Gregg Carlstrom: The Economist's Middle East Correspondent on Israel's strikes on Lebanon, impact on the ceasefire

Israel’s attacks on Lebanon may be a sticking point in ceasefire negotiations between Iran and the United States.  

More 300 people were killed and over 1000 injured in Israel's strikes on Lebanon yesterday, with Israel claiming the conflict there wasn't covered by the ceasefire agreement. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's since ordered his Cabinet to open direct talks with Lebanon to establish "peace relations", but has rejected any reports of a ceasefire.  

The Economist's Middle East correspondent Gregg Carlstrom told Mike Hosking the strikes won’t stop entirely, but we may not see the same level as before.  

He says that if Israel tones down their attacks, it will hopefully take away the threat to the broader ceasefire in the region.  

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
So the word currently associated with the ceasefires, of course shaky,
in no small part because Israel seems to think Lebanon
may or may not still be fair game. Israel maintains
Hiszbela is not covered by the agreement agreed. Carlstrom, Middle
East correspondent at the Economists Political author is with us.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
Greg Morning, Good morning for you.

Speaker 1 (00:17):
So the news in the last couple of hours in
NTNYA Who's going to have a word worth Lebanon over
the weekend or some stage soon. Does that solve this
part of the problem or not.

Speaker 2 (00:25):
It helped? I mean it comes after Donald Trump had
a word with him. I'm told he read nataw the
Riot Act in the past few hours, and so I
think that does mean the Israelis will restrain their bombing
in Gaza they want in Lebanon. Sorry, they won't cease
it entirely, but we perhaps will not see the sorts

(00:46):
of horrific scenes that we saw on Wednesday, with one
hundred coordinated breaks the country, one thousand people killed and injured.
There will be less of that in Lebanon, and there
will be these negotiations. So the Israelis will come that
down and hopefully that will take away this to the
broader ceasefire in the region, the one between America, Israel,

(01:07):
and Iran.

Speaker 1 (01:08):
The Lebanese president sometime a couple of weeks ago, in
the fog of war. You forget when it happened, but
the president came out, I thought, interestingly and said, look,
his blar is not Lebanon. Lebanon's not let his balar.
Let's have a word. Did that go anywhere?

Speaker 2 (01:21):
It didn't. I mean, they have been offering direct talks
the Lebanese government for a number of weeks now, and
there was a somewhat receptive statement from the Israelis a
few weeks ago, and they said they might be willing
to do that, but they didn't move forward with those negotiations.
I think we're at a moment now where Hesbella in
Lebanon has become deeply unpopular even with many of its

(01:44):
own constituents or supporters, who blame it for dragging the
country into yet another war. Now at the best of
it run so there is a moment politically when there's
a chance to do something about their weapons, about their arsenal,
but the Israelis did not at that opportunity. Are now
being pushed into it, I think by the Trump restriction

(02:05):
very broadly.

Speaker 1 (02:06):
If this is it, if the peace talks work, if
the war is over, is Israel satisfied with what they
and the Americans have been able to achieve in Iran.

Speaker 2 (02:16):
It really depends on the outcome of these negotiations. If
America and Iran managed to get to some sort of
more comprehensive deal where the Iranians, let's say, close down
parts of their nuclear program, agree to ship out of
the country the stockpile of four hundred kilograms of near

(02:36):
weapons grade uranim that they have, if they agreed to
maybe some other concessions, either around their missiles or their
support for groups like Hallah. If they make those kinds
of concessions, I think the Israelis would be quite satisfied
because it would diminish the threat they have from Iran,
which is their main state adversary. But if the Audians

(02:58):
don't do that, if we end up with a very trumpy,
you know, bare bones ten point agreement that doesn't actually
too much, or if the talk's still and we end
up back to a version of the status quote we
had on February twenty seventh, before the war. In that case,
I think the Israelis will not be satisfied around We'll
still have its urium stockpile, it will still have the

(03:20):
ability to fire missiles at Israel. The things they set
out to do in the war will be unachieved.

Speaker 1 (03:26):
Greg, appreciate your expertise. Having good week in Greg Helstrom,
who's the Middle East correspondent at the Economist line. Not
the greatest, but we got there in the end.

Speaker 2 (03:32):
I think. For more from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen
live to news talks. It'd be from six am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.