US pushes Lebanon to scrap Israel contact ban, Beirut draws a firm red line

Report by Maroun Nassif, English adaptation by Karine Keuchkerian

Israel, which has continued its attacks on Lebanon during both war and ceasefire periods, now appears to be accelerating developments with its long-standing adversary.

In that context, the United States has asked Lebanon, during direct meetings in Washington between the Lebanese and Israeli ambassadors, to repeal the law criminalizing dealings with Israel.

Politically, Lebanon’s official stance appears unified. Sources close to President Joseph Aoun, Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam agree that abolishing the crime of dealing with Israel is premature and not currently under consideration. 

They stress it is far too early to discuss such a step, which, if it were ever to occur, would come only as part of a comprehensive agreement centered on a ceasefire, an end to the war, a halt to the destruction of homes in southern Lebanon, and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanese territory.

Legally, if Lebanon were to decide to abolish the crime of dealing with Israel, the constitution does not explicitly mention such an offense, meaning no constitutional amendment would be required.

However, repealing the law on the boycott of Israel would require a regular parliamentary session with a quorum of 65 lawmakers and passage by an absolute majority of those present. 

In theory, this means the law could be amended with around 30 votes, but in practice, such a quorum and level of support are currently unattainable. Officials say the issue is not merely one of numbers, but a national matter that requires a broad consensus.

As for the penal code provisions under which detainees are prosecuted for dealing with Israel, specifically Articles 273 to 287, these would not necessarily require amendment if a formal agreement with Israel were reached.

Those currently detained or convicted on charges of dealing with Israel prior to any legal change would remain subject to the provisions of the new law to be issued by parliament, leaving their fate tied to future legislation.