Israel is moving towards reintroducing conditions related to the identity of Lebanese officers and military personnel who will be deployed in the "experimental areas" in southern Lebanon, alongside its insistence on a mechanism that allows for the inspection of homes and private properties to ensure they are free of Hezbollah weapons, according to Lebanese political sources revealed to "Erm News."

The sources following the recent movements stated that efforts are ongoing to reactivate the "experimental areas" project, after Prime Minister Nawaf Salam raised it during his meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington, amid American support for the idea and readiness to assist in its implementation.

This coincides with the official U.S. statement regarding the meeting between Salam and Rubio on September 28, which confirmed Washington's commitment to the "trilateral framework" and support for the authority of the Lebanese state, while Salam's office clarified that he called for activating the framework and adopting a phased and reciprocal implementation with a "credible verification mechanism." 
Names of military personnel before their entry

According to the sources, Israel insists on the condition of receiving lists in advance of the names of the officers and personnel that the army will assign to enter the experimental areas, to ensure that there are no military personnel it considers close to Hezbollah.

The sources indicate that the Israeli proposal may go further, reaching the demand not to include Shiite officers and personnel in some units assigned to the mission, a condition that the Lebanese army rejects, as it affects its military structure and the exclusive right of its leadership to choose and distribute its personnel.
This comes amid American efforts to hold a Lebanese-Israeli military meeting in Tampa, Florida, during the second half of October. Recent Lebanese reports confirmed that the expected meeting will specifically discuss the future of the experimental areas and mechanisms for their success, while other sources indicated that the date is around October 20, without it being finalized yet.

The House Inspection Dilemma

However, the most complicated issue in the negotiations, according to the sources, remains the inspection of homes. Israel insists that declaring an area free of Hezbollah weapons cannot be limited to removing visible military installations and stores, but must include the ability to verify that weapons are not being transferred to homes, farms, and private warehouses. 

Here, the required mechanism collides with a legal obstacle in Lebanon. In July, the idea of granting the army an "open judicial signal" allowing it to inspect properties within the experimental areas was proposed, but the Attorney General, Judge Ahmad Rami Al-Haj, denied issuing such a signal. Subsequently, a different formula was discussed, whereby the army would submit reports about suspected properties to the judiciary to obtain permission for inspections in each case, instead of a comprehensive mandate.

The sources confirmed that the army insists it will confiscate weapons when found, but it will not move from one house to another to inspect, as entering a home requires judicial permission even if it is located within an experimental area.

The Lebanese army command announced on September 9 that it had inspected a number of homes "according to Lebanese laws and with the consent of their owners," confirming the continuation of legal restrictions on inspections.

The issue gains additional importance with sources' information about Israel's continued demand for direct security and military coordination with the Lebanese army, which, according to the Israeli proposal, reaches managing some southern arrangements through a joint coordination room, which the army refuses to turn into a format that grants Israel a role in managing its operations or choosing its personnel.

Who Determines the Army's Rules?

Military researcher and expert Muhammad Youssef Al-Nour says, in a reading for "Erm News," that the essence of the problem goes beyond the experimental areas themselves to an attempt to draw the operational rules of the Lebanese military institution.

Al-Nour adds that "if it is true that Israel wants to be informed in advance about the names of the officers and military personnel, or to have a say in their backgrounds and sectarian affiliations, we are facing a transition from discussing security arrangements on the borders to interfering in the structure of a sovereign Lebanese institution." He points out that the Lebanese army is a national institution that its leadership cannot accept being dictated by Israel who serves in the south and who does not.

The expert notes that this does not hide a real problem concerning the weapons present in private properties, as the success of any plan to limit weapons assumes the state's ability to access them, but this must happen by a Lebanese decision and according to Lebanese law, not based on conditions imposed by Israel. 

From here, Al-Nour concludes that the Florida meeting will be a test of the limits of the verification mechanism; will it help the army implement the state's decision, or will it turn into a means of Israeli oversight over the army itself?