Israel attacks Lebanon

US and Iran trade new threats as more explosions are reported in Iranian cities, including Sirik, Ahvaz and Bushehr.

A former Biden official tells Al Jazeera that Lebanon’s pilot zones will only create an environment for Hezbollah to continue its armed resistance. Former State Department official, Jennifer Gavito, says she has a difficult time imagining Israel fully withdrawing from Lebanon.

President Donald Trump has promised that the United States will “help” Lebanon as he met with his Lebanese counterpart Joseph Aoun amid continued occupation of the south of the country by Israeli forces.

The US president did not announce any concrete policies towards Lebanon as he spoke to reporters alongside Aoun at the White House on Tuesday.

Asked whether there will be a timeline for Israel’s withdrawal from the country, Trump said: “They’re in the process of doing that. They’re in the process of redeploying [to] other sections.”

In reality, Israel has not pulled back from any area it has occupied since March. On Monday, the US State Department announced the establishment of the first “pilot zone” under a Lebanon-Israel framework.

Such areas are supposed to see the Lebanese army deploy to previously occupied towns and ensure that there is no Hezbollah military presence, so reconstruction can begin and residents can return. But the three towns announced in the first pilot zone were not under Israeli control, so Israel did not withdraw from them.

Israel has been systemically razing entire villages in south Lebanon, with Israeli officials openly declaring the objective of erasing Lebanese border towns out of existence.

On Tuesday, Aoun did not mention Israeli abuses in his comments next to Trump. Instead, he heaped praise on the US leader and hailed the US-brokered framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, which conditions Israeli withdrawal on disarming Hezbollah.

“I would like to thank President Trump, really, and his team for the historic visit and for the historic achievement that we did together by signing the framework with the ultimate objective of ending the state of hostility between Lebanon and Israel forever,” the Lebanese president said.

‘We’re going to help it a lot’

Israel has killed more than 4,000 people in Lebanon since the all-out regional war broke out earlier this year, targeting hundreds of medics and journalists as it invaded the country.

In his opening remarks, Trump said that Lebanon had been “badly treated” for decades without elaborating on the source of the mistreatment.

“We’re going to help it. We’re going to help it a lot,” the US president said. “So it’s an honour to have the president and your representatives here.”

Trump also renewed his suggestion that neighbouring Syria should intervene militarily in Lebanon to help disarm Hezbollah – a proposal that has been repeatedly rejected by Syrian authorities.

Hezbollah and the current government in Damascus – led by President Ahmed al-Sharaa – fought on opposite sides of the Syrian civil war.

The Lebanese group backed the government of President Bashar al-Assad, and al-Sharaa was a rebel commander who, early in the war, led the al-Qaeda branch in the country.

Trump took the opportunity on Tuesday to express his admiration of al-Sharaa once again.

“He’s pulled Syria together. He would like to come in and do something with Hezbollah. You know, they’ve been fighting. He’s been fighting Hezbollah for a long time. I think it’d be very effective. So it’s something I think about,” he said.

A Lebanese reporter asked Trump what concrete support he may offer Aoun during the visit. The US president said, “You’ll find out.”

‘I would speak to Hezbollah,’ Trump says

Trump also said he is open to speaking directly with Hezbollah.

“I would speak to Hezbollah. I speak to everybody,” he told reporters.

“I would say this: If the president wanted me to speak to Hezbollah – you know, he’s lived with Hezbollah for a long time – and if the president wanted me to speak to Hezbollah, I would,” Trump added, referring to Aoun, who previously served as Lebanon’s top general.

Aoun had called for assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF), saying that the military remains the “backbone of security and stability”.

Hezbollah has been highly critical of Aoun’s decision to engage in direct talks with Israel, as well as the framework in which Lebanon agreed not to pursue accountability for Israeli abuses in international courts and at the United Nations.

For his part, Aoun has accused Hezbollah of dragging Lebanon to war on behalf of Iran, stressing that the Lebanese military must be the sole armed force in the country.

Southern Lebanon – Dozens of displaced residents have begun to return to villages in southern Lebanon, as Israel, Lebanon, and the United States announced on Monday that the so-called “pilot zone” project had begun.

The pilot zone plan is part of a framework agreement between Lebanon and Israel, signed in Washington last month. It will see Israel withdraw from a small number of areas in southern Lebanon, even as it remains in others it has invaded since escalating its war on the country in March, killing more than 4,300 people.

Israel has been fighting the Lebanese group Hezbollah, which it insists must be disarmed before a full Israeli withdrawal.

Al Jazeera spoke to people in Froun and Ghandouriyeh, neighbouring villages in southern Lebanon to which residents began returning on Monday after Israeli bombardment forced them to flee. The US said Froun was one of three villages that were part of the first phase of the pilot zone plan, while Ghandouriyeh is believed to be in the second phase.

However, some locals have questioned the villages’ inclusion in the plan, saying they were never occupied by Israeli forces. To them, the inclusion of their villages is evidence that Israel is in fact not giving anything up despite the framework agreement, and is instead able to remain in the areas it has occupied.

Lebanese security sources back up that narrative, telling Al Jazeera that the two villages had not been occupied by Israeli forces.

Perched on hills overlooking several Israeli-occupied towns in the Nabatieh and Marjayoun districts, the two villages face the town of Zawtar el-Gharbiya, which is also part of the plan’s first phase.

The road connecting Ghandouriyeh and Froun is fraught with danger: The stretches overlooking the Hujeir Valley continuously come under Israeli fire, and occupying Israeli forces stationed in Odaisseh al-Qusayr, Qantara, Alma ash-Shaab and elsewhere can monitor anyone passing through.

Still, many families have not waited for the outcome of the framework agreement and have begun gradually returning. They include the family of Abu Ali Miqdad, who owns heavy machinery that allowed them to start clearing the rubble of a building they own – containing residential apartments and storage warehouses at the entrance to Froun – in an effort to salvage whatever materials remain.

Abu Ali founded the family business decades ago, before his sons and grandsons joined him. After hours of work, they managed to pull tyres, oil drums and spare parts from the debris.

The grandfather shows little optimism about the current situation, but says he has grown weary of constant displacement. Watching his grandchildren haul an oil drum from the rubble, he says he will keep “clearing the rubble and rebuilding, even under bombardment”.

He says that the presence of the Lebanese army and UN peacekeeping patrols brings him some comfort despite the circumstances.

Anxious

Across from the demolished house, one home did survive the destruction. On its doorstep sits a woman in her 70s, dressed in traditional southern Lebanese attire, with her grandson beside her wearing a Spain national team football jersey.

Spanish troops had been patrolling the area opposite Froun as part of the United Nations peacekeeping force (UNIFIL) deployed south of the Litani River, though its mission is set to end by year’s end under a UN Security Council resolution.

Despite the destruction around her, Sumaya Haidar says she is relieved to be back home, sitting beside her grandson – even though there is no water, electricity or phone service.

Like everyone else in Froun, she is anxious about the town’s fate. Sumaya’s worry also stems from the continued displacement of her children’s families to different towns, leaving them unsettled.

“We put our trust in God,” Sumaya says. “We sit here, we’re not afraid, and we’ll stay. Look at these people – living in schools after losing their homes, and my children are scattered, too.”

State authority

Meanwhile, Lebanese army patrols have been visible for three days in the area of Ghandouriyeh, with soldiers from the Fifth Intervention Regiment standing at the village’s southern entrance.

Ghandouriyeh has suffered even more destruction than Froun: 250 of its 260 homes are fully or partially destroyed, according to municipal council head Mohammed Nader. Along with several council members, he has set up damaged chairs under the shade of a tree for their daily meetings.

Nader, who used to live in Paraguay but returned to serve his small hometown, grows visibly angry when asked whether the village might be included in the second phase of the pilot zones.

Pointing towards the Israeli position just a few kilometres away, he rejects the idea outright, saying Israel wants “to sell us and the state empty walnut shells, calling it a pilot zone, when they never even entered it in the first place”.

The army granted Al Jazeera permission to film its positions in Ghandouriyeh and Froun twice, to affirm its control over the area and its designation as a zone under military oversight. Army patrols were seen repeatedly moving along the line stretching from Kfar Dounine to Froun via Ghandouriyeh, and a checkpoint was observed where service members searched vehicles and checked residents’ identification.

“Extending state authority” is expected to top the agenda when Lebanese President Joseph Aoun meets with US President Donald Trump in Washington, DC, on Tuesday.

For the Lebanese government, its presence in Froun and Ghandouriyeh is evidence of that state authority, even if Hezbollah continues to insist that its weapons are necessary to confront Israel if the Lebanese army is not willing to do so.

US forces attack Iran for the ninth consecutive night as one US soldier killed in northern Iraq.

US president says death of soldiers in Jordan a ‘sad thing’ as US forces attack Iran for the eighth consecutive night.

Syrian authorities say they intercepted a shipment including missiles, rockets, and drones before it entered from Iraq.

Syria has seized a shipment of weapons, including missiles, at its border with Iraq, as authorities say they foiled an ⁠attempt to ⁠smuggle arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon, something the group denies.

Syria’s General Authority of Ports and Customs said on Thursday that the weapons shipment – which included long-range missiles, rockets and drones – was concealed inside “one of the oil tanker-trucks ⁠headed to the city of Baniyas”.

It was discovered during routine inspection procedures at the al-Tanf border crossing between Syria and Iraq after customs officers subjected the vehicle to a thorough search, Syria’s state news agency reported.

“According to the ministry, preliminary investigations based on evidence collected at the scene indicated that the shipment was intended to transit Syrian territory before being delivered to the Hezbollah terrorist militia in Lebanon,” SANA wrote, citing sources from Syria’s Interior Ministry.

The Iran-backed Lebanese group denied having any activity in Syria, dismissing the accusations in a statement on Thursday as “fabricated narratives with no basis in fact, aimed at harming Hezbollah”.

Syrian authorities are known to be hostile towards the group, as it was an ally of former president Bashar al-Assad before he was ousted in 2024 by members of the current government.

Following the seizure, Iraq said it would form ‌a high-level committee to investigate what happened. The military’s Joint Operations Command said Baghdad would coordinate with Syrian authorities to establish the circumstances of the attempted smuggling, hold those responsible to account, and strengthen security along the shared border.

The Baniyas route, where the tanker was passing through, has been used frequently in recent months for fuel movements between ⁠Iraq and Syria, since the main route through the Strait of Hormuz has been disrupted by the Iran war.

“This seizure from Syria is part of a broader reshaping of the region that has occurred over the last couple of years, particularly the fall of the Assad regime in Syria,” said Al Jazeera’s Heidi Pett, reporting from Lebanon.

“It used to be a very popular land route for Iran to traffic weapons and cash to its partner here in Lebanon, Hezbollah. They went from Iran, across Iraq, through Syria, and then here into Lebanon.”

“Under the Assad regime they [Iran] had very little trouble with that, but since the new [Syrian] President Ahmed al-Sharaa took power, he has been cracking down on that crossroad of smuggling,” Pett added.

A source at Syria’s Interior Ministry told SANA that “protecting Syria’s borders and safeguarding its national sovereignty remained a top priority, adding that it would not allow Syrian territory to be used as a transit route or launch point for arms smuggling or other activities that threaten the security of Syria or neighbouring countries”.

US President Donald ⁠Trump had spoken to Syria’s al-Sharaa about disarming Hezbollah, which is fighting Israeli forces occupying southern Lebanon. But Lebanese President Joseph Aoun’s office said al-Sharaa had assured him that Syria would not ‌take sides in Lebanon’s internal affairs, including fighting Hezbollah.

US is carrying out more attacks on Iran, with Iranian media reporting explosions in Kish Island, Jam Island, Qeshm Island, Bushehr and Bandar Abbas.

Iranian state media report explosions in port cities pof Bandar Abbas, Sirik and Jask, as well as Qeshm Island.

The Israeli military has released video showing huge explosions and detonations in villages in southern Lebanon. Israel says they were targeting Hezbollah infrastructure and tunnels. Meanwhile a US military delegation has met with Lebanon’s army in Beirut to discuss Israel’s planned withdrawal from a ‘pilot zone’ in occupied territory.

Explosions heard in the port cities of Bandar Abbas, Sirik, Chabahar, Bandar-e Deyr and Asaluyeh as US bombs Iran for a third time this week.

Iranian leaders say they’ll never surrender and US President Donald Trump says the ceasefire between the two sides is ‘over’. Iran and the US are locked in the most serious escalation in almost a month. So is the war back on? Soraya Lennie breaks it down.

Air raids come after US revokes a waiver that allowed Iran to sell oil, citing the attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and members of his family were killed in a joint US-Israeli air strike in February.

The Israel-Lebanon framework agreement “threatens to betray the victims of war crimes” in Lebanon, according to six prominent human rights and media freedom organisations.

In a joint statement released on Friday by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH), Legal Agenda, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Union of Journalists in Lebanon, they warned that parts of the agreement “appear to be aimed at preventing victims of serious international crimes from seeking justice before international forums”.

The organisations pointed out that clauses 3 and 13 of the agreement, brokered by and signed in the United States on June 26, were particularly concerning as they would “prevent Lebanon and Israel from having recourse to international courts, including the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice”.

The six organisations warned that “Clause 3 further violates international law and the prohibition of forced displacement, conditioning the return of residents to specified zones along the border, currently occupied by Israel, to the ‘successful disarmament of non-state armed groups and dismantlement of their infrastructure”.

“Under international humanitarian law, people must be allowed to return once hostilities have ended or the reasons for their displacement cease to exist,” their joint statement said.

The organisations said that Clause 13 was particularly concerning as it prevents civilians from “actions in international political or legal fora [forums]”. This comes after “months of hostilities resulting in immense civilian harm, including as a result of war crimes, violations of international humanitarian law, and gross human rights abuses”.

Many in Lebanon have protested and criticised the government for signing the agreement with Israel.

Many critics of the framework deal, which does not force the Israeli army to withdraw from the areas it occupies, are people most impacted by the war, which has killed at least 4,300 people, injured over 12,000 and forced hundreds of thousands from their homes since early March.

The six organisations said the US-brokered agreement appears to “contradict the countries’ international legal obligations to pursue accountability for serious international crimes committed on their territories,” although it “does not appear to commit Israel to halt any initiatives in international forums against Hezbollah”.

“Victims of war crimes and other violations deserve justice,” said Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International. “Any agreement that fails to center their rights to justice, accountability and reparations will falter underneath the very impunity it builds.”

Ghida Frangieh, head of litigation at Legal Agenda, added: “Accountability and respect for international law are not bargaining chips. They are legal obligations. International law is clear: States cannot waive or negotiate away their obligation to investigate and prosecute the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. Nor can states extinguish individual rights to truth, justice and reparation”.

But Lebanon’s President said on Friday that the framework deal with Israel “does not legitimise the continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon”, but instead empowers the Lebanese army to extend its authority across the country’s territory.

Joseph Aoun made the remarks during a meeting with a delegation from the Association of Lebanese Universities, the Lebanese Order of Physicians and the Lebanese Maronite Order, according to a statement from the presidency.

“Our sovereign decision to separate our track from the Iranian-US track is a problem for some who have become accustomed to being under guardianship that controls us, decides for us and negotiates on our behalf,” Aoun said, adding that the Lebanese army will “fully assume its responsibilities in achieving security and stability in the south after the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.

Meanwhile, with a “ceasefire” in Lebanon agreed on June 21 as part of a deal between Iran and the US, and the Israel-Lebanon framework agreement signed five days later, many displaced Lebanese have been returning to their homes in southern Lebanon.

In a report on Thursday, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said 646,107 IDPs (internally displaced persons) have begun returning to their communities, while about 500,000 others remain displaced, based on data collected with local authorities since June 22.

Lebanese authorities said they were working to remove informal encampments in and around capital Beirut and to reduce the number of official shelters.

However, many people in southern Lebanon said they have nowhere to return to, as dozens of towns and villages near the border have been destroyed by Israeli forces.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the military “will not leave” southern Lebanon as long as Hezbollah remains a “threat”. Hezbollah has rejected the deal with Israel as “null and void”, saying any attempt to link an Israeli withdrawal to its disarmament crossed “all red lines”.

US president says a meeting with Iran will take place in Doha today, but Tehran says there are no plans for talks in the coming days.

Washington and Tehran have agreed to stop attacks and renew talks in the Qatari capital, Doha, Axios reports.

Beirut, Lebanon – After the governments of Lebanon and Israel on Friday signed a United States-brokered framework agreement following months of direct negotiations, protesters took to the streets of the Lebanese capital to express their anger at the deal.

Many of the demonstrators waved flags of the Iran-backed group Hezbollah, which has been militarily confronting Israel’s ongoing invasion and occupation of large swaths of southern Lebanon.

Israel and Hezbollah have been fighting since October 2023, with varying levels of intensity, but the former has twice escalated the conflict – first in September 2024 and then nearly four months ago.

Some of the harshest critics of the framework, which does not force the Israeli army to withdraw from the areas it occupies, have been those most deeply impacted by Israel’s war, which has killed more than 4,200 people and forced hundreds of thousands from their homes since early March.

“After everything my family, my village, the south, and Dahiyeh have endured – the destruction, the displacement, the grief and the loss – it is incredibly difficult for me to accept an agreement with the same state that carried out the military actions that devastated our communities,” said Ali Zaytoun, a resident of Beirut’s southern suburbs, known as Dahiyeh.

Zaytoun, who runs a popular Instagram account called History of Dahieh, said he had been displaced multiple times due to Israeli attacks.

“Imagine someone destroys your home and your life, and then you’re expected to simply move on as if nothing happened,” said Zaytoun. “My protest is about remembering those who suffered, standing up for my community, and expressing that this agreement does not reflect the justice or respect that people who lived through this war deserve.”

A new Oslo?

The Israeli intensification on March 2 came after Hezbollah fired on Israel for the first time in more than a year following the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a joint US-Israeli air attack on Tehran two days earlier, and as a response to more than 10,000 Israeli violations of a ceasefire reached in November 2024.

On the same day, the Lebanese government declared Hezbollah’s military activities illegal and later tried – unsuccessfully – to expel the Iranian ambassador.

Its position was that Hezbollah’s actions invited Israel’s wrath in a war fought on behalf of Iran and not the people of Lebanon.

Hezbollah, however, continued fighting Israel in southern Lebanon, where the Israeli army has established what it calls a “security zone” that goes as deep as 10km (6.2 miles) into the country.

As attacks continued, Lebanon’s government entered the United States-brokered negotiations with Israel, despite Hezbollah’s objections.

The final text of the 14-point Washington agreement states Israel has no claim to Lebanese territory and that the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) will eventually be the authority in southern Lebanon, “pending the verified disarmament of” non-state armed groups such as Hezbollah.

Proponents point to Israel recognising Lebanon’s authority over its own territory, though critics say the framework relies too heavily on the US – Israel’s main military and diplomatic backer and a signatory to the deal – to enforce it.

“The United States is unlikely to act as a neutral mediator and will almost certainly align with Israeli positions whenever disputes arise over the interpretation or implementation of the agreement,” said Karim Emile Bitar, a professor of international relations at the Saint Joseph University of Beirut.

“This creates a fundamentally asymmetric negotiating environment in which Lebanon has little leverage and few effective guarantees.”

Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem declared the agreement “null and void”, calling it “humiliating, shameful, and a surrender of sovereignty”, while Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah lawmaker, warned of “internal conflict” in Lebanon.

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri called for calm but also declared that the deal was an attempt to incite strife.

Those who backed the government said it had originally little choice but to enter direct negotiations, given its limited leverage in a war where Israel has technological superiority and unwavering US support.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam wrote on social media after the agreement’s signing that it “aims to achieve Israel’s withdrawal from all Lebanese territories”, while President Joseph Aoun called it “a first step” towards restoring Lebanon’s sovereignty.

Still, the final terms of the deal were criticised by many analysts.

“This framework agreement essentially mirrors the reality of the military and political balance on the ground, which is decisively tilted in Israel’s favour,” said Bitar.

Bitar said the agreement was reminiscent of the Oslo Accords, a series of US-brokered agreements signed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel in the 1990s.

“We see a similar pattern here: Israeli negotiators seek recognition and get the other side to relinquish leverage while offering no binding timetable or reciprocal obligations,” he added.

On Saturday, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz insisted soldiers will remain in Lebanon until Hezbollah is disarmed.

US reliance

Days before the signing of the Washington framework, Iran and the US agreed on a memorandum of understanding (MoU) that aims to end the war launched by the US and Israel against Iran in late February.

The MoU declared, among other things, “the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon”, between the two countries and their allies.

Lebanon’s inclusion in the MoU was reportedly an Iranian priority, while a “deconfliction cell” was formed to bolster the supposed ceasefire in the country.

Throughout the war and the period of negotiations, Lebanon’s government has tried to separate itself from Iran – but some said it may have gone too far in the other direction.

“We are seeing the confirmation of what Hezbollah has been warning all along. Not because Hezbollah got it right, but because the Lebanese state got it so wrong,” said Lebanese writer Elia Ayoub.

“I understand the need to not depend on Iran, but what we’ve instead done is become even more dependent on the US than we’ve previously been,” added Ayoub, the founder of the podcast The Fire These Times.

“And it’s the US that has been bankrolling Israel’s genocide in Palestine and war crimes in Lebanon,” Ayoub added.

Analysts also questioned whether the government would be able to implement the deal.

“It appears that the Lebanese side has come under significant US pressure to sign an agreement that is very likely to remain little more than ink on paper, and very unlikely to be implemented in any meaningful way,” said Bitar.

Karim Safieddine, a nonresident fellow with the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, said the framework left the Lebanese government with “very little agency”.

“It’s Israel imposing a deal,” he added. “It’s very clear what this deal is. It’s just a surrender agreement.”

At the same time, some pointed to similarities to the 2024 ceasefire agreement, expressing doubt whether Israel will be incentivised to respect the framework.

“It’s one thing to sign a declaration of intent; it’s another thing to have it implemented, and I can see all kinds of problems emerging from this,” said Nicholas Blanford, a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council and author of a book on Hezbollah.

Last year, Israel repeatedly complained that LAF’s efforts to disarm Hezbollah were either too slow or ineffective. The US often sided with Israel despite diplomatic attempts from European and other officials encouraging it to support LAF.

In a call with his US counterpart, President Donald Trump, on Saturday, Aoun said Lebanon “would assume its responsibilities” in implementing the framework and expressed hope Washington would help ensure that commitments ‌are fulfilled, particularly by pressing Israel to pull out from the areas it occupies.

Point 9 of the agreement states Lebanon’s government commits to a “rigorous, performance-based program to enable the capacity of the LAF to assert full military and security control within Lebanon … to implement the disarmament of all non-state armed groups”.

This provision has some in Lebanon worried about potential confrontations between LAF and Hezbollah, but Blanford said the possibility of a large escalation is currently not likely.

“The Lebanese army and the government are unwilling to use force against Hezbollah,” he said. “Forcibly trying to disarm a group that is refusing to disarm is an act of war. And I think the Lebanese army and the Lebanese government would be extremely wary of that.”

US president threatens to ‘militarily complete the job’ as US strikes Iran over ship attacks.

Israel and Lebanon have agreed on a new framework agreement after four days of marathon talks in Washington, DC, brokered by the United States, trying to end the months-long conflict.

Israel has been occupying almost 20 percent of Lebanese territory in the south and has killed more than 4,000 people since fighting erupted on March 2. A previous bout of fighting ended in a ceasefire in November 2024, but Israel carried out almost daily attacks and refused to end its occupation in breach of the deal.

The new deal, however, does not specifically call for the withdrawal of the Israeli forces and instead ties it to the disarmament of Hezbollah – a condition repeatedly rejected by the Iran-backed armed group.

Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem on Saturday rejected the framework agreement, calling it “null and void”. Hezbollah has demanded that Israel first end its occupation.

Hezbollah supporters flooded the streets of the capital, Beirut, on Friday evening to oppose the deal.

So, what is the new agreement, which does not include Hezbollah, and can it lead to peace in Lebanon?

What’s in the Israel-Lebanon agreement?

After the trilateral signing in Washington, the US Department of State released the text of the agreement, which talks of a “sequenced process” that will see the Lebanese army restore “effective sovereign authority over all Lebanese territory, pending the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups” – a clear reference to Hezbollah.

The deal does not mandate Israeli withdrawal from the fifth of Lebanese land it occupies. Instead, the framework notes that Israel shall “progressively redeploy” out of Lebanon, offering two “pilot zones” where the Lebanese military “will gradually assume full and effective security responsibility”.

“One [pilot zone] is south of the Litani River and outside the security zone altogether, and the other is north of the Litani – a small area in the expanded security zone that we conquered in the last two weeks, and which the [Israeli military] says it does not need,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later said in a statement.

Once these conditions are met, “Lebanese civilians will be able to safely return to these areas under the exclusive control of Lebanese state authorities,” the framework says. More than 1.2 million people have been forcefully displaced.

Israel says that successfully returning southern Lebanon to Lebanese government control would “eliminate any future need for [Israeli military] action or presence in Lebanon” and “[declared] that it has not territorial ambitions in Lebanon”.

The Lebanese government has signed that it rejects “the claims of any state or non-state actor to use force on its behalf without its explicit authorization,” deeming such attacks “illegal” and “contrary to Lebanese national interests”.

How have parties to the conflict reacted to the agreement?

Israel

Netanyahu issued a video statement shortly after the agreement was announced, stressing that the framework would allow the Israeli military to remain in the occupied Lebanese land.

“We will maintain [the buffer zone] until Hezbollah disarms and as long as there is a threat to the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said.

It is also a partial, momentary win for Netanyahu, who faced intense domestic criticism after the US and Iran sidelined Israel to sign the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, which mandates an end to hostilities in Lebanon as well.

Lebanon

President Joseph Aoun expressed gratitude to Trump and other regional mediators after the signing of the trilateral agreement, which he hailed as “the first step on the path to restoring Lebanon’s sovereignty”.

In a statement from the Lebanese presidency, Aoun noted that the framework also “marks the beginning of the road to fructify [Lebanese citizens’] sacrifices, so that they may return to their fully liberated land”.

His statement has done little to tamp down the tensions in the capital, where supporters of Hezbollah took to the streets, burning tyres and blocking a road leading to the airport.

Hezbollah

Though the armed group is not a party to the agreement, and was not present at the negotiating table, its posture and actions will dictate where the conflict heads in the future.

The Hezbollah leader on Saturday condemned proposals to tie the Israeli withdrawal to the group’s disarmament. “Linking the Israeli withdrawal to the disarmament of the resistance throughout Lebanon is a very dangerous proposition that crosses all red lines,” he said.

“The framework agreement in Washington is humiliating, shameful, and a surrender of sovereignty,” he said.

He added that the framework agreement should be replaced by the Iran-US Memorandum of Understanding (⁠MoU) signed on June 15.

Earlier, Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah representative in the parliament, said Lebanese authorities would not be able to enforce the framework agreement unless, with US support, “they go to civil war”.

In a televised speech before the agreement was signed, Qassem said that Hezbollah would hold its weapons closer, ready to fight Israel for Lebanon, if the Lebanese state fails to do so.

The Iran-US MOU called for the “territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon” – a similar wording has been used in the framework agreement.

United States

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Washington’s point person in Israel and Lebanon talks, announced an “immediate” $100m donation by the US towards humanitarian assistance in coordination with the UN.

At the signing ceremony at the State Department in Washington, Rubio appeared to acknowledge the limited scope of the agreement, calling it “the beginning of the beginning.”

“There’s a lot of work ahead. We don’t in any way underestimate the difficulty of the task ahead, but we understand the importance of it, how vital it is, and we are honored to have played a part in bringing this together,” he said.

Two previous ceasefire agreements brokered by Washington failed to stop the fighting in Lebanon, as well as the Islamabad MOU, signed by President Trump and his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian, earlier this month.

Iran

Though Tehran is yet to officially react to the agreement, its state media has been pressing against the deal.

Fars news agency noted that the agreement is essentially the US permitting Israel to violate the first clause of the Islamabad MOU, which mandated the cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon.

Does the Israel-Lebanon agreement contradict the Islamabad MOU?

Analysts point towards two direct contradictions between the preliminary deal signed by the US and Iran, and the latest agreement between Israel and Lebanon.

In short, the Islamabad MOU mandates the end of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon, with no conditions – while the Israel-Lebanon agreement ties it to Hezbollah’s disarmament.

Israel has not adhered to any of the ceasefire agreements, including earlier ones, and continued with its assault on Lebanese territories. On Saturday, Lebanese state news agency NNA reported that the Farah amusement park intersection in Nabatieh al-Fawqa was targeted by an Israeli drone strike.

Israel has killed at least 4,192 people in Lebanon since the start of the war on Iran four months ago.

Secondly, the Islamabad MOU does not refer to or mention any of the Iran-backed proxy armed groups among its listed clauses to take forward the negotiations to end the war.

Tahani Mustafa, a visiting fellow on the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera that Israel and Washington would “definitely use the fact that Hezbollah refuses to disarm and capitulate to blame Hezbollah for derailing the entire process”.

Mustafa further added that Israel “has also proven that it is acting in bad faith, which really gives no confidence to Hezbollah to disarm or capitulate in the way that is being demanded.”

Washington is not blame-free either, she noted, arguing that “the American negotiators actively work behind the scenes to try and decouple Lebanon and Iran.”

“This has really just been something that both the Israelis and the Americans have attempted to cook up behind the scenes and once again obfuscating the blame for its failure,” she told Al Jazeera.

Can a deal work if Hezbollah rejects?

This is not the first time that Hezbollah’s disarmament is on the table – and the existing challenges remain. The 2024 deal also called for Hezbollah’s disarmament, but it could not be achieved as Israel continued to attack Lebanon and refused to withdraw its troops in breach of the deal.

Alon Pinkas, an Israeli former ambassador and consul general in New York, says he is “very doubtful and sceptical” that this will work out because the deal is between Israel and Lebanon with the US; the issue here is Hezbollah.”

Iran’s linking of the Lebanon conflict to the maturation of an agreement with the US, Pinkas says, “complicates things [because] Netanyahu said that [Israel] would not yield to any linkage to Iran and that Israel would defend itself in Lebanon”.

Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem said that the agreement is an “existential threat” to Hezbollah’s presence.

“Without Hezbollah’s consent, this is not going to happen,” Hashem said. “This is going to be a recipe for another confrontation. The Lebanese government isn’t capable of imposing this deal. It’s not the de facto force on the ground.”