The United States has privately criticized Israel for targeting civilian buildings in Lebanon that were reportedly not linked to Hezbollah, according to official Lebanese sources who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat on condition of anonymity.

The sources said Washington acknowledged that the sites were not being used by Hezbollah and held Tel Aviv responsible, calling Israel’s justification for the strikes “unfounded.”

Despite the behind-the-scenes rebuke, the U.S. criticism is unlikely to halt Israel’s ongoing military operations in Lebanon, particularly as the joint monitoring committee has failed to address repeated violations of the ceasefire agreement by the Israeli side.

Officials in Beirut believe that Washington’s remarks will not materially alter the status quo, as Israel continues to benefit from American political cover. This support, they argue, allows Tel Aviv to maintain pressure on Lebanon to set a timeline for Hezbollah’s disarmament, which Israel has tied to its eventual withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

Ministerial sources said President Joseph Aoun remains steadfast in his position to bring all weapons under the control of the state and is actively engaged in communications with Hezbollah’s leadership. These talks, they added, aim to pave the way for serious dialogue that could eventually lead to the state’s exclusive control over all arms once the necessary conditions are met.

According to the same sources, Hezbollah has no alternative but to participate in this dialogue. They dismissed concerns that the group is merely buying time while awaiting the outcome of U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations. The sources emphasized that the upcoming talks with Hezbollah form a central pillar of Lebanon’s national security strategy and are not intended to be symbolic.

Lebanon, they added, remains committed to the continued presence of the monitoring committee overseeing the ceasefire. However, the sources also expressed concern over the apparent lack of U.S. engagement on the ground, particularly regarding Israel’s military escalation and its potential consequences for Lebanon’s fragile stability.

They pointed to the sidelining of Morgan Ortagus, the former Deputy Special Envoy for the Middle East, who had handled the Lebanese portfolio, as a significant setback. This decision, they said, has created uncertainty both for the U.S. mission in Beirut, currently led by Ambassador Lisa Johnson, and for Lebanon’s government.

Meanwhile, political observers in Beirut believe the U.S. absence is not accidental. They interpret the situation as a deliberate strategy designed to give Israel the space it needs to degrade Hezbollah’s remaining military capabilities and pressure Lebanon to move forward on disarmament.

According to lawmakers who regularly visit Washington, the White House supports linking any Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon to Hezbollah's disarmament.

“The framework was crafted in the United States,” one MP reportedly told Asharq Al-Awsat, describing it as a non-negotiable position in American diplomacy.

Lebanon, in turn, is seen as having little choice but to comply. Officials view this path as the only viable route to ending Iran’s influence in the country and ushering in a new political era in the wake of a potential collapse of the Assad regime in Syria.