DistantNews
Support us
🇶🇦 Qatar /Conflict & Security

Lebanon’s latest truce: What is different from the April agreement?

From Al Jazeera · () English

Summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.

At a glance

News Named sources Ongoing story
  • Israel and the Lebanese government have agreed to a new US-mediated ceasefire, but Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has dismissed it as a "surrender and defeat."
  • The Trump administration announced the ceasefire, which is contingent on Hezbollah halting fire and withdrawing fighters south of the Litani River.
  • The agreement's viability is doubted due to Hezbollah's rejection and Israel's insistence on continuing military operations, mirroring the failure of a previous April truce.

A new US-mediated ceasefire between Israel and the Lebanese government has been announced, but its prospects appear uncertain as Hezbollah has already rejected the deal. The Trump administration stated that the agreement would come into effect within 24 hours of approval by all parties.

the ceasefire would come into force within 24 hours of approval by all concerned parties

— Joseph AounLebanese President Joseph Aoun stated the timeline for the ceasefire's implementation.

However, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has been highly critical, labeling the ceasefire as a "surrender and defeat." This starkly contrasts with the administration's announcement, highlighting a significant rift in the perceived outcome of the negotiations. The agreement reportedly requires a complete cessation of Hezbollah fire and the withdrawal of its fighters from areas south of the Litani River. It also proposes the creation of "pilot zones" under the exclusive control of the Lebanese Armed Forces, aiming to move towards a broader political and security settlement.

The viability of this latest truce is further cast into doubt by Israel's defense minister, who insists the military will continue operations in Lebanon. This stance, coupled with Hezbollah's outright rejection and Iran's position, which demands Israeli forces withdraw to pre-war positions, undermines the agreement's foundation. Critics point to a previous truce in April, which they argue failed to halt Israeli attacks or the occupation of southern Lebanon, suggesting a pattern of failed agreements.

labelling it a “surrender and defeat”.

— Naim QassemHezbollah leader Naim Qassem dismissed the US-mediated deal.

Adding to the complexity, Lebanon was represented by government diplomats in the talks, even though the Lebanese army is not directly involved in the current conflict. The agreement's terms are set to be revisited during the week of June 2, but with key players expressing dissent and continued military intent, the path to lasting peace remains precarious.

the baseline demand in Lebanon is for Israeli forces to withdraw to the positions they held before the start of the US-Israel war on Iran at the end of February

— Esmail QaaniQuds Force commander Esmail Qaani outlined Iran's primary condition for a ceasefire.
DistantNews Editorial

Originally published by Al Jazeera. Summarized and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.

More Stories

From Our Blog