Israel/Palestine

US/French role. It is lightly touched on here in a Reuters article from 11/27/24. So your doubt of the same reporting in Al Arabiya is unfounded and bias by a reader towards any publication when it is reporting a matter brought up for the purposes of discussion displays intellectual insecurity. Even in the Russian media there are items printed that spur further discussion and examination.

"One of the sticking points in the final days leading to the ceasefire's conclusion was how it would be monitored, Lebanon's deputy speaker of parliament Elias Bou Saab told Reuters.
A pre-existing tripartite mechanism between UNIFIL, the Lebanese army and the Israeli army would be expanded to include the U.S. and France, with the U.S. chairing the group, Bou Saab said.
Israel would be expected to flag possible breaches to the monitoring mechanism, and France and the U.S. together would determine whether a violation had taken place, an Israeli official and a Western diplomat told Reuters.
A joint statement by Biden and French President Emmanuel Macron said France and the U.S. would work together to ensure the deal is applied fully.
The U.S. and France will work within the Military Technical Committee for Lebanon (MTC4L) to enable and achieve a total Lebanese armed forces deployment of 10,000 soldiers to southern Lebanon.
The Lebanese armed forces will deploy forces, set road blocks and checkpoints on all the roads and bridges along he line delineating the Southern Litani area.
Israel and Lebanon will report any alleged violations to the tripartite mechanism and UNIFIL."

But in this case Al Arabiya reported on the same subject as Reuters had previously. I had not seen the Reuters article until today and so when I saw the reference in Al Arabiya I felt it was worth discussing. Now based on the confirmation that it was also in Reuters previously the slur against Al Arabiya for reporting the subject shows the problem of biased reading.

Furthermore to the topic of the US/French role if it is only to be one of receiving complaints of violations and then determining the validity of the complaint then certainly that is not some terribly complex matter that requires weeks and meetings to implement. Everybody knows each other's phone numbers. Pick up the phone and call. Send out the UNIFIL troops to ascertain the facts. Forward to each party the findings and any corrections needed. Basically the same as UNIFIL has been doing that everyone ignored anyway.

But Reuters also notes some glaring major issues of different interpretations by the parties about the ceasefire. The existence of which further validates that questioning the lack of preparation for the monitoring/reporting/investigation of accusations of violations is completely appropriate. Why was this not in place to coincide with the beginning of the ceasefire? Or did we really just get an announced start but without structure for conduct? It would appear so and we already see in the first week that accusations of violations aren't handled by the "committee" that doesn't exist yet and is late to their duties.

"Israeli officials have insisted that the Israeli army would continue to strike Hezbollah if it identified threats to its security, including transfers of weapons and military equipment to the group. An Israeli official told Reuters that U.S. envoy Amos Hochstein, who negotiated the agreement, had given assurances directly to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel could carry out such strikes on Lebanon. Netanyahu said in a televised address after the security cabinet met that Israel would strike Hezbollah if it violated the deal. The official said Israel would use drones to monitor movements on the ground in Lebanon.

Lebanese officials (said this) is not in the deal that it agreed, and that it would oppose any violations of its sovereignty.
The provision is not in the deal published by the Lebanese cabinet and Lebanese officials say that it would oppose any violations of its sovereignty."

[ Please not my parenthesis words above are not in the original article from Reuters but were inserted to correct their editors missing sentence construction.]

The committee/group/commission is pointed out by Reuters, in the first quoted segment, even as some people around the world think that a grouping of UNIFIL, Israel, Lebanon, France and the US is not a "commission" or a "committee" however the Deputy Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament is quoted by Reuters as saying the US is chairing the group. Golly Mr. Peabody I think when you are the "chair" it means you're the head/control of something. Apparently we aren't supposed to call it a "commission, committee or group" but instead we shall forever pretend it doesn't exist.

So the "new" scheme is now....... what? I guess everybody thought it would work to make it up on the fly. That always works so well.

https://www.reuters.com/world/what-does-us-brokered-truce-ending-israel-hezbollah-fighting-include-2024-11-27/