Israel attacks Lebanon

An Israeli strike on a vehicle in the southern Lebanese city of Sidon killed two people and sparked a fire that spread to nearby cars. Israel has continued to attack Lebanon despite a US-announced ceasefire on April 16.

Four-year-old Malika was seriously wounded in an Israeli attack that killed her mother while she shielded her from falling debris. Now, with support from her family and the Ghassan Abu Sitta Children’s Fund, she is recovering from her injuries. Her story reflects the lasting impact of war on children in Lebanon.

Israeli forces killed nine people in Tyre in the past 24 hours after it issued forced displacement orders on the city and continued deadly attacks across southern Lebanon.

United States President Donald Trump has warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he might find himself fighting on his own if Israel returns to war with Iran.

The warning on Monday came as Israel and Iran said they would pause attacks following their most serious escalation since a ceasefire took effect in April.

Trump, who has reportedly grown increasingly exasperated with Netanyahu, demanded that both sides stop “shooting” in a post on his Truth Social platform and said that “final negotiations” towards peace would proceed “subject to ignorance or stupidity getting in its way”.

He also called Netanyahu and told him to stop the strikes, according to media reports.

In an interview with Axios, Trump said he had warned Netanyahu about the consequences of continuing the war.

“I said, ‘Bibi, you better be careful, or you will be on your own very soon’,” Trump said.

The flare-up began on Sunday, triggered by Israel’s deadly bombardment of Lebanon’s capital, Beirut. Iran – which has long said any peace deal with the US depends in part on an end to the fighting in Lebanon – responded with a wave of missiles at northern Israel.

Trump reportedly called Netanyahu on Sunday evening and asked him not to retaliate, but Israel launched attacks on Iran early on Monday.

Israeli forces struck Iranian air defence systems and a petrochemical plant, while Iran retaliated by hitting a similar facility in Haifa and targeting two Israeli airbases. Many of the missiles were intercepted over the occupied West Bank.

No deaths were reported on either side.

Israel plays down tensions

The exchanges complicated Trump’s push to end a war that the US and Israel launched on February 28. A ceasefire announced on April 8 paused all-out warfare. But flare-ups in the Gulf have continued.

For his part, Netanyahu said in a televised statement that he had told Trump that “Israel has a full right to self-defence, and we are exercising it as required”.

“Right now, the fire at the front is contained, because after we hit the terrorist regime in Tehran, it stopped attacking us,” he said.

Netanyahu also warned that should Iran “make the mistake of resuming attacks against us, we will respond with full force”.

Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Yechiel Leiter, downplayed reports of tension between the US and Israeli leaders, telling Fox News that “sometimes, lovers have a spat”.

He said that while Netanyahu had “decided” to “lower the temperature” at Trump’s request, the US president understands “full well” that Israel cannot “absorb ballistic missiles into our country without responding.”

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, blamed Washington for the escalation.

“The US is directly responsible,” he said. “They are party to the ceasefire negotiations. Therefore, any act in violation of the ceasefire, be it through the interception of vessels [in the Strait of Hormuz], the targeting of southern Lebanon by Israel, or any other event, will cause the United States to be directly responsible for the escalation in the region.”

Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref said the operation against Israel, dubbed “Nasr” or victory, showcased “a new level of deterrence from mighty Iran” and that Israel had been “forced to beg once again” for a ceasefire.

Behind the scenes, diplomatic efforts continue.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian posted on X that Tehran was still “at the negotiating table”, while Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, said that Washington and Tehran, through Pakistan as an intermediary, are “presenting and exchanging views” towards an agreement.

Iravani told The Associated Press news agency he was hopeful that “very soon” the two sides would reach “a conclusion”.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said efforts for a peaceful diplomatic solution was ongoing “earnestly and painstakingly” and called for restraint, “especially when the final objective is just about to be achieved”.

He also said Israel and Iran’s exchange of fire was a “reminder of the dangers associated with a tenuous ceasefire and the unbearable consequences it may lead to”.

Attacks on Lebanon continue

The escalation on Monday also drew in Yemen’s Houthi rebels.

The group fired missiles at Israel early in the morning and declared a complete ban on Israeli maritime navigation in the Red Sea, warning that all Israeli movements would be considered “legitimate military targets”.

Later on Monday, air raid sirens sounded in the Israeli port city of Eilat, with the military saying a suspected aerial target was launched from Yemen.

Violence has also continued in southern Lebanon.

An Israeli strike killed five people in the city of Tyre, while another, in the Nabatieh district, left seven dead. A third strike in Marwanieh killed two people, the Lebanese Ministry of Health said.

Phyllis Bennis, a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, said Trump was trying to give an impression that he was tougher on Israel than he actually is.

“The words could be significant if they were matched by actions,” she told Al Jazeera.

“As long as they’re sending billions of dollars directly to the Israeli military, and as long as they’re protecting Israel from being held accountable in the International Court of Justice or the International Criminal Court, as long as those actions don’t change, the words just don’t mean very much,” she added.

A UN spokesman says forced evacuation orders issued across southern and eastern Lebanon are nearly impossible to follow safely, and calls into question whether Israel is complying with international humanitarian law.

Residents in Tel Aviv voiced mixed reactions after Israel and Iran said they would halt strikes following a day of missile exchanges. While some wanted a stronger response against Iran, others said Israelis were ‘losing’, citing disruptions to daily life, schools and tourism.

Tehran, Iran – An ongoing war of words between Beirut and Tehran has highlighted the central role Lebanon has played in a ceasefire between Iran and the United States.

Iran on Sunday responded to an Israeli strike on an alleged Hezbollah site in southern Beirut – an unofficial red line for Tehran – by launching a barrage of missiles at Israel. Israel then hit Tehran and other cities on Monday, threatening to end a two-month ceasefire between Iran and the US.

Tensions had already heightened after Israeli forces crossed the Litani River last month – a point Israel had unilaterally set as a buffer zone to be cleared of Hezbollah elements – leading the Lebanese government to appeal for an end to foreign interference in the country.

Last week, it was reported that US President Donald Trump had convinced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not to target Beirut, understanding that such an escalation could end a regional ceasefire in place since April.

The Israeli invasion has deepened tensions between Iran, which backs Hezbollah, and the Lebanese government, which is seeking exclusive control over weapons in the country. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on Thursday warned “there will be no calm in the region” if Israel continued its occupation of southern Lebanon.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun stressed that there is no way to end the war in the country “except through negotiation and diplomacy” and slammed Tehran for “using Lebanon as a bargaining chip in their negotiations” with the US.

He said “Hezbollah must understand that [there is] no other way but to sit and talk”, something Beirut is trying to achieve via direct talks between Israeli and Lebanese officials in Washington, DC.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi responded by saying Aoun appeared to believe Iran, not Israel, was occupying Lebanese territory.

“Had Lebanon been a bargaining chip for Iran, we’d have a deal long ago. Save Lebanon from your real foe, Mr. President,” he posted on X on Saturday, likely referring to Israel and Aoun.

Hezbollah opposes direct talks with Israel and wants Iran to play a greater role in mediated talks to end the crisis, and the situation has led to an increasingly voracious back-and-forth between Beirut and Tehran.

A conditional “ceasefire” currently in effect between the Lebanese government and Israel, negotiated by Washington and excluding Hezbollah representation, set conditions that included the removal of armed groups south of the Litani River.

It also sought the establishment of “pilot zones” in southern Lebanon, where the Lebanese army would have sole authority, allowing the region to come under direct state control.

Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Washington, DC-based Center for International Policy, noted that while Israel had demonstrated patience regarding its continued offensive in the south, the targeting of Beirut’s southern suburbs, known as Dahiyeh, would be a serious escalation.

“Where exactly is the red line? So far, it seems that Tehran has tolerated attacks in southern Lebanon to some extent as part of a messy ceasefire, and instead allowed Hezbollah to engage with Israel,” she told Al Jazeera before Israel bombed Beirut suburbs on Sunday.

“I think the stalemate cannot continue for too long, so it will be going back to an escalated conflict, or heading for an actual peace deal.”

Iran has stressed that any long-term peace agreement with the US hinges on Israel’s war on Lebanon also ending.

“Hezbollah entered the war with them and helped them, so they want to help them by making them an extension of the peace deal,” Mortazavi said.

Israel’s largely unchallenged advances in southern Lebanon had angered and frustrated hardliners in Iran, who had called for the government to take action.

“Now that I’m speaking with you, it’s correct that [Israel] has stopped attacking Dahiyeh, but except for that, it is hitting wherever it wills,” Abbas Abdi, a state television analyst, told a gathering of state supporters near Enghelab (Revolution) Square in downtown Tehran on Friday night.

Hezbollah flags are regularly waved by supporters of the government during such rallies. On Friday, the iconic Azadi (Freedom) Tower was draped with a Hezbollah flag in a show of support for the Lebanese movement, amid Israel’s offensive in southern Lebanon.

Abdi said such facile shows of solidarity with Hezbollah were not a deterrence and that Iran might have to “show the enemy that negotiations are not important for us”.

“We are still releasing statements and saying we will do such if they do such, but we are not doing anything. Our dear people have gone to the [missile] launchers numerous times to respond, but they have been stopped,” he said.

There have been direct tensions between the two sides in recent weeks, with the US military attacking Iranian islands and the IRGC launching missiles and drones at its Central Command (CENTCOM) bases in Kuwait and Bahrain.

Mostafa Najafi, a state television political analyst, earlier this week characterised the Israeli attacks on Lebanon as intended to go hand-in-hand with the US blockade of Iran’s southern waters to force the government to capitulate.

“The aim of the ring of pressure created in Lebanon is not just Hezbollah, it is against our levers and to weaken our regional activities,” he said, pointing out that this elevates the issue to strategic significance.

“You cannot separate the file of Hezbollah and Lebanon from the file of Iran, because they have a meaningful ideological and geopolitical link together, they are in a geopolitical cluster together,” Najafi said.

Amirhossein Sabeti, a lawmaker representing Tehran in the hardline-dominated parliament, told state television that Trump was only “playing” with Iranian authorities to keep the peace until the World Cup in the US, Canada and Mexico is over.

“The US will start a more intense war with the US once the World Cup is over. They will turn the country into a second Gaza, where everything is destroyed,” he said.

“We must be prepared to deal stronger blows than before, and we can do this. We must not wait for them to hit before hitting back; we must strike even when they talk of striking, that’s deterrence.”

Escalation comes after Israel attacked Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, killing at least two people and wounding 20.

On the 100th day of the US-Israeli war on Iran, Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Vall explains how Tehran’s patience has reached its limit with the continuous violations of the ‘ceasefire’. Iran fired missiles at Israel after Israel attacked Beirut on Sunday.

Yariv Oppenheimer told Al Jazeera that Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has incentives to escalate tensions with Iran and Hezbollah but is constrained by US President Donald Trump and US interests. He said Iran’s June 7 response was a warning, not a push for war, and doubts Trump would allow major Israeli retaliation.

Iran and Israel exchanged threats after Tehran launched missiles towards Israel in response to Israeli strikes on Beirut’s southern suburbs. Israel vowed to deepen attacks on Lebanon, while Iran warned of further action if the strikes continue.

Iranian media has released video showing missiles being launched towards Israel, while videos captured incoming missiles making impact in northern Israel. Iran says it’s a response to Israel attacking Beirut in violation of a US-brokered ceasefire in Lebanon.

Videos show missiles over Israel as the Israeli military says Iran launched a new wave of attacks. The escalation follows a deadly Israeli strike on Beirut, with Iran warning it would abandon negotiations and return to ‘direct confrontation’.

Videos show the aftermath of an Israeli attack on Beirut’s southern suburbs, with multiple explosions reported. Israel says it targeted Hezbollah headquarters, while Lebanese media says residential apartments were hit. The attack comes just days after US President Donald Trump told Benjamin Netanyahu that Beirut was off limits as Washington pursues a deal with Iran.

Funerals will be held for Lebanese officers killed in an Israeli attack in southern Lebanon, as Beirut’s army chief headed to Pakistan on a surprise visit amid ongoing mediation efforts in the wider United States-Israel war on Iran.

The Lebanese soldiers will be laid to rest on Sunday, a day after the brigadier general, captain and soldier were killed in an Israeli strike on a military vehicle on the Khardali-Nabatieh road, in an incident the Israeli army said it was investigating.

A ceasefire agreed on April 17 was meant to halt the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, but Israel has continued to carry out near-daily attacks, prompting retaliatory ones from the Lebanese group. The violence has taken a disproportionate toll on civilians in Lebanon, where more than 3,500 people have been killed since hostilities resumed on March 2.

A further conditional ceasefire was announced by Lebanese and Israeli envoys last week in Washington, but was rejected by Hezbollah as it did not include the group or provide for Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

Lebanese army chief Rodolphe Haykal left on Saturday for Pakistan, which has emerged as a central mediator between the US and Iran.

The visit is notable given the insistence by Washington – and by Lebanese leaders, including the president – that ceasefire talks for Lebanon remain separate from the US-Iran negotiations ‌mediated by Pakistan.

Fighting continues in southern Lebanon

Meanwhile, Israeli attacks hit several towns across southern Lebanon and the western Bekaa overnight, while Hezbollah said it launched rockets, artillery fire, and drone attacks against Israeli forces, including near the Beaufort Castle in Yohmor al-Shaqif.

Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health said on Sunday that an Israeli raid on the town of Saksakiyeh a day earlier killed at least two people. The ministry added that 22 people were wounded in the attack, including three children and a woman.

Two others were wounded following an Israeli drone attack on the town of Shahabiyeh, Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA) reported.

Israeli air attacks also hit the town of Qalawiya at dawn, and the towns of al-Qatrani, Byblos and Rihan in the Jezzine district overnight. The town of Deir Kifa in the Tyre district was also bombed, while Barashit and Chaqra in the same district were subjected to intermittent artillery shelling overnight.

NNA also reported artillery shelling in the towns of al-Mansouri and Bayt al-Sayyad in the Tyre district.

Israeli warplanes launched an attack on the town of Srifa. Local media also reported that Israeli fighter jets attacked Dweir, near Nabatieh, north of the Litani River.

Paramedics, meanwhile, continue to look for survivors under the rubble following Israeli attacks.

“The pattern is part of what is being called the Gazafication of Lebanon, or Israel using actions normalised by the Gaza genocide,” said Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh, reporting from Ramallah in the occupied West Bank.

“The targeting of schools in southern Lebanon, just like Gaza. Bombing Lebanese hospitals and clinics, also like Gaza. And the murder of journalists. Then there’s these so-called double-tap attacks against paramedics and rescue workers. Hundreds of Palestinian and Lebanese paramedics have been killed with this unlawful practice.”

Gazafication extends to the ceasefire, too, she added.

“The ‘Yellow Line’, first introduced in Gaza, has now swallowed 60 percent of the territory. In Lebanon, the ‘Yellow Line’ now includes nearly a fifth of the country. Both invisible lines keep expanding,” said Odeh.

No choice but negotiations, says Lebanese lawmaker

Najat Aoun Saliba, an independent member of Lebanon’s parliament, meanwhile, condemned Israel’s killing of the Lebanese soldiers and said President Joseph Aoun has no choice but to enter into negotiations with Israel.

“If we don’t have negotiations, what is the alternative? Is the alternative going to war? The war is not going to give us peace,” she told Al Jazeera.

Saliba said dialogue was the only viable path given the imbalance of power between Israel and Lebanon’s armies.

“The balance of power between the armies is not to be compared. Israel has a very strong army backed up by the United States. The Lebanese Armed Forces have been sidelined by a political will for 30 years, because they wanted to strengthen the presence of Hezbollah,” she said.

The lawmaker added that Hezbollah has not been able to stop Israeli aggression.

“Hezbollah is not able to stop any of these war crimes, and it’s not able to stop any of the invasions that Israel is doing. I think with … all these massacres and destruction, I don’t think we have a choice.”

The killing of Brigadier General Wissam Sabra, Captain Elie Khoury and soldier Hussein Ghozal came at a tense moment amid broader efforts to strike a deal between the US, Iran, Hezbollah, the Lebanese government and Israel.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said the attack was “aimed at thwarting all efforts to reach a solution”, while Prime Minister Nawaf Salam described it as “a heinous crime and an attack on Lebanon and all Lebanese people”.

Lebanon was drawn into the Middle East war when Iran-backed Hezbollah attacked Israel on March 2, following joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran.

Tehran has made a ceasefire in Lebanon between Israel and Hezbollah a condition for any peace deal with Washington.

Israeli forces kill three high-ranking Lebanese soldiers as Arab nations condemn Iran’s attacks on Bahrain and Kuwait.

On Wednesday, Israel and Lebanon announced yet another ceasefire – after they had seemingly already agreed to a truce on April 16.

Iran and the United States have formally had a ceasefire in place since April 8. And Israel and Hamas, the Palestinian group, have had a ceasefire in Gaza since October 10, 2025.

Yet Israel’s attacks on Lebanon continue unchecked, with strikes on the Naqoura and Nabatieh districts of southern Lebanon on Friday, resulting in at least one death. Iran and the US have continued to trade periodic attacks that have picked up in intensity in recent days. The Iranian military has also fired missiles and drones at Gulf nations such as the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain, which it accuses of enabling US attacks on Iran during the ceasefire.

And in Gaza, Israel continues to carry out bombings, including one that killed nine people in a residential building this week, despite a supposed truce aimed at ending its genocidal war on the Palestinian territory.

So what does it mean for a ceasefire to be in place when fighting continues? What does international law say? And why do violations so rarely lead to consequences?

We speak to legal experts to understand:

What is a ceasefire?

Simply put, it’s a pause in fighting designed to create space for negotiations, explained Mark Kersten, assistant professor of criminal justice and criminology at the University of the Fraser Valley.

“A ceasefire is effectively a cessation of hostilities, but typically not understood to be a permanent one,” he told Al Jazeera.

It is also often fundamentally a political agreement rather than a strongly enforceable legal instrument, said Michael Lynk, an emeritus professor at Western University in Canada.

Unlike peace treaties, which often have guarantors responsible for oversight and enforcement, ceasefires can be breached with few immediate legal consequences, Lynk told Al Jazeera.

This is especially true in Gaza and Lebanon, where the United States has acted as the principal broker and overseer. While some countries have criticised Israeli strikes in Lebanon, Lynk says there has been little pressure on Washington for allowing repeated violations.

“A number of Global North countries have criticised the continuing Israeli attacks on Lebanon despite the ceasefire, but they have not called out the US for allowing Israel to repeatedly breach the ceasefires in Gaza and Lebanon.”

So are ceasefires legally binding – or not?

Yes, they are, argues Toby Cadman, a British international human rights lawyer and cofounder of Guernica 37 Chambers.

But, like Kersten and Lynk, Cadman said that ceasefires – which he described as the “temporary, military and diplomatic suspension of military operations” – are inherently fragile. Unlike peace treaties, ceasefires do not resolve the underlying conflict or end the legal state of war.

“It suspends the fighting; it does not end the state of armed conflict,” he said.

Where there is a broader peace agreement, such as in Gaza, the ceasefire too stands – at least in theory – on a stronger footing, said Lynk. The Gaza peace plan that accompanied the ceasefire was endorsed by the UN Security Council through Resolution 2803, which calls for the agreement to be implemented “in its entirety, in good faith and without delay”.

In theory, states could ask the Security Council to sanction parties violating the Gaza agreement. In practice, Lynk explained, the US veto on the body means that neither Israel, nor the US itself, can realistically be censured.

“This is why ceasefires and peace treaties are ultimately political documents because it requires political will to enforce them,” Lynk said.

Who decides when a ceasefire has been violated?

Palestinians have repeatedly pointed to the violation of the Gaza ceasefire by Israel. The US and Iran routinely accuse each other of breaching their truce. And Israel and Lebanon do the same when it comes to their ceasefire.

So who decides whether a ceasefire has been violated – and by whom?

The answer, according to Cadman, is that “there is no neutral arbiter empowered to determine, with binding effect, who has breached.”

Monitoring mechanisms do exist, but they are largely political bodies overseen by the same states that brokered and guaranteed the agreements. In the case of Gaza and Lebanon, that is the United States. But Washington occupies the unusual position of mediator, guarantor and Israel’s closest military and diplomatic ally.

That means allegations of violations are often filtered through political calculations rather than assessed by an independent legal authority, say experts.

What about international law?

For Kersten, Gaza and Lebanon expose a fundamental contradiction within the international legal system. On paper, international law has succeeded in establishing a broad consensus about the legality of what is taking place.

“The vast majority of the world recognises that what is happening in both contexts is not just wrong, but illegal – thanks to international law.”

Yet recognition has done little to halt the violence. “Little is being done to save lives and stop the carnage,” he said.

The result is a widening gap between legal findings and political action. Courts can investigate, collect evidence and issue rulings as the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice have both done against Israel, but that does not stop bombs from falling or guarantee compliance on the ground.

For Kersten and Lynk, the problem is not a lack of legal standards; it is the persistent failure of states to enforce them, particularly when powerful actors are involved.

“The lack of effective accountability is the hole in the heart of international law and our modern international political system,” Lynk said.

But Kersten said what was clear was that international humanitarian law, human rights law and international criminal law remain fully applicable during a ceasefire.

“Ceasefire provides no legal cover to commit atrocities against civilians.”

That means allegations of war crimes can still be investigated and prosecuted even while a ceasefire is in effect.

Is ‘self-defence’ a justification for attacks during a ceasefire?

Cadman highlights the legal argument most frequently used to justify continued strikes by Israel on Gaza and Lebanon, and by the US against Iran: self-defence.

These arguments rest on Article 51 of the UN Charter, which carves out the right for states to launch unilateral military action against other nations if they are acting in self-defence.

But Cadman said the interpretation of that clause is heavily contested.

“Article 51 answers an armed attack that has happened or is genuinely imminent; it is not a standing licence for preventive strikes.”

So why do countries feel they can get away with attacks during a ceasefire?

Asked by reporters on Wednesday how he defined a ceasefire, given the continuing – though sporadic – attacks that the US and Iran have exchanged in recent weeks, US President Donald Trump said: “It’s a different part of the world, you know. I’d say in that part of a ceasefire is when you’re shooting in a more moderate manner.”

Trump’s comments underscore what legal experts say is at the heart of the persisting violence in Gaza, Lebanon and the Gulf: The lack of any meaningful enforcement mechanism.

The Security Council is constrained by veto powers. The ICJ can issue binding orders but cannot enforce them. The ICC can issue arrest warrants, but depends on states to carry them out.

“The unifying theme is an enforcement deficit,” Cadman said.

Cadman argued that the problem is not that international law lacks rules. Rather, those rules are often applied selectively. “The law is not formally different for Israel or the US; its application is selective.”

EXPLAINER

Israel strikes Lebanon despite ceasefire, while Hezbollah rejects deal as death toll tops 3,500.

Israel has continued to carry out deadly strikes across Lebanon despite the announcement of a new US-brokered ceasefire agreement reached by Lebanese and Israeli officials in Washington, DC.

The violence has pushed the number of casualties higher, with Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health reporting that at least 3,526 people have been killed and 10,733 wounded in Israeli attacks since March 2.

Meanwhile, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has dismissed the ceasefire as a “farce”, warning that northern Israel will remain a target as long as Israeli forces continue bombing Lebanon, raising more doubts about the prospects for a lasting truce.

Here is what we know:

In Iran

• Iran adviser flags concerns over draft deal: Mohsen Rezaei, an adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, said the draft memorandum of understanding being negotiated to end the war still contains “ambiguities” that need to be clarified. Speaking to Iranian state television, Rezaei also accused US President Donald Trump of trying to pressure Tehran into accepting Washington’s terms while keeping Iran’s own conditions “in a vague state”.

War diplomacy

• Questions over US strategy: Reporting from Washington, DC, Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett said the White House is facing growing questions over why a negotiated agreement with Iran is still needed after President Donald Trump repeatedly claimed US military action had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme. Halkett said critics are asking: “If these military objectives have been achieved, then is there still a need for talks?” She added that “with each passing week that this war drags on” and negotiations remaining stalled, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the administration to reconcile its claims of success with the continued push for diplomacy.
• Hezbollah rejects conditional ceasefire: Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem rejected the limited truce agreed to by Lebanese and Israeli representatives in the US, demanding a complete ceasefire and a full Israeli pullout from the country. Qassem also warned of more attacks on northern Israel, highlighting the difficulties in reaching a lasting peace. Both sides have blamed each other for breaking a previous ceasefire announced in April.

The Gulf

• Oman oil terminal disruption: Reuters reported that Oman has suspended crude oil loading operations at its key Mina al-Fahal terminal after an explosion near its single-buoy mooring (SBM) berths. Citing unnamed sources, the agency said the blast occurred between SBM 1 and SBM 2 and was allegedly caused by a drone attack.

In the US

• Trump says US does not need a deal to access Iran’s uranium: The US president said Washington could access Iran’s enriched uranium without reaching an agreement with Tehran, arguing the material is effectively “entombed”. Trump also said he does not plan to meet Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, but he suggested a meeting could be possible if a deal is eventually reached, adding that “if it happened … I’d be respectful”.

In Israel

• Ultra-Orthodox protest blocks major highway: Hundreds of ultra-Orthodox Israelis blocked Highway 1 in protest against the government’s enforcement of military conscription for religious students, according to Israel’s Channel 10. The demonstrations began after police stopped two ultra-Orthodox students and transferred one to military authorities. Large numbers of police and border guards were deployed to clear the highway and disperse protesters.

In Lebanon

• Hezbollah rejection raises fears of escalation: Reporting from Beirut, Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem said Hezbollah remains the key actor on the Lebanese side when it comes to decisions about fighting and any potential halt to hostilities with Israel, “regardless of what the Lebanese government says”. Given Hezbollah’s rejection of the US-brokered ceasefire, Hashem warned that further escalation is likely from both Hezbollah and Israel. He noted that southern Lebanon and the western Bekaa Valley experienced significant Israeli air and ground attacks on Thursday, adding that Hezbollah’s position suggests “it is going to be a very difficult situation” in the days ahead.

Israel’s supreme court annuls a government ban on the International Committee of the Red Cross visiting Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.

A congressional panel in the United States has rejected an effort to revoke a provision from the defence budget that would further integrate the US and Israeli militaries.

An amendment to sink the pro-Israel measure, introduced by Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, failed in a voice call on Thursday in the House Armed Services Committee.

That defeat paves the way for the proposal to advance to the floor of the House of Representatives.

Khanna had argued that the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), formally called Section 224, rewards Benjamin Netanyahu at a time when the Israeli prime minister is trying to dictate US policy in the Middle East.

The progressive Democrat cited recent reports that President Donald Trump is angry at Netanyahu over Israel’s escalation in Lebanon.

“Everyone in America — whether you’re a Republican, an independent or a Democrat — says that we need to tell Netanyahu that America calls the shots, not the prime minister of any other country,” Khanna said.

“They want less cooperation and blank checks to Israel, not more. Only the United States Congress would dream up at this moment, ‘Let’s actually do more for Israel.’”

The vote on the amendment was taken by calling on committee members to say aloud either “yes” and “no”, and the “nays” clearly were more numerous. It was not recorded as a roll-call vote, which would require each member’s preference to be logged.

Section 224 would require the Pentagon chief “to designate an executive agent responsible for synchronising cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel”.

That official would be in charge of overseeing several joint initiatives, “including bilateral defence technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation”, the NDAA reads.

Netanyahu’s endorsement

Critics have raised concern that Section 224 may make US military aid to Israel more opaque, concealing the assistance as cooperation rather than a separate expense.

The measure also risks tethering the US military to its Israeli counterpart technologically at a time when the American public is rapidly turning against Israel, according to recent public opinion polls.

“As political pressure builds to reduce US military assistance to Israel, Section 224 provides the framework for continuing — and expanding — US-Israel military ties by entrenching Israeli technology within the US defense supply chain in a way that would shield it from the annual appropriations process,” the nonprofit lobbying group A New Policy said in a brief last week.

“The use of must-pass legislation as the NDAA as a mechanism of integration speaks to the plummeting popularity of continuing unconditional support to Israel.”

The measure comes as Netanyahu pushes to transform US aid to Israel from direct assistance to military “cooperation”.

The Israeli prime minister wrote a letter to Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman endorsing a bill facilitating that transition.

In the letter, Netanyahu said, “The time has now arrived for us to move from aid recipient to partner.”

He added he supported Stutzman’s plan for a “new framework of joint defense cooperation, codevelopment, coproduction and mutual investment in areas including advanced missile defense, artificial intelligence … and next generation military platforms”.

Referencing the letter on Thursday, Khanna argued that Section 224 “directly” follows Netanyahu’s language.

“I am for Team America. I am for the interests of this country, and I believe that when Donald Trump ran, he ran ‘America First’,” the Democrat said.

“That includes American interests against any foreign country. We should have American sovereignty and make it clear that we strike 224. If we want to give aid to Israel, if we want to sell them weapons, that should be a vote for the entire Congress.”

But both Democrats and Republicans pushed back against his argument, saying that the provision aims to streamline existing cooperative programmes that benefit the US.

Key Democrat backs Section 224

Congressman Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the panel, said he was “very sympathetic” to Khanna’s frustration with Netanyahu.

“Mr Netanyahu insisted on this war with Iran that has strengthened Iran and weakened our position. I do not like his leadership of Israel or where he is going,” Smith said.

But he added that it is in the US’s interests to have deep military ties with Israel, a country accused by leading rights groups and United Nations investigators of committing genocide in Gaza.

“The reason that we have these partnerships with Israel, where we may not have as many developed partnerships with other NATO countries, is because Israel has actually been having to fight,” Smith said.

“They have faced drone attacks and missile attacks. They have had to develop new technologies, technologies that we’ve benefitted from.”

Rights advocates often decry the promotion of Israel’s weapons as “battle-tested” — because they have been tested on the Palestinian and Lebanese communities that they devastated, killing tens of thousands of people along the way.

Earlier on Thursday, Palestinian rights advocates warned against approving Section 224 during a news conference on Capitol Hill.

“It is unfathomable that this is the American response to a country that has, over the past two and a half years, carried out a genocide against Palestinians and started wars in both Iran and Lebanon,” said Margaret DeReus, the executive director at the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU).

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie has promised to introduce an amendment to revoke Section 224 when the NDAA goes to a full House vote.