Israel and Lebanon sealed a ceasefire agreement to end fighting between the Israeli army and Hezbollah.
It was announced on Tuesday by the President of the United States, Joe Biden, in a special intervention from the White House.
“The fighting will end. This is designed to be a permanent cessation of hostilities“said the American leader, and assured that displaced civilians from both sides will soon be able to safely return to their communities.
The US government participated in the negotiations to reach the agreement that came into force at 4:00 local time this Wednesday (2:00 GMT).
Over the next 60 days, Israel will gradually withdraw its remaining forces, while the US and its allies committed to working with the governments of both countries to ensure full implementation of the agreement.
Since October 7 of last year, Israel has freed a war on two fronts: against Hezbollah in Lebanon and against Hamas in Gazawhich continues its course with no armistice in sight in the short term.
We asked BBC correspondents in the region why a ceasefire has been declared in Lebanon but not yet in Gaza, and how it got to this point.
Carine Torbey, BBC Arabic Service correspondent in Beirut
There are stark differences in the way Israel has confronted its two main regional adversaries: Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
While Gaza is part of an entity under Israeli occupation, Lebanon is a sovereign state, although it was occupied by Israel until Hezbollah resistance and other factors forced it to withdraw.
Despite its enormous military capabilities and its supremacy in the air, Israel has suffered in its ground operation in Lebanon. After almost two months, it has failed to control the southern cities or neutralize Hezbollah’s rocket launch capacity in the north.
Hezbollah has also extended its attacks into Israel’s interior, disrupting life in the country’s main cities and causing casualties.
This comes as the Israeli army suffers increasing numbers of casualties in southern Lebanon.
Israel has also failed to create the conditions for the return of its displaced residents to the north, which could have played an important role in convincing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to agree to a ceasefire with Hezbollah.
Added to this is the depletion of the Israeli army and the political and economic effects of having to attract more and more reservists to the conflict.
Leila Nicolas, author of Global and Regional Strategies in the Middle East, also believes that “the Israelis do not have a clear plan for the next day in Gaza.”
He adds that this is something that could last until Donald Trump becomes president of the United States in January.
On the contrary, there is already a clear framework for the agreement in Lebanon, which is the basis on which the terms of the ceasefire have been negotiated.
It is based on the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701which ended the war between Israel and Hezbollah in 2006.
Many aspects of the agreement remain unclear or ambiguous, suggesting that both parties have had to revise their initial objectives to make it work.
Israel has not been able to completely eliminate the Hezbollah threat and ensure, through military means, the safe return of its citizens to the north of the country.
Hezbollah, decimated by numerous blows to its leadership, institutions and military command, also appears to have renounced its original condition of not stopping attacks on Israeli positions before the end of the war in Gaza.
“It is also clear that Iran (Hezbollah’s financial and ideological supporter) would not want Hezbollah to be dragged into a long war of attrition that would exhaust it even more,” Nicolas maintains.
Adnan el Bursh, BBC Arab Service correspondent in Gaza
Some in Gaza have called the agreement a decision by Hezbollah to abandon the “unity of fronts” strategy.
This is the concept that Hezbollah and Hamas adopted at the beginning of the war with Israel to coordinate operations between members of the so-called “axis of resistance,” which includes other groups in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen and other smaller groups in Iraq.
The key difference between the ceasefire agreement in Lebanon and the lack of one in Gaza is that Hezbollah left negotiations in the hands of the Lebanese government, while Hamas leads negotiations in Gaza and refuses to be represented by the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah.
Divisions among Palestinians and the lack of a unified, officially recognized state managing talks with Israel have played a major role in the lack of a ceasefire agreement in Gaza.
Some experts also mention that there is a vacuum in the Hamas leadership following Israel’s assassination of senior figures in the organization.
This means that Hamas is not in a position to effectively negotiate a ceasefire.
Communication difficulties between Hamas leaders inside and outside Gaza make it even more complicated.
Professor Fathi Sabah, a Gaza writer and political analyst, told the BBC that “Israel considers the war in Gaza to be its main battle, given that Hamas started the fight and not Hezbollah. “Attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon was an opportunity that presented itself to Israel when it felt it had destroyed Hamas’ capabilities in Gaza.”
Sabah also believes that the larger scale of fighting with Hezbollah – which has more capabilities and poses a greater threat than Hamas – was a factor Israel took into consideration when negotiating a ceasefire.
“Hezbollah rockets hit cities such as Tel Aviv and Haifa, and had a painful impact on Israel and the thousands of people displaced from the north,” Sabah told the BBC.
Sabah also believes that Israel was influenced by the attitudes of allied countries such as the United States and Francewho were increasingly uncomfortable with what they described as “Israeli aggression” towards Beirut.
Muhannad Tutunji, BBC Arabic Service journalist in Jerusalem
The agreement between Israel and Lebanon responds to several factors, taking into account the different political and military realities of Lebanon and Gaza.
In Lebanon, Hezbollah – which fights against Israel – is part of a broader political spectrum, representing just one of several sectarian and political groups in the country.
Analysts recall that not all Lebanese citizens share Hezbollah’s perspective on the conflict with Israel.
However, the situation in Gaza is markedly different. There, the ruling political and military force is Hamas, supported by other factions with similar anti-Israel stances.
For Israelis, the war in Lebanon is also different from the war in Gaza.
The military operation in Lebanon aims eliminate any military threat to residents in northern Israel and seeks to restore its security in the region.
In Gaza, Israel has declared its intention to completely eradicate Hamas, a goal that has not yet been fully achieved. It also aims to recover the 101 hostages who are still held in the strip, which would condition the ceasefire negotiations.
Former head of Israel’s National Security Council Yaakov Amidror told the BBC that many Lebanese fear the conflict could spread to other parts of their country.
This, he opined, could cause destruction in those areas similar to that seen in the southern suburbs of Beirut.
He also highlighted the Israel’s strategic decision to separate its focus on Lebanon from the Gaza conflictsomething crucial for Israel as it allows it to focus on completely eradicating Hamas in Gaza.
Amidror highlighted that The real test of the ceasefire lies not in the agreement itself, but in its implementationand asked how Israel would react if Hezbollah violated the ceasefire.
click here to read more stories from BBC News Mundo.
Subscribe here to our new newsletter to receive a selection of our best content of the week every Friday.
You can also follow us on YouTube, instagram, TikTok, x, Facebook and in our new whatsapp channel.
And remember that you can receive notifications in our app. Download the latest version and activate them.