Israeli forces are unlikely to withdraw from five key military positions in southern Lebanon in the near future, justifying their continued presence on "strategic grounds," The National reported, citing Lebanese, French, and U.S. sources.

Since a ceasefire was implemented in late November between Israel and Hezbollah, Israeli troops have maintained control over several strategic points along the border. These positions, which were supposed to be vacated by February 18, provide surveillance and defense advantages due to their elevated locations overlooking critical areas.

A senior Lebanese military source revealed that the U.S. initially opposed Israel’s ongoing deployment in Lebanon but later shifted its stance.

“This appears to have changed now; the Israelis managed to convince the Americans that they need to stay in these five locations,” the source said.

The same source emphasized that the Lebanese army has been actively deployed in the south.

“There are no issues with the Lebanese army’s deployment in the south. The forces are already there, clearing the towns so residents can safely return,” the source said. “The Israelis don’t want to give up the five hilltops because they see them as key monitoring and support centers. These positions overlook southern Syria, effectively linking their network.”

A U.S. official, who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, outlined two conditions that must be met before Israel considers a full withdrawal.

“The first set involves the redeployment of the Lebanese army in the south Litani sector and the removal of Hezbollah’s apparatus from that area, including dismantling its remaining infrastructure and weapons caches,” the official stated.

“The second set of conditions requires Lebanon to elect a president, form a new government, and adopt a ministerial declaration that bans Hezbollah’s military activity, ensuring that the Lebanese state is the sole authority responsible for arms, which has now been accomplished.”

Following the partial withdrawal of Israeli troops last month, the Lebanese army expanded its deployment across southern border towns in coordination with the Quintet committee, which oversees the ceasefire mechanism, and the UN peacekeeping force, UNIFIL.

In an attempt to expedite Israel’s withdrawal, France proposed deploying its own forces in southern Lebanon or expanding the UN’s presence. However, three sources confirmed that Israel rejected the proposal.

“The objective was to ensure that the concerns of both sides were addressed – to reassure Israeli security but not at the expense of Lebanon’s sovereignty,” a French diplomatic source stated. “This is natural as we are part of the mechanism committee. We are working closely with the U.S. to maintain open channels with the belligerents.”

The U.S. official indicated that Washington had not pressured Israel to accept the French proposal.

“In addition to security concerns, there’s a long-term strategic reasoning to keep the Lebanese government in check and, eventually, push Lebanon toward a long-term peace agreement with Israel. It’s a long-game, steady-state approach.”

Sources revealed that the U.S. briefly froze its funding to the Lebanese army before reinstating it under strict conditions.

“There must be no Hezbollah military presence south of the Litani River – or anywhere in Lebanon, for that matter – or else the funding will be cut, and the ceasefire could collapse as well,” said the military source.

The U.S. is Lebanon’s primary military backer, providing hundreds of millions of dollars annually in aid, including weapons, training, and equipment such as armored vehicles, artillery, and surveillance drones. Since 2006, Washington has contributed over $3 billion in security assistance to the Lebanese army, according to a U.S. State Department fact sheet published in January.

Many observers view international support for the Lebanese military as a crucial step in enforcing UN Resolution 1701, which calls for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon—a clear reference to Hezbollah.

“The U.S. has been and remains Lebanon’s most enduring partner. Over 80 percent of all military investment comes from the U.S. The current administration remains committed to a safe and secure region, but that could change,” said the U.S. official.

However, the official warned that Washington cannot shoulder the burden alone.

“Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE need to bolster Lebanon now rather than later. This cannot be a ‘wait-and-see’ experiment. President Aoun has already demonstrated that the future cannot be shaped in isolation – it requires strong regional partnerships.”

Bilal Saab, a senior managing director at Trends US and a former Pentagon official who oversaw U.S. assistance to the Lebanese military, described the evolving nature of U.S.-Lebanon military relations.

“This is phase three of the U.S. relationship with Lebanon's military,” Saab explained. “Phase one began in 2007, shortly after the Nahr Al Bared war. Phase two culminated in the Fajr Al Joroud operation against ISIS. Now, we’re in phase three, which should focus on broader security and national defense. The U.S. has a unique window of opportunity in Lebanon today – it must seize it.”