had called the deal a “total security-political failure,” and argued Israel should have insisted on keeping a security zone within Lebanese territory.

This was dismissed by Hochstein as a “fantasy.”

“Yes, there are fantasy deals that are utopia where you get a ceasefire agreement with a security zone, but those won’t ever happen,” Hochstein responded.

“If you choose to have a dead zone or a demilitarized zone, then you are there as an occupier, and you are not there in agreement; which means that while you may have two, three, four or five kilometers inside Lebanon, there won’t be an agreement to stop [Hezbollah from] shooting at Israel from longer ranges,” he contended.

The envoy was also asked by several outlets whether the Biden administration threatened more weapons embargoes, or the stop of mediation efforts, to pressure Israel into the agreement.

“There were no demands by the United States related to weapons or a veto at the UN. There were no threats whatsoever… Those ideas never came up in discussions at any point,” he told Channel 13.

Regarding the terms of the agreement, Hochstein argued that the deal’s improved enforcement mechanism would make it more effective than the failed U.N. Resolution 1701, on which it is based.

“The failure of the 2006, 1701 agreement was that it was not implemented by anyone. [We] have learned that lesson and...we're not going to allow to repeat again," he vowed.

For the first time, the U.S. will co-chair alongside France to which Hochstein added, "And we will make sure that any reports of violations are addressed immediately, are investigated, are monitored and are either deterred, stopped or ensure that they cannot happen again."

Now that a ceasefire was put into place in Lebanon, Hochstein said there is “an opportunity on the hostage deal” in Gaza, he told the Jewish community.

“Everyone blames Israel, but as the president made clear, it is Hamas that has not returned to the discussion table for months. Now, the people of Hamas woke up at 04:00 in the morning and found that Hezbollah, who directly supported them, had made a deal and ended the war.”

“Israel is no longer distracted on two fronts, and Iran supported the cease-fire agreement, which means Hamas knows that there is a disconnection between the arena in Lebanon and the arena in Gaza,” he said.

Also Wednesday, a “senior political source” disputed a comment by Hochstein in an interview with CNBC, where he characterized the ceasefire as a permanent agreement.

The source told Israeli media outlets: “Contrary to what was attributed to Hochstein, fighting can restart at any moment, as we saw today,” referring to several truce violations during the day.

The source added: “Israel will act firmly against any violation of the ceasefire, and is prepared militarily for any scenario.”