A fragile ceasefire between the United States and Iran, announced by Donald Trump and acknowledged by Tehran, is facing mounting strain as Israeli military operations in Lebanon intensify, raising doubts about the deal’s survival, The Intercept writes.
Within the first 36 hours of the truce, Israeli strikes reportedly caused significant casualties across Lebanon, expanding beyond traditional targets and marking one of the heaviest bombardments since the 1982 invasion.
While Trump maintained the ceasefire remains intact, describing the strikes as “a separate skirmish,” the original agreement called for “an immediate ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon.”
The phrase “including Lebanon” was reportedly dropped following last-minute discussions between Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump later said he advised Netanyahu to “low-key it,” a remark seen by critics as tacit approval for continued military action.
In response, Iran signalled it would refrain from closing the Strait of Hormuz only if Israel complies with the ceasefire, while planned U.S.–Iran talks in Islamabad remain uncertain.
Netanyahu has downplayed expectations of a lasting truce, calling the ceasefire temporary and “a way station on the way to achieving all of our goals.” He has previously remarked, “America is a thing you can move very easily.”
Analysts argue that Israel has historically opposed U.S.–Iran diplomatic breakthroughs, with Netanyahu repeatedly taking steps that disrupted negotiations across multiple U.S. administrations.
Recent developments suggest a similar pattern, with Israeli actions potentially jeopardising renewed diplomatic efforts during Trump’s second term. Critics contend such conflicts are aimed less at defeating Iran and more at derailing negotiations.
By Aghakazim Guliyev
