Earlier today I caught part of a speech by António Guterres about the war between Israel and Lebanon.
I wasn’t alone. A friend happened to be watching with me.
As the speech continued, I noticed a puzzled look spreading across her face. The kind of expression people get when something doesn’t quite add up but they’re still trying to figure out why.
Finally, she turned to me.
“Didn’t Hezbollah fire rockets at Israel when the Israel–U.S. war with Iran began?”
“Yes,” I said calmly.
“And Israel responded in self-defense… targeting Hezbollah strongholds?”
“Yes,” I said.
“And Israel warned civilians to evacuate areas Hezbollah was using to launch attacks?”
“Yes.”
She nodded slowly and returned her attention to the television.
The Secretary-General continued speaking.
He said the conflict between Israel and Lebanon must stop. He said Lebanon’s sovereignty must be respected. He called on nations to strengthen Lebanon’s military so it could defend that sovereignty.
The puzzled look returned – this time stronger.
She turned again.
“So, the solution he’s proposing is… Israel must stop?”
“Yes,” I said calmly.
“And the world should arm Lebanon?”
“Yes.”
She sat there quietly for a moment, processing.
Then the questions started coming faster.
“Shouldn’t the international community be focused on disarming Hezbollah?”
“Yes.”
“Shouldn’t the Lebanese government itself be working to disarm Hezbollah?”
“Yes.”
She paused again, thinking it through.
“Wouldn’t the obvious solution be for Lebanon and Israel to work together against Hezbollah?”
“Yes,” I said.
By now she was fully exasperated.
“Israel doesn’t have a problem with Lebanon’s government or its people,” she said. “The only reason there’s fighting is because Hezbollah attacked Israel.”
“Yes.”
“And without Hezbollah, Israel and Lebanon could probably live in peace.”
“Yes.”
She leaned back in her chair.
“So, if the focus was on disarming Hezbollah, the war would end.”
“Yes.”
“But if the focus is on arming Lebanon – as he just suggested – that means more weapons, more conflict, more destruction, more death. And this is from the United Nations.”
I nodded.
She sat silently for a long moment.
Then she said something that, in its simplicity, captured the entire problem.
“This is backwards,” she said. “The world has this completely backwards.”
“Yes,” I said calmly.
But there is another part of the story that rarely gets mentioned.
Back in 2006, after a previous war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United Nations itself adopted United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701. The resolution required that southern Lebanon be free of Hezbollah fighters and weapons and that only the Lebanese Armed Forces and UN peacekeepers operate south of the Litani River.
In other words, the international community already agreed on the solution nearly two decades ago: Hezbollah must be removed from Israel’s border.
That never happened.
Instead, Hezbollah entrenched itself deeper in southern Lebanon, built an enormous arsenal of rockets, and embedded its launch sites inside civilian towns and villages – the same areas from which attacks on Israel have repeatedly been launched.
So, when world leaders now speak about respecting Lebanon’s sovereignty or strengthening Lebanon’s military, it is worth asking a very simple question.
What happened to Resolution 1701?
Because the resolution did not fail due to confusion or lack of clarity. It failed because the international community never enforced the one provision that mattered most: the removal of Hezbollah from southern Lebanon.
For nearly two decades, the blueprint for peace has already existed.
Which brings us back to that moment in my living room.
After listening to the speech, after working through the logic step by step, my friend finally leaned back and repeated what she had just said.
“This is backwards. The world has this completely backwards!”
I nodded.
Because when the solution written by the international community itself is ignored, and the focus shifts from disarming the aggressor to restraining the country defending itself, the logic inevitably begins to twist.
And once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
“Yes,” I said calmly.
“Welcome to our world.”
Harry Katcher is a writer and editor based in Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. He writes on Israel, the Middle East, and the challenges of moral clarity in modern discourse.