‘Meaningful step’: First-ever Lebanese–Israeli civil panel held at Munich Security Conference

The event, titled “Conversation on Regional Integration: Perspectives in the Middle East”, looked at Lebanon and Israel in the aftermath of the Gaza war.

MIND Israel and Lebanese-American organization This is Beirut held the first-ever formal Lebanese-Israeli civil society panel at the Munich Security Conference this week, representing a “meaningful first step toward reversing decades of hostility,” Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Yadlin, founder of MIND, told on Wednesday.

“The very fact that this event took place signals a willingness on both sides to pursue a different path,” he told the Post, “and [is] a small but meaningful first step toward reversing decades of hostility, based on the understanding that war is not inevitable.”

The event, titled “Conversation on Regional Integration: Perspectives in the Middle East,” looked at Lebanon and Israel in the aftermath of the Israel-Hamas War. Particular focus was on Hezbollah’s disarmament, ongoing indirect talks between Lebanon and Israel, and the broader prospects for regional integration.

This is Beirut is outside of the country but nevertheless remains closely connected to audiences inside Lebanon and has a strong grasp of the public mood and the views of Lebanon’s diverse society, Yadlin explained. MIND is unfortunately not able to collaborate directly with Lebanese citizens due to Lebanese criminal law, which prohibits Lebanese citizens from having any contact or engagement with Israelis, he added.

A recent poll released by the Council for a Secure America on Tuesday found that around 40% of Lebanese respondents support normalization with Israel, a figure significantly higher than a previous survey suggested. Yadlin said this indicates “genuine openness to change despite existing legal constraints.”

He believes that normalization with Lebanon is realistic if both countries act in accordance with their core national interests and do not allow Iranian interests to dictate their policies.

“Yes, Hezbollah must be weakened in order for the Lebanese government to move toward normalization, and this will happen, either by Israel, through another military operation targeting its key power centers, or, preferably, by a Lebanese state strong enough to do so itself. But until that becomes possible, there is significant value in ‘preparing the ground.’”

He explained that Israel can build trust with Lebanon through measures such as official Israeli statements clarifying that Israel has no territorial claims against Lebanon. On the other side, Lebanon can generate confidence by repealing the Lebanese criminal law that prohibits contact with Israelis and, at the civil level, by promoting people-to-people dialogue like the event in Munich.

“Steps like these can help weaken Hezbollah’s political hold in Lebanon because one of its central justifications for keeping its weapons is the claim that it is needed to defend Lebanon from Israel,” he added.

Regarding territorial claims, Yadlin said that Israel must first have its security concerns guaranteed.

“Israel cannot accept the continued presence of Hezbollah’s terror army on its border. Southern Lebanon must be demilitarized of weapons and cleared of Hezbollah terrorists; this is a central lesson of October 7, and it is not negotiable. The threat posed by Hezbollah’s precision missiles is also something Israel cannot live with. Therefore, as long as Hezbollah is not dismantled and the Lebanese government cannot confront it on its own, it is essential that Israel retain freedom of action in Lebanon to counter these threats,” he said.

War creates window of opportunity

Nevertheless, he believes that the war has created a window of opportunity.

“The war has reshaped the regional landscape and dealt a severe blow to Iran’s ‘axis of evil.’ Hezbollah – long the most important and threatening actor in that network – was defeated in its war with Israel. That military defeat also created conditions for political change inside Lebanon. It helped pave the way for a more moderate, pragmatic leadership that seeks to restore sovereignty and a state monopoly over weapons and to put Lebanon back on a path of growth after years of political paralysis and economic crisis.”

He urged the international community – specifically the US – to leverage the current climate to deepen diplomatic pressure on the government of Lebanon and to intensify the financial campaign against Hezbollah’s financial networks.

In parallel, Yadlin said it is important to increase US involvement in supporting the Lebanese Armed Forces and to mobilize as many positive actors as possible – European countries, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE – to lead the reconstruction process in southern Lebanon.

“The goal is to ensure the area is not rebuilt with Iranian money, which would allow Hezbollah to re-entrench itself in those areas,” he added.

Yadlin, however, stressed that “this window of opportunity will not remain open for a long time” and that Hezbollah is already recovering with the help of the Iranian money and rebuilding its military strength.

If normalization fails, what do the next five years look like for Israel-Lebanon relations?

“The more relevant question here is not whether normalization will fail but whether Lebanon will be able to return to a positive trajectory and uproot Iranian influence and Hezbollah’s grip – an influence that has brought destruction on the country time and again,” he said, adding that he is “optimistic because the major shift has already happened.”

“Sooner or later, Israel and Lebanon will bring their state of hostility to an end. And if my optimism is premature, it will become relevant after another round of fighting that further weakens Hezbollah.”

Reflecting on the event, This is Beirut said it “carried significant symbolic weight.”

“At a time of heightened polarization across the Middle East, the cooperation between a Lebanese and an Israeli organization at one of the world’s most prominent security forums underscored a growing recognition that dialogue and regional integration are no longer abstract aspirations but strategic imperatives.

“While profound political and security obstacles remain, the panel signaled that civil society actors are increasingly willing to test new frameworks for engagement, even amid ongoing tensions.”