Middle East crisis: is there really a diplomatic path forward?

When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.

The White House has insisted that a diplomatic solution between Israel and Hezbollah was "achievable" and "urgent", even as Israel launched major strikes on Lebanon.

After senior diplomats from the US, Britain, Germany, France and Italy met in Paris yesterday, the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, urged against "escalatory actions by any party" and Britain called for a ceasefire between the two foes.

What did the commentators say?

The "deadly explosion" of pagers and walkie-talkies "dealt another blow" to Joe Biden's "beleaguered efforts" to reduce tensions in the Middle East, said John Hudson in the Washington Post.

Although "the absence of a full-blown war" between Israel and Hezbollah has been "touted by US officials as a core achievement" of the past 11 months, the recent escalation means "Washington's grip on the crisis appears more tenuous than ever".

The US has "sought to downplay its ability to tamper tensions", said Al Jazeera. It provides Israel with $3.8bn in military aid annually as well as "staunch diplomatic support" but "pushed" on whether the Biden administration could prevent a wider war, Washington said that was “not just a question for the United States”.

After Blinken called for restraint, the UK Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, "went further", said Politico's London Playbook, calling for the first time during the current conflict in southern Lebanon for an "immediate cease-fire".

A war involving both Israeli and the Lebanese armed forces, "the latter still receiving support from UK troops inside Lebanon", would be a "diplomatic nightmare for Britain", said Larisa Brown in The Times, because London has "tried to be a friend of both".

Experts are "divided" on whether the pager attacks "weakened Hezbollah to the extent it's more willing to accept a diplomatic agreement", or if the group "will indeed act" on its threat to retaliate, said Shannon K Kingston for ABC News.

"Oftentimes", Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told the broadcaster, "shows of force like this that knock one combatant back on its heels could be openings to actually secure a negotiated settlement".

But Dan Byman, a senior adviser to the State Department and a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Hezbollah is now much less likely to accept any offered settlement.

"It would be hard for Hezbollah to cut a deal after this humiliation", he said, because "it would look weak and as if you were caving under Israeli pressure", which it "would be".

What next?

The UN Security Council was scheduled to discuss the crisis this afternoon. The "emergency meeting" was requested by Algeria and will be "dedicated to discussing the Israeli cyber-terror attacks", said The Palestine Chronicle.

The UN peacekeeping force in south Lebanon has already urged de-escalation, saying it had witnessed "a heavy intensification of the hostilities across the Blue Line” and throughout its area of operations".

Israel's Ambassador to the UN has already "lambasted" Iran for "pulling the strings" of "terrorist" groups across the Middle East, said The Algemeiner. Danny Danon said the Security Council "and the world" must "wake up to the reality of the threat Iran poses".

But a chink of light appeared in the Israeli media today, noted The Guardian. Reports emerged that Tel Aviv had submitted a new ceasefire proposal to the US, "under which all hostages held in Gaza would be released at the same time in exchange for ending the war" and the Hamas leader, along with his family and thousands of operatives, would be allowed to leave Gaza for a third country "through a safe passage".