Direct talks between Lebanon and Israel resumed in Rome on Tuesday, with disagreements over Israel's conditions for withdrawing from southern Lebanon threatening to delay implementation of the US-brokered framework agreement signed last month.
The sixth round of negotiations, held at the US embassy in the Italian capital, comes as both sides seek to translate the 26 June framework agreement into a phased Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon.
However, Israeli media reported that disputes over the first "pilot zone" and the conditions attached to further withdrawals risk stalling progress.
According to Israel's Maariv newspaper, practical preparations are currently focused on only one "pilot zone", despite the framework referring to two. While US officials have suggested an Israeli withdrawal from the first area could begin "within days", no map or binding timetable has been agreed.
Under the framework, Israel would gradually withdraw from designated areas before handing them over to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), which would deploy troops, dismantle Hezbollah infrastructure and prevent the group from re-establishing a military presence.
But Israel reportedly insists that any expansion of the plan will depend on whether the first "pilot zone" is deemed successful.
Israel seeks US oversight
According to Maariv , Israel is demanding US oversight of Lebanese military units deployed to the "pilot zones", including vetting soldiers to ensure they have no links to Hezbollah.
The report said Israel also wants proof that the Lebanese army can locate weapons, destroy tunnels and military sites, prevent Hezbollah fighters from returning, and maintain long-term control over the areas before agreeing to additional withdrawals.
It remains unclear who will determine whether the pilot project has succeeded.
Israeli officials are reportedly seeking the ability to delay future withdrawals if they argue that Hezbollah infrastructure or fighters remain in the area. At the same time, the framework does not define operational criteria for dismantling Hezbollah's military infrastructure.
The report added that Israel has not committed to a broader withdrawal beyond the initial phase and continues to insist on maintaining what it calls a "security buffer zone" along the border for as long as it considers Hezbollah a threat.
Lebanon pushes for immediate withdrawal
Lebanon has instructed its delegation to demand that Israeli forces begin withdrawing immediately from two "pilot zones" before any further discussions take place.
According to the Lebanese presidency, the Lebanese army is prepared to deploy as Israeli troops withdraw.
Beirut has also argued that the "pilot zones" should include areas currently occupied by Israeli forces so that the first phase delivers tangible political and territorial gains.
Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri again criticised the framework agreement, warning that withdrawing through pilot zones rather than larger administrative districts would unnecessarily prolong the process.
"If withdrawal is carried out through pilot zones, it will take two years," he told Lebanese newspaper Al Joumhouria .
Berri reiterated his opposition to the "principle" of pilot zones, saying he had instead proposed withdrawals by district ( caza ), which he argued would be faster.
He nevertheless said he would welcome any outcome that secured an Israeli withdrawal, the return of displaced residents, the release of Lebanese prisoners and reconstruction.
"What matters to me is eating the grapes, not killing the vineyard's guard," he said.
Berri also described the framework agreement as "a trap", arguing that it sought to draw the Lebanese army into internal confrontations with Hezbollah that would only benefit Israel .
"The aim is to drag the army into internal clashes and provoke discord that serves only the Israeli enemy, which seeks to lure us into this trap," he said.
The negotiations come as the renewed US-Iran conflict casts fresh uncertainty over the framework agreed in Washington.