U.S. envoys Thomas Barrack and Morgan Ortagus are due in Beirut on Monday at the head of a large American delegation that includes members of the Senate and other senior figures, following a series of meetings with Israeli officials in Paris and elsewhere.

The pair are expected to spend three days in Lebanon in what sources described as a decisive visit aimed at advancing the process of disarming Hezbollah.

On Monday evening, Barrack and Ortagus will dine with about 30 Lebanese ministers and MPs at a restaurant in downtown Beirut before holding formal talks with government leaders on Tuesday. A second dinner is planned on Wednesday at the residence of MP Fouad Makhzoumi, gathering lawmakers and ministers.

The visit comes on the heels of talks the two envoys held with Israeli officials last week. According to sources cited by Nidaa al-Watan newspaper, those discussions were meant to encourage Israel to take reciprocal steps in response to the Lebanese government’s recent decision to push ahead with Hezbollah’s disarmament under a U.S.-backed framework.

Israeli officials neither accepted nor rejected the proposals, but instead asked for a deadline—expiring Monday—to give their answer. Negotiators interpreted the request as a cautiously positive sign, noting that an outright rejection would likely have been immediate, while asking for time suggested Israel was weighing its options seriously.

According to sources cited by Nidaa al-Watan, Barrack is seeking two key concessions from Israel:

• A 15-day halt to hostilities and targeted killings to give the Lebanese army time to finalize its disarmament plan, present it to the cabinet, and begin implementing elements of the U.S. framework.

• Once implementation begins—on a timeline not extending beyond early next year—Lebanon would demonstrate its seriousness. At that point, Israel would withdraw from one of five hilltop positions it currently holds in southern Lebanon, with further withdrawals unfolding gradually until Hezbollah’s arsenal is totally dismantled.

Analysts said if Barrack secures both the 15-day truce and an initial Israeli pullback, it would deliver two major outcomes.

First, Lebanon would gain a powerful political tool to weaken Hezbollah’s argument for retaining its weapons, since Israel would already have addressed some of its preconditions, namely ending hostilities and beginning a withdrawal. This, analysts said, would effectively corner Hezbollah by eroding its rationale for armed resistance.

Second, it would hand Speaker Nabih Berri a political victory, as he was the one who originally proposed the formula of a 15-day cessation of hostilities coupled with a phased Israeli withdrawal from the five positions.

Meanwhile, on the domestic front, Brig. Gen. Andre Rahal, an adviser to President Joseph Aoun, has been shuttling between Ain al-Tineh and Hezbollah’s stronghold in Beirut’s southern suburbs.

On Thursday, Rahal met Berri. Later that evening, he held talks with Hezbollah MP Mohammad Raad, head of the Loyalty to the Resistance bloc, for a rare meeting acknowledged by the party in an official statement. Hezbollah said the two men discussed the political situation and the positions of various sides. Analysts said the unusual public disclosure signaled that communication channels between the president and Hezbollah had been restored after being severed since August 5, when the government decided to move forward with disarming the group.

During the 90-minute meeting, Raad told Rahal that stripping Hezbollah of its arsenal through a confrontational government decision "risks provoking a clash." But he added: “If you want cooperation, we are ready, even at the highest levels. You may be surprised at how far our cooperation can go. Give us your plans, we’ll share ours, and we can talk. Maybe we’ll find a solution through a defensive strategy for the weapons. Otherwise, any imposed decision is rejected, and a clash would be inevitable.”

Raad insisted Hezbollah would not surrender “a single weapon, heavy or light, not even a single bullet” under coercion or outside a national consensus. He also dismissed the idea of international security guarantees, saying: “In the past, the Lebanese State received guarantees that ended up in the trash. There is no trust in guarantees anymore. What we need are concrete measures on the ground.”

Rahal presented working papers outlining possible mechanisms of cooperation, stressing that the president’s approach was not confrontational but instead aimed at gradual, practical steps. The government’s decision, he said, should be understood as part of that process.

“Things will take time, and nothing has been resolved yet,” a source familiar with the meeting told Nidaa al-Watan. The encounter, dubbed the “R–R meeting” (Raad–Rahal), “only re-established contact between the president and Hezbollah—nothing more.”