Are we close to an Israel-Lebanon peace treaty?

Hagar Chamali has been heavily involved in policymaking and public affairs, including serving as director for Syria and Lebanon at the National Security Council, senior adviser and spokesperson roles at the Treasury Department's terrorist financing offices, and spokesperson for the US mission to the United Nations. A foreign policy analyst appearing regularly on major American networks. Hagar is the somewhat prophetic founder of the Lebanon Israel Peace Alliance. She joins us next to give us the American view. The Garamali, thank you so much for taking the time to join us here. Everything seems to be focused right now on Iran, but of course it's linked to Lebanon. It's linked to Syria. Everything in the region seems to route back to Thran. Your uh main focus throughout your professional career, one of your big focuses has been Lebanon. Of course, it's a huge part of your own personal history having parents from Lebanon as well. If you can kind of give us a lay of the land, how things stand right now with the US brokered Israel Lebanon talks. We heard they were going well. We heard they're not going well. We've hearing a lot of different things. What What's your analysis right now? Sure, Mike. Well, first, thanks for having me. I'm so happy to be here. Um, let's dive in. So, General lay of the land on Lebanon, Israel specifically, they've been in talks since April. The war that Hezbollah launched against Israel started on March 2nd, and they signed a trilateral framework agreement on June 26th. And since then, they've really rolled up their sleeves and they're working on implementing and executing that framework agreement, particularly as it relates to these two pilot zones in southern Lebanon where the Lebanese armed forces are taking control over those territories and ensuring that the disarmament of Hezbollah uh continues and remains uh remains the case. There have been some hiccups of course uh we already know there have been stories already of Hezbollah individuals trying to re-enter those zones and these this issue you listen it's hard it's not going to be without its ups and downs. I will tell you up until the point that framework agreement was signed on June 26th. Every round of peace negotiations had a lot of fanfare to them. There was a lot of pump and circumstance, a lot of photos, uh a lot of announcements. And since then they've really been taking a regular cadence in Rome where people are rolling up their sleeves trying to execute and implement this agreement. But it's been difficult understandably particularly as we in the runup to both Israeli elections and US elections but the talks do continue. >> The US has invested so much political capital in this particular endeavor here. Why do you feel from the US side? I mean there's so many conflicts around the world to focus on that they zoomed in on this particular issue at this particular time and felt I mean you don't you don't start going after something unless you feel like you can win especially this administration they don't like rolling the dice unless they feel they can get to a resolution. Why do you feel that they felt this was the time to get it done? >> Yes. I love this question by the way because the sentiment really started in January 2025 and a lot of us spoke to the administration about this back then. those of us working on these peace efforts because the geopolitical shifting geopolitical dynamics made this opportunity created this opportunity and what I mean to be very brief is following the escalation between Hzbollah and [clears throat] Israel in 2024 and when you had those for example those pager explosions and Hassanah was assassinated you then had a ceasefire in November 2024 that called for Hzbalah's disarmament a few weeks after that you had the fall of Bashar al-Assad who fled like a coward to Moscow. So the two nooes really wrapped around Lebanon's neck had fallen or or or significantly been degraded. And in January 2025, you had the election of President Joseph an who started off the year with a statement in the parliament saying that all the weapons would be under the monopoly of the state. And suddenly it looked like we had Hezbollah weakened, Bashar Assad gone, and a leadership that looked genuinely interested in degrading and dismantling Hezbollah. And then from there a series of decisions from the cabinet that were focused on this. Now I'm not trying to pretend that it was all perfect, but in the world of Lebanon and its history, it really significant showed significant progress in the effort or at least in the desire for that. And you also saw a lot of people, a lot of political commentators, leaders, media calling for peace with Israel in general. And then that really escalated when you had the war that started on March 2nd. the momentum in Lebanon completely shifted where the the majority of the population felt this is an entity Hezbollah working solely at the order of Thran this is a foreign entity it invited a war we didn't want and now we must push for peace and so that re that whole momentum shifted and I will tell you the reason I remain optimistic on Lebanon Israel peace and I would gather why the white house as well does does as well is because this process is succeeding against all odds and what I mean by that is largely with what's happening with the Iranian regime which at a certain point wanted a ceasefire in Lebanon without any terms and preconditions. They wanted the withdrawal of Israeli troops so that Hezbollah could rebuild. And the reason we are where we are today is because the Lebanese and Israelis, these two sides want peace so badly. I am not so sure there is a peace process in history where you have two sides who want this to happen so badly. You specifically though kind of saw this coming sooner than others did. As I mentioned, you founded the Lebanon Israel Peace Alliance. Morgan Ortegus was one of the uh kind of early proponents of trying to move forward on this particular peace initiative. You have a very unique background in that you were born to Lebanese parents in the United States almost by accident of of sorts as your mom had some complications with pregnancy, decided not to leave the US at that given time. And then you find out what around about mitzvah age or so your mom's Jewish yet you didn't know it all all the time that you were growing up. And so you're of Lebanese heritage, Americanborn, Jewish mother, Christian father, and here we are in the midst of a potential historic breakthrough between the Jewish state and Lebanon. What is it that you're seeing from your perspective that you feel like nobody else can see because of your unique background? You know, it's so interesting you say this. First of all, my background is very relevant, of course, to this. I almost feel like I was born to do this, like I was meant to do it with Basher, but I didn't know it growing up or or even as I pursued my career in the US government. Um, and it's interesting because somebody uh from Israel told me that it was it must have been meant to be that I was named Hagar because Hagar in the book of Genesis, you know, saw things that others or was driven to see things that that she couldn't see previously. and that I see this come, you know, I see the potential for this. And I will tell you it's it back in January 2025 and I actually, it's I love that you mentioned this because in February 2025, I spoke about Lebanon Israel peace on a panel with Amos, General Amos Vadlin uh at the Munich Security Conference. And when we spoke about it, people left the room. Uh some Lebanese people, some some Lebanese left, some of them whipped out their phones. They couldn't believe that someone of Lebanese descent was talking about something that had been at that point a year and a half ago was viewed as taboo. To mention peace, to mention peace with Israel and to watch how quickly those walls have been shattered. I mean, there isn't a day that goes by now in Lebanon where somebody doesn't call for peace. You have Lebanese reporters interviewing Israelis now. You have people breaking the rules, the criminalization laws that exist in Lebanon that prohibit Lebanese from even speaking to Israelis. And so you sense, you see that not only that that geopolitically I saw that that the country was ready for it because suddenly you see these nefarious influences, the Iranian regime, the Syrian regime at that time, Hezbollah on the on their heels. But suddenly you're also seeing the appetite of the people shift where they don't want this anymore. They want to see the economic development that the Gulf enjoys. They want to they don't want to leave Lebanon for better opportunities. They want to stay home and they understand that peace really could open the doors for them. And they're seeing that particularly now. And I'll give you two very brief examples. One was after the framework agreement was signed, the UAE announced that Emiratis could travel back to Lebanon. Very small move, but it went viral in Lebanon. same after the presidential visit President Al to Washington DC the Trump administration announced direct flights or that they would allow direct flights between the United States and Beirut. Now this is going to take a while. I can tell you this having been on the other side. But this news went viral for Lebanese and Lebanese Americans. Why? Because they saw what's at the other end of the rainbow. They saw that if they stick with this process, there's economic opportunity, reintegration into the world. And that for them really keeps them motivated. >> I want to move shifting just a bit here. Although still very much tied in of course uh with the change of the guard in Syria what about uh year and a half ago now that has changed the the template in Lebanon. It's also changed the template in Israel. There is still a lot of distrust between Israel and Syria. There is uh the message coming from Damascus. Hey, we want peace. You'll get your security as long as you don't strike us. the Israeli side is saying, "No way. You're a terrorist. You're talking about al-Sharah. You might be off the list, but you are who you are." We see, as you mentioned, the end of the rainbow potentially uh between Jerusalem and Beirut. >> When are we going to see that the end of the rainbow between Jerusalem and Damascus? >> Right. So, I also I think that there's a lot of opportunity between Israel and Syria ba really truly based on what I'm seeing and I'm not trying to sugarcoat um President Alshara whatsoever. Uh, in fact, I was in the government when we sanctioned him, and I know very well who he is and who he was, and you still see pieces of that play out when he speaks publicly. [snorts] Um, when he when you just see the the the threats that the minorities in Syria face, the Christians, the Drews, the Kurds, and so on. And so, we do see it play out. So, we cannot be naive to Alshara's tendencies or worldview. That said, there is an opportunity there for engagement and very much a trust but verify type of engagement because al-Shara it shows also a level of of pragmatism. He wants to control Syria. He wants to rebuild Syria. He wants to uh put it on the right path. He certainly probably wants to remain in power as long as he can and be seen as having success in that regard. And so there is and and you know we always know this in any negotiation. There's always something the other side wants. And so if you have something that the other side wants, there's a real opportunity there to make some kind of deal, but to also insert things that are important to you at the same time. So for example, maybe you work with Oshara, maybe the US removes the state sponsor of terrorism designation as they did, but get something in return. For example, the protection of minorities and proof of that. Uh I'm not so sure, by the way, that the Trump administration got enough uh for what they gave. But that being said, an an an opportunity for engagement and you're seeing it now. So now the Syrians with the escalation that you had now over the last week, Israel struck the north uh because of the threats emanating from Turkey and President Erdogan. You see a Syrian desire to to come to some kind of agreement. They've been in talks. They have publicly said, "We want to pursue this." And that's with Turkish pressure at their doorstep. And the Turks really make no mid of their ambitions. President Erdogan himself has said that he was in favor of military intervention to push back on Israeli influence in Syria and is also extremely unhappy of of about what's happening between Lebanon and Israel. And so you see him persistently try and yet you still see those talks continue. But there, listen, they're never going to be perfect. the bar is a is low a little bit. These are not easy issues. These are not countries that inherently trust each other, nor should they. Um, and so, well, I would say that on on the Israeli side, it would be hard to trust uh on their side, but but still reason for hope and optimism. >> That leads me to it's it's just a burning question because the chief foreign policy achievement of President Trump in his first term was the Abraham Accords. Undoubtedly, it stalled out in the second term. And I think people forget how difficult peacemaking actually is. And and when you're talking about the Amiradis and and the Bahrainis, the other countries that joined in then and eventually after that, those relationships had been in the works for years, oftentimes covert, sometimes bubbling a little bit above the surface, but it didn't spring up suddenly. And everybody's been saying, "What? Come on now. It's been years and what's going on with this? Yes, we're impatient. Yes, everybody feels it should have been expanded by now. But looking ahead to the next couple of years beyond Lebanon, God willing, if some peace develops there over the next couple years, where do you see other opportunities in the region for the Abraham Accords to evolve based on what has already transpired over over the previous years? >> Sure. Well, I definitely see I still see opportunities uh believe it or not with Saudi Arabia. Uh Saudi Arabia is in its own uh metamorphosis on these issues trying to figure out really where are they standing in this world. What alliances are they making? Some of those alliances by the way are really not in favor of any kind of peace. Uh we know that Pakistan, Qatar, Turkey, these are not countries I would trust uh at all to be ever supportive on on peace deals. And yet Saudi Arabia still wants to be a hedgeimon. They want to diversify their economy. And the hope for a two-state solution even among the established foreign policy crowd in Washington, you know, it's withering a bit. Mainly in part because even if you believe that this is the only solution, if it's not a realistic outcome, then what are we waiting for? What are we working towards? And that also plays in to peace deals with Israel because if it looks like an unrealistic outcome, then a lot of countries are going to start putting their own interests out ahead at first. And Saudi Arabia is a perfect example because they do already have relationships with the Israelis and have already proven have already taken certain steps. So Saudi Arabia um for one in particular, but also Southeast Asia. This is where I constantly hear efforts their uh efforts to reinvigorate Abraham Accord's countries and so on. And I think that that would be possible. But the but to me it's the Middle Eastern ones that are the most impressive. >> The benefit that monarchies and dictators tend to have. They can play for time and they can if they don't like the situation, chances are they can wait uh for a little while and the situation will evolve. It could be more to their liking. Democracies don't really have that advantage typically. And it seems like what we're seeing now, we've seen it before, but especially now, we're seeing this kind of waiting game play out right now in the development of the Middle East. You've got the Israeli elections coming up. And even though Prime Minister Netanyahu seems like he's been there for a lifetime, and who knows what's coming, but still, we got an election on the way. And then here in the US, the midterm elections are coming up, which could completely reframe the Trump agenda going forward in a way that possibly no one can really expect. How much of what we're seeing right now, whether it is Lebanon, whether it is Syria, whether it's Israel, whether it's the Saudis, who who have you, how much of this is let's wait around and see what develops here, and then we'll we'll kind of figure out how the ground shakes up later. >> Okay. So, there are two things I want to point out here. So, first, I love the point that you made about democracies because it does mean that you pursue peace efforts in a different way. In Lebanon, for example, that's one of the reasons why press efforts, public narratives, talking to the public and listening to them is so important. And if there's anything uh that is very clear in Lebanon, it's that the street is ready for peace. And they vocalize this all the time. There are polls, even polls, by the way. And I know that polling is an iffy thing in Lebanon, but there was a poll that was led by an organization and an individual who was who is tied to the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party, meaning formerly pro- Bashar al-Assad. This guy and his institute did a poll and found a significant majority of individuals of each religious sect in favor of peace. And that's not and so you can trust something like that given that that's not likely in this guy's own interest. Um, so the street is ready. And that is important in democracies versus a monarchy, because you're not really going to be able to impose peace completely if it's a democratic system, even an exceptionally dysfunctional one like Lebanon. I'm not even sure you can call it fully democracy, but you get my point. Now, in terms of the of the elections that you're mentioning in Israel and in the United States, you're right. There are on one hand it's going to hold the Israelis and Americans back from doing anything significant diplomatically or militarily when it comes to the Lebanon Israel peace process. Uh and that's it's difficult for them. They don't want they don't want to risk anything. They on the US side that means for example they're going to have to wait when it comes to giving military aid to the Lebanese armed forces. It's not the time to announce that. That's not going to help when it comes to elections probably for either side. uh on the Israeli side, the uh when the framework was signed, uh you had a lot of folks who were dubious about it, right? And understandably, they're not so sure that the that the that the operations and war uh undermining and degrading Hisbellah should have been halted uh you know, in only certain parts of Lebanon. So, they are dubious, of course. And so, also the Israelis are going to be worried about making major steps, major announcements. That doesn't mean the peace talks themselves aren't continuing and aren't going well. They're talking about they're even talking about things like the border and I have to tell you as they the border is something very very easily figured out. Everybody on both sides repeatedly tells me that it's super easy and just figuring out the border is Nobel Peace Peace Prize winning stuff there. But that said, there's an understanding that on that front we may not see major moves until after the election. And then this is where Iran ties in because Trump is very motiv motivated President Trump motivated by low gas prices and lowering inflation in advance of the elections which is obviously directly tied to the straight of Hormuz. So, it feels a little bit like his operations or threats against Iran are his hands are a little bit tied behind his back or perhaps he's not fully interested in in making good on certain military threats because ultimately what he wants is an open straight and lower gas prices. But after those elections, the US will have more freedom. Trump, the Trump administration will have more freedom in degrading Iran even further. And that plays into the freedom they will have toward Lebanon, Israel, Syria as well, and so on. >> That perfectly segus into my next question. And um we talk about Iran every second of the day. It takes up so much oxygen, but I'd be remiss if I didn't pick your brain on behalf of our viewers when it comes to the secondary sanctions that are being imposed now by a secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessant. this uh uh new operation, whatever they call it at this point in time, to try to isolate and uh and and strangle the Iranian economy based on on sanctions. You worked at Treasury, you worked in uh financial terrorist aspects, you worked with sanctions as well. Give give us a kind of a read here. Is this just the president trying to hit pause right now because he can't find an off-ramp? Or does this administration feel like these secondary sanctions can really be effective here in generating some kind of a a change of mindset or or possible change of regime? The the secretary brought that up last week. What's the endgame here? >> Sure. Well, first, Mike, I love talking about sanctions. It's literally my favorite topic. So, I'm glad you asked me about it. It's basically my love language because I worked in sanctions for a long time and secondary sanctions in general historically have proven to work in undermining the Islamic Republic of Iran and bringing the Iranian regime to the negotiating table with its back against a corner. When I was in the US government from 2010, 2011, 2012, Congress and the Obama administration imposed a series of secondary sanctions particularly against consumers of Iranian oil. And it's that that brought the Iranian regime to its knees and brought them to the negotiating table for the nuclear deal. Now, we could debate the nuclear deal and its pros and cons later, but that said, it's it's the secondary sanctions that really flipped the switch and really increased the pressure on them. And that shouldn't be surprising given that the Iranian regime requests sanctions relief. It's the top of their list for every round of negotiations is that they want sanctions relief and that's because it matters to them. It's what allows them to survive. We don't want them to survive. Obviously, they are already financially standing at the edge of a cliff. Their they their currency has significantly degraded. It is that that led uh protesters to the streets last December. And and so and Treasury knows this. So when I see this campaign, I don't view it necessarily as an off-ramp for President Trump, though I do believe that he is looking in some way to get out of this quagmire. I view it as they are now threatening they're it's not so much last resort as they are pursuing the next level of this campaign because it's going to have an impact on our friends American friends American partners and that's why you see targets being sanctioned for example in the Emirates uh there were entities sanctioned recently that operate in Singapore in China and that is a threat to everyone particularly China is what I would keep my eye on to really financially isolate the Iranian regime. So, I really think that this is a maneuver to aid in this effort, but also in a long-term goal of regime change. I know for a fact that that was the Trump administration's goal, and they still have two years to try and make that happen or to try to push them off the edge of the cliff. And this is something they hope either does that or genuinely gets them to a deal that that works in the favor and national security interests of the United States. I think the question here is though, you know, the administration has bounced kind of from strategy to strategy during the war and listen, part of it is trial and error and you figure out what works, what doesn't, but some of it has just been chaotic. Do you feel like allies who may otherwise feel pressure from the Trump administration to cut ties with Iran are going to take a step back and say, you know what, this could all change tomorrow anyway, so we'll we'll kind of wait and see. And it winds up being ineffective in the end. Is that a danger here? >> When it comes to military operations, I think the answer is yes, but not when it comes to financial efforts. Um, and thankfully the reason for that remains because of the strength of the dollar and the extent to which people uh banks, financial networks work with New York, clear dollars by the US Fed. Uh, we still live in a world where the dollar is is king and where people don't want to be excommunicated out of the US system. uh even even for example by countries that have efforts that try to build systems on the outside like China and Brazil and India and so on they still have to deal on the dollar and so those that power is it really unleashes global market forces in in complying even if they don't want to and China is a perfect example of that and that's why you're seeing so you're seeing these threats from Secretary Bessant the economic D-Day he announced that was mainly a message to China in particular not because we're friendly for them, not because they're going to do it because they're with us in it, but because they're going to it's where the rubber meets the road. >> I wish we had more time to talk. This has been fascinating. Hagar Shamali, foreign policy analyst, we really do appreciate the time. Hopefully, we'll have you back soon. Hopefully, we'll be talking not about the future peace uh but current peace between Israel and Lebanon and beyond in the region. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us. Thank you so much, Mike, >> and we will talk to you here again next week on American View.