Lebanese Speaker Berri Rejects Framework Deal, Cites Risk of 'Civil War'

Nabih Berri’s rejection of the framework agreement marks a significant escalation in the political rift within Beirut. Speaking to the pro-Hezbollah daily *Al-Akhbar*, Berri described the document not as a sovereign pact but as a list of "demands" that are "ten times worse" than the failed May 17, 1983 accord. By invoking the 1983 treaty—which was abrogated under intense Shia and Syrian pressure—Berri is signaling that the Shia political bloc views the current Washington-led diplomacy as an existential threat to its standing.

Warnings of Internal Strife

Berri’s rhetoric focused heavily on the danger of domestic instability. He cautioned that the agreement is designed to "sow discord among Lebanese" to the benefit of the "Israeli occupation." Despite the severity of his warning, Berri called on his supporters to avoid street protests, fearing they could be exploited to drag the country into chaos. Instead, he indicated that Amal movement ministers would participate in cabinet meetings to voice their opposition through official state institutions.

Strategic Context and Regional Alignment

The Speaker's stance aligns with a broader rejection of the U.S. proposal by the Shia axis, which remains tethered to the "Islamabad Agreement"—a separate memorandum of understanding between Iran and the United States. Berri suggested that the Islamabad framework is the only mechanism capable of producing the "balances" necessary to force Israeli compliance. He also addressed reports regarding the potential dismissal of the Lebanese Army commander, labeling the military a "red line" and a guarantor of national stability. As the IDF continues to dismantle Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon, the political battle over the terms of any future settlement has become the central front in Beirut.