Israel and the Lebanese government agreed to a new ceasefire plan on Wednesday, the third ceasefire agreement since clashes between Hezbollah and Israel began in October 2023. However, Hezbollah, the group Israel is actually fighting with in Lebanon, has rejected the deal, saying they would only halt its attacks after Israel completely withdraws from southern Lebanon.
The agreement was reached during direct negotiations between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats in Washington, D.C., the fourth round of such talks since April.
The negotiations came just days after tensions between Israel and Hezbollah spiked. Over the weekend, sirens sounded nearly without end in communities across northern Israel, as Hezbollah launched barrages of rockets and drones toward the area. Several soldiers were killed and wounded in attacks both within Lebanon and Israel. In response, Israeli officials threatened to strike the Dahiyeh suburbs of Beirut, a Hezbollah stronghold, on Monday.
Iran warned that if the strikes on Beirut occurred, it would completely freeze negotiations with the U.S. and even launch strikes on Israel. With the situation rapidly escalating, U.S. President Donald Trump spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and demanded that he call off the planned strikes, a demand that Israel complied with.
Trump announced on Monday evening that Israel and Hezbollah had agreed to halt their strikes on one another. Nevertheless, Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks and Israeli airstrikes and ground operations continued over the following days. Even with the announcement of a new ceasefire, much uncertainty remains, with people on both sides of the border left wondering: what comes next?
How did we get here?
First, some background on Hezbollah. Hezbollah is an Iran-backed Shia Muslim militia and political party based in Lebanon. Founded in the 1980s, it has grown into the most powerful armed force in the country, stronger, by most estimates, than Lebanon’s own national army. It also holds seats in parliament and positions in the government. The U.S., Israel, and a number of other countries designate it a terrorist organization, due to Hezbollah’s attacks in Lebanon, Israel, and around the world. Crucially, Hezbollah is also Iran’s most important regional ally, and that relationship is central to understanding the latest round of fighting.
Israel and Hezbollah have technically been in a ceasefire since November 2024, reached after about a year of clashes that started when Hezbollah attacked northern Israel shortly after Hamas launched its October 7, 2023 massacre.
As part of the 2024 agreement, Hezbollah committed to leave southern Lebanon and to dismantle any weapons production facilities in the country, while Israel agreed to fully withdraw from Lebanon within 60 days. Neither side fully complied. Israel remained in five strategic border positions and continued airstrikes. Lebanon argued this violated the agreement. Israel countered that Lebanon was failing to rein in Hezbollah’s ongoing operations and that the terrorist group was regrouping in southern Lebanon.
On March 2, 2026, a few days after the war in Iran erupted, Hezbollah renewed its rocket and drone attacks on Israel in support of Iran, its main patron. Israel responded with massive strikes on Beirut and southern Lebanon and a ground operation aimed at establishing a buffer zone in southern Lebanon to keep Hezbollah far from Israeli communities. According to Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health, over 3,400 people in the country have been killed, and more than a million Lebanese have been displaced as the fighting has expanded. Lebanese authorities do not differentiate between civilians and combatants in their casualty counts.
On April 16, Israel and Lebanon agreed to a new ceasefire, which has been extended periodically a few times since. That agreement came just days after Israeli and Lebanese officials held the highest-level direct negotiations between the two countries since 1993. However, neither Israel nor Hezbollah complied with that agreement. Hezbollah’s drone and rocket attacks continued and even intensified, and the IDF continued its operations in southern Lebanon and beyond.
Over the past two weeks, the situation has rapidly escalated. One of the most significant changes has been an increase in Hezbollah’s use of fiber-optic and first-person-view drones, which are significantly harder to take down than regular drones. Of the 15 IDF soldiers killed by Hezbollah since mid-April, at least 10 were reportedly killed in drone attacks. Hezbollah has also widened its attacks on northern Israel. Over the weekend, sirens sounded in the Safed and Tiberias areas for the first time since the ceasefire, as Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks intensified.
The IDF responded to the new attacks with expanded airstrikes. Over the past week, the IDF also advanced past the Litani River in southern Lebanon, moving deeper into the country in an effort to secure a buffer zone to protect northern Israel and to destroy Hezbollah strongholds in the area. Last week, the IDF struck the town of Choueifat, the first strike in the Beirut area in almost three weeks, targeting Ali al-Husni, the head of the missile force in the Imam Hossein Division, an Iranian militia that works with Hezbollah.
The breaking point
With the exchange of fire intensifying with each passing day, Netanyahu and Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz announced on Monday that the IDF would be expanding strikes into the Dahiyeh suburbs of Beirut in response to the intensification of Hezbollah’s attacks on Israeli communities. On Monday afternoon, the IDF issued an evacuation order for the area, warning it would launch strikes in the near future.
Iranian officials warned that any such strikes would put an end to efforts to reach a deal to end the war with the U.S. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) additionally threatened to launch attacks on northern Israel if the strikes on the Dahiyeh suburbs took place.
After the Iranian threats were published, Trump called Netanyahu and ordered him to cancel the planned strikes. After the conversation, Trump wrote on Truth Social, “I had a very productive call with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, of Israel, and there will be no Troops going to Beirut, and any Troops that are on their way, have already been turned back. Likewise, through highly placed Representatives, I had a very good call with Hezbollah, and they agreed that all shooting will stop — That Israel will not attack them, and they will not attack Israel.”
The post sparked confusion among both Israelis and Lebanese, as few and contradictory details were published about what exactly was agreed on.
Netanyahu stated that the IDF would continue to operate as it had been in southern Lebanon, adding that he told Trump that if Hezbollah does not stop firing at Israeli communities, Israel would strike Beirut.
Katz insisted as well that “the State of Israel is ‘absolutely’ not in a ceasefire,” on Monday evening. “If the shooting does not stop, we will attack the Dahiyeh suburbs,” he added. “The prime minister and I pledged that we would not allow harm to the towns [in northern Israel], and we kept saying, the rule for Dahiyeh is the same as for the towns in the north. If there is no peace here, there will be no peace there either.”
The Lebanese Embassy in Washington painted a similar picture, saying that Hezbollah and Israel had agreed to a reciprocal ceasefire, with Israel committing to hold off on strikes on Beirut’s southern suburbs in exchange for Hezbollah ending its attacks on northern Israel. The embassy added that the ceasefire would eventually be expanded to include all of Lebanon, noting that talks planned between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats on Tuesday and Wednesday would discuss the agreement and build upon it.
However, MPs Hassan Ezzedine and Hassan Fadlallah, who represent Hezbollah in the Lebanese parliament, rejected the assertion that the movement had agreed to a ceasefire which only required Israel to halt strikes on the Dahiyeh suburbs. The two emphasized in comments on Monday that Hezbollah would only agree to a ceasefire that applies to all of Lebanon and that serves as a first step towards a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from the country.
Lebanon and Israel resume direct negotiations
The picture changed radically on Wednesday after two days of direct negotiations between Israeli and Lebanese diplomats. This was the fourth round of talks between the two sides since April. Last Friday, Israeli and Lebanese military officials met in Washington to discuss details of the situation and to organize information for the diplomatic meeting held on Tuesday and Wednesday.
Alongside the goal of ending the war between Israel and Hezbollah, the talks were also aimed at setting the guidelines for future negotiations to secure a comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and Lebanon, which would end a seven-decade-long state of war between the two countries. While the two sides haven’t been fighting directly for the entirety of that period, they haven’t ever established diplomatic relations.
On Wednesday night, the two sides announced that they had agreed to a new ceasefire, hoping it would be more comprehensive than past agreements.
According to the joint statement released by the U.S. State Department, Lebanon, and Israel, the ceasefire is contingent on Hezbollah completely halting its attacks and withdrawing all of its operatives from the area south of the Litani River. In other words, the truce only holds if Hezbollah, which was not a party in the talks, actually stops fighting and pulls back from the border area.
The three governments also agreed to move quickly to establish what they called “pilot zones,” areas in which the Lebanese Army would take exclusive control and bar all non-state armed groups, Hezbollah included. The statement did not set out a timeline for creating these zones. The idea is that these steps will pave the way toward a broader peace and security agreement between the two countries.
Israel and Lebanon further stated that they have no hostile intent toward one another, and all three governments affirmed that the future of Israeli-Lebanese relations should be decided by the two countries alone. In a thinly veiled reference to Iran and Hezbollah, they rejected any attempt by a state or non-state actor to hold Lebanon’s future hostage.
In the joint statement, Israel, Lebanon, and the U.S. also condemned Iran’s attacks across the region, as well as “ongoing activities that undermine stability throughout the Middle East, whether through support for proxies and all other acts of aggression.” The sides also stressed that any ceasefire or peace agreement could be negotiated only between the two sides, with U.S. mediation, without the involvement of any other party.
The joint statement also emphasized U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio‘s declaration that “Hezbollah is not just an enemy of Israel and an enemy of America, but that it is an enemy of Lebanon.” The U.S. noted in the statement that it would provide support to the Lebanese Army to ensure it could maintain control throughout Lebanese territory.
The two sides agreed to resume both the political and security tracks of the negotiations during the week of June 22, with the goal of eventually reaching a further comprehensive agreement. In the meantime, the U.S. said it would continue to act as an intermediary between them.
Whether this ceasefire will hold remains to be seen. Just like the deals reached in November 2024 and in April, this latest iteration hinges on Hezbollah laying down its arms in southern Lebanon, a condition the terrorist group has repeatedly rejected. This also isn’t the first time the Lebanese government has committed to demilitarizing Hezbollah.
In August 2025, the Lebanese government formally tasked the army with a phased plan to bring all weapons in the country under state control. In January 2026, the army announced it had completed the first phase, clearing non-state weapons from the area south of the Litani River near the Israeli border. However, in March, it became apparent that this wasn’t true, as barrages of rockets and drones were launched from supposedly cleared areas. Israeli forces operating in southern Lebanon also uncovered stockpiles of weapons and equipment in areas that the Lebanese Army had said were clear.
But if the Lebanese government, the Lebanese Army, and Israel are all agreed on the need to disarm Hezbollah, why hasn’t it happened yet?
Why hasn’t the Lebanese government already disarmed Hezbollah?
There are several reasons. The first is political. Lebanon has a long history of sectarian conflict. The country was engulfed in a bloody and horrific civil war from 1975 until 1990, with Shia Muslim, Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Druze militias dividing the country among themselves in years of combat.
Today, Lebanon is held together by a fragile power-sharing system that divides government authority along sectarian lines. The president is always a Maronite Christian, the prime minister is always a Sunni Muslim, and the Speaker of Parliament is always a Shia Muslim. While Lebanon has managed to avoid another civil war, the shadow of the last one still hangs over the country and shapes its political reality. Throughout the years, several smaller conflicts have erupted, though most have lasted only a few hours or days.
Lebanese leaders fear that a direct confrontation with Hezbollah could reignite this already fragile peace. The country is already dealing with a failing economy and a government that can barely function and is constantly stuck in deadlock. Another civil war would be a death blow.
The second reason the Lebanese government hasn’t acted is a lack of practical ability. The Lebanese Army is seriously underfunded, understaffed, and underequipped. It simply doesn’t have the manpower or the weaponry to confront a force as large as Hezbollah.
The solution to that problem may sound simple at first glance: give the army more money, help it recruit more soldiers, and supply it with better weapons. However, Israel and other countries are concerned that weapons provided to the Lebanese Army would find their way to Hezbollah instead, especially since the terrorist organization still holds leverage over the army and the entire country.
This creates a Catch-22. The Lebanese Army can’t confront Hezbollah unless it gets better weapons. Giving it better weapons risks strengthening Hezbollah. Not giving it better weapons means it can’t confront Hezbollah at all. Potential donors want to see progress on disarming Hezbollah before committing funds and weapons, but that progress can’t happen without the funds and weapons.
Additionally, the U.S. has already been providing the Lebanese Army with substantial funding and training over the past two decades, amounting to about $3 billion in aid.
On top of all of this is also the fact that if the Lebanese Army is tied too directly with the U.S. or Israel, it could delegitimize its efforts in the eyes of the Lebanese public. Lebanon, like many countries in the Middle East, has a difficult history with foreign influence. During the civil war, the various local militias were often backed by other countries, including Israel, the U.S., France, Italy, Syria, and Iran. Israeli troops maintained a presence in Lebanon from 1982 until 2000, working with a Christian militia known as the South Lebanon Army. Syrian troops remained in Lebanon even longer than the IDF, only fully withdrawing in 2005. Iran was central in establishing and building up Hezbollah both during the civil war and after.
For a ceasefire to last, Israel and the Lebanese government will need to navigate all of these complexities. They’ll need to find a way to strengthen the Lebanese Army without simultaneously empowering Hezbollah or making the Lebanese Army appear to be a puppet of foreign countries. They’ll also need to address how to prevent another civil war as the Lebanese Army disarms Hezbollah, a question only Lebanese leaders can really answer. They’ll also need to address Lebanon’s concerns about an extended Israeli presence in the south, while also addressing Israel’s concerns that a rapid withdrawal would simply allow Hezbollah to rush back into the area as it did after the last ceasefire.
Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S., Yechiel Leiter, acknowledged concerns that the Lebanese Army would be unable to confront Hezbollah on its own, but emphasized that the U.S. would be helping to strengthen the Lebanese Army and that, if the ceasefire collapsed, Hezbollah would need to deal with renewed Israeli strikes.
“It very well may be that the hard work is only starting now, but we have a framework, we have a map to get to the destination,” Leiter added. He stressed that this would take time. “Whoever thinks that it’ll be ‘hocus pocus’ is simply mistaken.”
Leiter also provided some further context about the “pilot zones” plan, adding that special units of the Lebanese Army would be responsible for taking control of these areas and preventing Hezbollah from returning.
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun described the new ceasefire as a “last chance” on Thursday, insisting that this new deal differs from the 2024 ceasefire “because it will be sustainable, and we are counting on the role of President Trump and his administration.”
Aoun added that the ceasefire should take effect within 24 hours of when all parties give their final approval to the deal. “We await the response of all concerned parties and the provision of the necessary guarantees for compliance with what the American sponsor will determine regarding the timing and mechanism of implementation,” Aoun said.
Aoun additionally proposed that the first “pilot zone” should include the area between Beaufort Castle and the towns of Zawtar El Charqiyeh and Zawtar El Gharbiyeh, located about three miles west of the castle and about 6 miles from the Israel-Lebanon border.
Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Naim Qassem, categorically rejected the agreement reached between Israel and the Lebanese government on Thursday afternoon, saying the terrorist organization would only agree to a ceasefire once Israel entirely withdrew from Lebanese territory.
Qassem described the deal as “futile, humiliating, and shameful for Lebanon,” and a “roadmap for the extermination of a segment of the Lebanese people and the enslavement of the rest.
In his statement rejecting the government’s right to sign agreements with Israel, the Hezbollah leader stressed that “No one has the right to interfere in the Lebanese internal affairs between the Lebanese to organize their political, economic, and social life and the decisions they agree upon regarding the sovereignty of their country and its protection within the national security strategy they agree upon.” The decision to launch negotiations with Israel and to demand the demilitarization of Hezbollah was approved several times by the Lebanese cabinet, which includes allies of Hezbollah.
Considering that the foundational condition of the ceasefire is Hezbollah’s agreement to withdraw from southern Lebanon and disarm, it’s unclear as of yet how Israel and the Lebanese government will proceed.
The shadow of Iran
On top of all these issues, Israel and the Lebanese government also need to deal with the threat posed by Iran, Hezbollah’s main patron.
Iran and the U.S. still haven’t reached a full ceasefire between themselves, and Iran has repeatedly insisted that it will only agree to a deal that includes a ceasefire for Hezbollah. Both Iran and the U.S. have implemented blockades on the Strait of Hormuz as well, bringing maritime traffic through the crucial waterway to a near halt. This disruption has increased prices for gas and other goods around the world, as much of the world’s petroleum and other critical trade has to pass through the Strait.
Additionally, in recent days, clashes have repeatedly erupted between Iran, the U.S., and Arab states along the Persian Gulf. Iran has attacked several commercial and military vessels and has launched missile and drone attacks on Kuwait and Bahrain. Meanwhile, the U.S. has intercepted several Iranian vessels and struck several Iranian military sites in response to drone and missile attacks and threats.
The two sides have been trying to reach an agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding as an interim arrangement until a more comprehensive deal can be reached. However, Iran and the U.S. disagree on what such an MoU should include. The U.S. is demanding that Iran agree to completely lift its blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, halt uranium enrichment, and hand over its stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Iran, meanwhile, is refusing to discuss issues concerning its nuclear program at this time and is demanding that the U.S. release billions of dollars in funds intended for Iran that have been frozen for years due to sanctions. Iran is also insisting that it has the right to maintain at least some control over the Strait of Hormuz and is trying to continue levying a toll from all ships using the Strait, a demand the U.S. and most other countries consider unacceptable.
With the situation between Iran and the U.S. remaining unstable, securing a lasting peace in Lebanon is even more difficult than usual. If the war between the U.S. and Iran resumes, Hezbollah will likely resume or intensify its rocket and drone attacks on Israel. Iran has also tried intervening to protect Hezbollah in the past, and it will likely try to undermine any ceasefire agreement reached, even if Hezbollah complies or is forced to comply in the short term.
The reason Iran has such an interest in Lebanon is that Hezbollah has served as a sort of buffer between Israel and Iran over the years. The standing assumption for decades was that if Israel struck Iran, Hezbollah would respond with a devastating attack that would cause widespread damage and casualties across Israel. However, after Hezbollah was pushed into joining the war that Hamas started in October 2023, Israeli strikes and ground operations destroyed much of the capabilities Hezbollah had built up over the years, meaning one of the main threats deterring strikes on Iran had been significantly reduced.
Iran’s other proxies in the region, including Hamas and militias in Iraq, were also heavily damaged due to conflicts and political shifts over the past two years. The situation was exacerbated even further after the downfall of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in late 2024. Syria under Assad served as both a base for Iranian forces and Iran-backed militias and as a corridor for Iran to ship weapons and supplies to Hezbollah in Lebanon. The government that replaced Assad is staunchly anti-Hezbollah and adversarial to Iran due to Iran’s and Hezbollah’s role in supporting Assad in the Syrian Civil War. All of these developments mean that Hezbollah has never been more important to Iran than it is now. If they fall, the regime in Iran will have lost almost its entire support network across the region.
