Kataeb MP Salim Sayegh voiced support for ongoing direct negotiations between Lebanon and Israel, arguing that U.S.-backed diplomacy remains Lebanon’s best chance to secure a ceasefire, restore stability, and reassert State authority, while warning that Iran continues to seek influence over the Lebanese file through Hezbollah.

In an interview with Al Hadath television, Sayegh said the Lebanese government was fulfilling its responsibilities by insisting on direct negotiations and ensuring continued U.S. involvement in the process.

“The United States must remain present in any negotiations because it serves as a guarantor for Lebanon’s protection and recovery,” Sayegh said. “That is not an easy role to play, but we saw yesterday how Washington helped spare Beirut and its southern suburbs from Israeli bombardment.”

He said the immediate objective should be to have the United States contain the conflict and secure Israeli concessions that could pave the way for a ceasefire.

“The first priority is for Washington to restrain the conflict and obtain concessions from Israel regarding its military operations,” he said. “That would open the door to a ceasefire, which must then lead to broader security arrangements, including the Lebanese state taking full responsibility for the weapons issue.”

Sayegh argued that Israel would have little reason to halt military operations or withdraw from southern Lebanon unless Beirut could demonstrate its ability to impose state authority on the ground.

“Why would Israel agree to a ceasefire when the military situation is working in its favor?” he asked. “Why would it withdraw from southern Lebanon while it continues to occupy territory, expand its control, kill, and displace people? The only convincing answer is for Lebanon to prove that it can effectively control its territory and guarantee its sovereignty.”

Addressing Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri’s assurances regarding Hezbollah, Sayegh questioned their reliability, noting that previous guarantees had failed to prevent the latest escalation.

“It appears that Iran has communicated with Speaker Berri and provided him with assurances on this issue,” he said. “But Berri had previously given guarantees to President Joseph Aoun, and Hezbollah still launched a war on March 2 in support of Iran. That means Berri himself was misled, so I do not know how much value such guarantees carry today.”

Sayegh also pointed to recent comments by U.S. President Donald Trump, who linked calm in Beirut and its southern suburbs to security for Israeli communities in the north.

“Yesterday, Trump essentially said that quiet in Beirut would be matched by quiet in northern Israel,” Sayegh said. “Then Hezbollah Political Council Deputy Chairman Mahmoud Qmati appeared and rejected that formula, insisting instead on a comprehensive ceasefire across all of Lebanon.”

He said Hezbollah’s actions reflected its rhetoric, citing attacks on northern Israel as evidence that the group was not committed to understandings reached through diplomatic channels.

“The party’s actions matched its words when it shelled northern Israeli communities,” he said. “That sends a clear message that it does not consider itself bound by agreements reached elsewhere.”

According to Sayegh, Iran is seeking recognition as an essential player in any future ceasefire arrangement involving Hezbollah.

“I know with certainty that Iran wants to be a full partner in any ceasefire agreement and in any guarantees related to Hezbollah in Lebanon,” he said. “For that reason, it is not in Tehran’s interest for a ceasefire to take hold unless its role is formally acknowledged.”

He noted that Trump had publicly suggested that understandings regarding Lebanon were reached directly with Lebanese authorities, without Iranian involvement.

“Trump said these understandings were reached with Lebanon’s leadership and that Iran had no role in them,” Sayegh said. “Then Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf responded on X, saying he had coordinated the matter with Speaker Berri. It was almost as if he was undermining President Aoun’s authority and signaling that the Washington track was unacceptable.”

Sayegh argued that Iran does not want major decisions concerning Lebanon to be made outside its sphere of influence. However, he praised Aoun’s insistence that direct negotiations represent the only alternative to continued conflict.

“President Aoun has repeatedly said that direct negotiations are the alternative to war because war has brought Lebanon nothing but suffering,” Sayegh said. “The decision to enter this conflict was neither the choice of the Lebanese state nor the Lebanese people. By making that distinction, he is effectively taking the Lebanese file out of Iran’s hands.”

He said Aoun’s approach demonstrated that Lebanon was moving in the right direction and expressed confidence that the country would eventually emerge from the crisis.

“I remain optimistic that Lebanon will reach safety and stability sooner or later,” he said.

Discussing Washington’s role in guaranteeing Israeli commitments, Sayegh said the United States recognizes only Lebanon’s legitimate state institutions and deals primarily with President Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.

“The Americans recognize President Aoun as the guarantor,” he said. “They communicate through Lebanon’s embassy in Washington and with the legitimate authorities represented by the president and the prime minister.”

At the same time, he warned that Lebanon’s credibility would be tested by its ability to prevent further Hezbollah attacks against Israel.

“If President Aoun, Speaker Berri, or Prime Minister Salam cannot secure Hezbollah’s commitment to stop attacking northern Israel, then I fear the Americans may leave Lebanon to face Israel on its own,” Sayegh said. “In that case, Lebanon would be exposed to a military balance of power whose outcome is already well known.”

Sayegh also called on the international community to abandon what he described as outdated punitive approaches toward Lebanon and instead focus on strengthening state institutions.

“The logic of punishing the Lebanese state has become obsolete,” he said. “What Lebanon needs today is for its friends and the international community to rally around its institutions, beginning with the Lebanese Army.”

He said the United States, European countries, France, Italy, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and other partners increasingly recognize that there is no viable future for Lebanon outside the framework of a strong state.

“There is no project worth betting on in Lebanon except the project of the state,” he said. “Nothing outside the state can provide a sustainable future.”

Looking ahead, Sayegh noted that former French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian is expected to visit Lebanon in the coming days and said discussions would focus on mobilizing broader international support for the country.

“No single country can shoulder the responsibility of helping Lebanon on its own,” he said. “We need a coordinated international effort to create a supportive environment for the Lebanese state and help protect it. Otherwise, if the state is left exposed, Lebanon risks once again falling under Iranian influence and seeing Hezbollah regain its ability to destabilize the political system and reassert control.”