British soldiers in Lebanon? Draft agreement with UK raises questions

A "disguised British occupation in Lebanon?" This is what an article published Friday in the pro-Hezbollah daily al-Akhbar argued in a report on a British military presence in Lebanon via a memorandum of understanding between the armies of the two countries.

The author of the article claimed to have seen the document in question and that it would be a question of deploying British army personnel in Lebanon and its seas. An unjustified military presence that probably does not have "a training objective [of Lebanese personnel] strictly speaking", stated al-Akhbar'd report. "This military cooperation does not benefit Lebanon in any way, which amounts to saying that it is a British occupation that does not say its name ... It is a real violation of Lebanese sovereignty."

This is not the first time that London has found itself in the crosshairs of al-Akhbar. In November 2023, it also published a similar article, referring to the same document and accusations of the same type under the slogan, this time, of "British military tutelage." Contacted by L'Orient-Le Jour, a diplomatic source close to the Foreign Ministry stated that the document cited by the daily – which in any case remains a draft that has still not received the approval of the Lebanese authorities – relates to the "mechanism for the evacuation of foreigners" in the event of a global conflict sparked against the backdrop of the Gaza war and the support front in southern Lebanon. The source also explained that any agreement of understanding between two countries goes through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs according to the procedure in force. The military protocol is systematically transmitted to the Ministry of Defense and then to the government.

"Once in the hands of the government, it will then be made public. There is no plot, much less military occupation," said the source.

'Technical movements'

This is also confirmed by a Lebanese diplomat, who stated that an agreement as presented in the article in question "cannot be accepted by Lebanon, much less by the commander in chief of the army."

Proof of this, added the source, is that the document has still not been officially adopted.

"The British can propose whatever they want, but it is not certain that official Lebanon will follow," said the diplomat, who said that he has not seen the document in question. The British embassy in Beirut did not respond when contacted for comment.

A source close to the army told L'Orient-Le Jour that the document is "old," linked to the evacuation operations and, above all, remains a dead letter until further notice.

When asked, a Western diplomat believed that "it is true that London is seeking to play a role in Lebanon, but [concerning the agreement in question] it is probably a document that does not go beyond the framework of the technical movements of the British military detachment attached to the diplomatic mission."

Military bases in Cyprus

However, the question remains as to why the camp close to Hezbollah insists, through its media, on sending what appear to be messages addressed to London, whose Foreign and Defense Ministers, David Lammy and John Healey, had, during their visit to Beirut on Aug. 1, called on "all parties to respect resolution 1701 and to implement it in all its articles."

During the visit of the former British Foreign Secretary David Cameron in February, he proposed a plan for the deliniation of the southern border, from Naqoura to Shebaa. The project consisted of installing surveillance towers equipped with detection devices under the supervision of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). A proposal that is similar to the project built in 2014 at the initiative of London, on the border between Lebanon and Syria, where several surveillance towers, operated by the army, were installed. The project in South Lebanon never saw the light of day, Hezbollah being clearly recalcitrant.

In a speech delivered on June 19, in a context where the risk of all-out war between Lebanon and Israel was particularly high, Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah went so far as to threaten Cyprus, which hosts British military bases. "We warn Nicosia: The opening of Cypriot airports and bases to the Israeli enemy to target Lebanon would mean that the Cypriot government is a party to the war," said Nasrallah in an implicit message also intended for London.

Yet Britain, particularly under its new Labour government, has distanced itself from the United States, notably when its defense minister, visiting Israel on July 14, called for a halt to hostilities, expressing compassion for the Palestinians in Gaza. "I hope ... that we will soon achieve a cease-fire and that we will manage to alleviate the suffering and the intolerable loss of life that we are seeing in Gaza," Lammy told reporters, in the presence of Israeli President Isaac Herzog.

But the U.K. is not the only one targeted by the al-Akhbar article. There is also the commander-in-chief of the army, Joseph Aoun – still a presidential candidate and who, failing that, could be reappointed as head of the military in December this year.

This article originally appeared in French in L'Orient-Le Jour.