Israeli shelling of southern Lebanon continues despite Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s call at the United Nations for a consolidation of the US-brokered ceasefire and a full Israeli withdrawal from Lebanese territory.
Speaking at the UN General Assembly on Friday, Salam demanded that the ceasefire agreement reached earlier this year be honoured in full — and that Israeli forces pull back from the positions they have held along the southern border. The shelling, according to reports from the region, did not stop during his address.
What the Prime Minister asked for
Salam’s central demand is that the ceasefire be treated as a foundation, not a pause. He called for an end to the violence that has displaced tens of thousands of people on both sides of the Lebanon-Israel border and for the consolidation of a peace that so far has proven fragile. The US-brokered agreement was intended to create the conditions for a more durable calm, but the continued Israeli fire suggests the instrument is fraying at the edges.
The Prime Minister’s speech placed Lebanon’s case firmly in the broader context of regional stability. He argued that without a full withdrawal and a genuine cessation of hostilities, the cycle of violence would continue to claim lives and keep southern Lebanon in a state of permanent displacement and uncertainty.
The situation on the ground
The shelling reported during and after Salam’s UN address is the latest in a series of flare-ups that have dogged the ceasefire from the start. Communities in southern Lebanon have borne the brunt of the violence, with homes destroyed, families displaced, and a sense that the promised peace has not yet arrived. On the Israeli side, communities near the border have also lived under the threat of rocket fire and shelling, though the patterns of violence are uneven and often asymmetric.
International observers have repeatedly expressed concern that the ceasefire, while a welcome step, remains vulnerable to the very kind of incident that can reignite a broader conflict. The presence of Israeli forces in Lebanese territory — even if framed by Israel as a temporary security measure — is one of the most contentious issues in the whole arrangement.
ADVERTISEMENT
Why it matters
For Lebanon, a country already grappling with economic collapse, political fragmentation, and the aftermath of previous wars, the stakes are existential. Every day of continued shelling deepens the humanitarian toll and weakens the claim that diplomacy can deliver a durable peace. For the wider region, the Lebanese Prime Minister’s intervention at the UN is a reminder that the Israel-Lebanon frontier remains one of the most volatile fault lines in the Middle East.
The US-brokered ceasefire was meant to be a template for de-escalation. If it cannot hold, the question will be whether there is any alternative framework robust enough to keep the violence contained — and whether the international community is willing to put pressure on both sides to comply.
What happens next
The immediate question is whether the shelling will stop, and whether Israel will commit to the withdrawal Salam demanded. Diplomats will be watching closely to see if the US, as the broker of the original agreement, steps in to enforce compliance or at least to press both sides back to the letter of the deal.
On the Lebanese side, the government will be under pressure to show its citizens that the UN platform produced something tangible — not just speeches. If the violence continues, the political cost for Beirut rises, and the ceasefire risks being seen as another in a long line of unimplemented agreements.
We do not allow links of any sort in comments. No SPAM whatsoever. On topic comments only.