The ceasefire in Lebanon, hailed as a diplomatic triumph when it was brokered, is unravelling at an alarming pace. For the families in Beirut's southern suburbs who returned to rubble, the pause in fighting offered a fleeting hope. But the limits of a truce that was always more about US-Iran relations than the lives on the ground are now starkly obvious. The UK government, in a carefully worded statement, has urged all parties to exercise restraint, a clear sign that Whitehall believes the accord is hanging by a thread.
The trouble is that the ceasefire was never designed to address the root causes of the conflict. It was a temporary patch, a way to de-escalate tensions between Washington and Tehran without tackling the proxy war that has turned Lebanon into a battleground. Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed militia that holds considerable sway in the country, has not disarmed. Israeli airstrikes have resumed in response to alleged violations. The cycle of violence is not broken; it is merely on pause.
For ordinary Lebanese, the cost is measured in more than just lives. The economy, already shattered by years of political paralysis and corruption, cannot take another shock. The currency has plunged, inflation is rampant, and jobs are scarce. A family in Tripoli told me they have used up their savings just to buy bread. They do not care about the geopolitics of the ceasefire. They care about whether they can feed their children tomorrow.
The UK's caution is well placed. London has long recognised that lasting stability in Lebanon requires more than a temporary truce. It needs a political settlement that includes all factions, a functioning government that can deliver basic services, and an end to the external meddling that fuels the conflict. But achieving that is a Herculean task. The US and Iran are locked in their own strategic rivalry, and Lebanon is just one arena in a wider regional struggle.
The ceasefire exposed the limits of the US-Iran truce precisely because it was a top-down arrangement. It did not involve the Lebanese people or address their legitimate grievances. It was a deal between powers that saw Lebanon as a chessboard, not a home. When the people are not part of the peace, the peace will not last. The UK, with its history of engagement in the region, should push for a more inclusive process that puts the kitchen-table issues at the centre.
Until then, the ceasefire will remain fragile. And the families of Beirut, Tripoli, and the south will continue to pay the price for a peace that was never really theirs.
