Cairo talks set the stage for the Paris conference

Lebanon’s effort to enhance its military and reassert state authority over the decision of war and peace has entered a decisive diplomatic phase. As the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) prepares for the Paris conference on 5 March 2026, a high-level preparatory meeting in Cairo has emerged as a critical testing ground, with the participation of Beirut’s top military and security officials.

The discussions go beyond financial pledges; they center on restoring institutional authority, reinforcing sovereignty, and aligning international support with Lebanon’s internal reform trajectory.

The Cairo preparatory meeting

The Cairo preparatory meeting is designed to define the practical framework for the Paris conference, scheduled for 5 March 2026. The Lebanese delegation, headed by LAF Commander General Rodolphe Haikal and Internal Security Forces (ISF) Director General Major General Raed Abdallah, presented the operational requirements to complete the army’s phased deployment across Lebanese territory. Essential needs include necessary equipment, logistics, training, and financial sustainability. It should be noted that the LAF remains one of the few institutions that retain cross-sectarian credibility domestically and sustained trust internationally. Yet financial erosion since 2019 has strained operational capacity and personnel welfare. Therefore, sustained international backing remains essential for maintaining stability.

The meeting gathered representatives from the countries of the “Quintet Committee” (comprising Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, France, and the United States) and key international stakeholders. The United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert was also present, reflecting the broad international stake in Lebanon’s stability.

According to informed sources, the European Union (EU) is set to contribute an initial $100 million in support of the Lebanese Army. This pledge represents a significant signal of continued European investment in Lebanon’s institutional stability, at a time where its security institutions continue to operate under severe financial strain.

While over 50 countries are expected to attend the Paris conference, the Cairo meeting sought to translate general expressions of support into structured recommendations and concrete priorities. Diplomatic discussions in Cairo focused not only on material support but also on clarifications regarding the army’s deployment plans, particularly north of the Litani River, and on broader reform commitments. From here, the preparatory nature of the meeting underscores a desire among participating states to move beyond general pledges and toward measurable, operational commitments.

Egypt backs Lebanon’s sovereignty and state institutions

A notable dimension of the Cairo meeting was Egypt’s explicit political support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and institutional empowerment. On the sidelines of the preparatory session, Egyptian Foreign Minister (FM) Badr Abdelatty met with French envoy Jean-Yves Le Drian.

Abdelatty reaffirmed his country’s firm support for Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, highlighting the priority of enabling Lebanese state institutions, foremost among them the LAF, to fully assume their responsibilities. He underscored that empowering national institutions is essential for guaranteeing stability.

The Egyptian minister welcomed France’s active role and the convening of the Paris conference, while also expressing support for efforts to organize a later conference aimed at revitalizing Lebanon’s economy and reconstruction. Cairo thus signaled its readiness to contribute to the success of these milestones.

At the same time, Abdelatty stressed the necessity of a comprehensive international approach to restoring stability. He argued that this requires obligating Israel to immediately cease hostilities, fully withdraw from occupied Lebanese territories, and implement United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution 1701 (2006) without selectivity. Abdelatty thus warned that continued Israeli escalation poses serious risks to regional security.

Regional hesitations and conditional support

While international engagement remains tangible, it is not unconditional. Diplomatic sources suggest that certain capitals expect clearer timelines regarding the second phase of the army’s deployment plan and more visible progress on financial and structural reforms.

The linkage between support and reform reflects a broader international consensus: reinforcing the army must coincide with strengthening the state’s authority and governance capacity. In this sense, the Paris conference is not merely a fundraising event, but part of a political process aimed at restoring Lebanon’s sovereign coherence.

Simultaneously, regional developments may prompt some states, particularly Arab countries, to adopt a more cautious stance in raising their financial contributions to the Lebanese file. Diplomatic circles acknowledge that broader geopolitical uncertainties, coupled with concerns over the pace of reform and the implementation of security plans north of the Litani River, have introduced caution into donor calculations.

Despite this measured approach, Lebanese officials are placing considerable hope in positive outcomes from the Cairo meeting to generate renewed momentum ahead of Paris. Ministerial sources have also indicated that success at the army support conference could pave the way for a subsequent international conference dedicated to supporting Lebanon’s economy and reconstruction efforts.

The logic is clear: a credible security framework under state authority can provide the stability necessary for economic recovery efforts. International donors are more likely to engage in large-scale economic assistance if they perceive progress in governance, reform, and sovereign control. In this framework, the military file is being treated as an entry point toward broader recovery.

Hence, the Cairo preparatory meeting represents more than a diplomatic formality. It is a strategic junction where Lebanon’s internal commitments meet international expectations. The EU’s pledged $100 million provides an encouraging signal, while Egypt’s strong political backing reinforces the principle that empowering state institutions (above all the army) is central to restoring sovereignty.

Yet the broader picture remains contingent on credibility and execution. If the Paris conference succeeds in mobilizing meaningful and coordinated support, it could lay the groundwork not only for strengthening security institutions but also for launching a wider economic recovery process.

Ultimately, restoring the state’s monopoly over the decision of war and peace is not a theoretical aspiration. It is the cornerstone upon which Lebanon’s stability, reform trajectory, and international reintegration depend.