This article is from: srnnews.com
Israel and Lebanon Face New Risks Even if US-Iran Talks Advance
Hezbollah’s position in southern Lebanon and Israel’s demand for long-term security arrangements could keep the northern front unstable
By Keren Setton / The Media Line
Tensions in the Middle East are mounting as a fragile ceasefire between the US and Iran threatens to unravel, possibly plunging the region into a broader escalation that could once again draw in Israel, Lebanon, and other major players.
The implications of renewed escalation are vast. The risks range from a multi-front war and another sharp jump in global oil and shipping prices to international backlash against the US and Israel and political fallout ahead of the upcoming US midterm elections.
On Monday, the US attacked and seized an Iranian cargo ship that it said had tried to break the American naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran condemned the move as a ceasefire violation, demanded the vessel’s release, and warned it would retaliate if the pressure campaign continued.
The talks are expected to take place in Pakistan, and by Tuesday, the diplomatic picture appeared somewhat firmer than it had been a day earlier. Washington said it remained positive that negotiations would go ahead, while a senior Iranian official said Tehran was considering participation. Reports also said Vice President JD Vance was set to travel to Pakistan, though important uncertainties remained.
A Pakistani source involved in the negotiations said the truce was due to expire at 8 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, giving the diplomacy a more clearly defined deadline than was publicly available the day before.
“It looks like both sides want to leave an opening for negotiations,” Dr. Yossi Mansharof, a lecturer in the “Politics of the Middle East” MA program at the School of Political Science at the University of Haifa and a senior researcher at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, told The Media Line. “Neither side is interested in resuming the fighting. Iran is an expert at delaying negotiations.”
President Donald Trump has continued to pair public threats with claims that a deal may still be within reach as the ceasefire deadline approaches.
“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran,” President Trump posted on his social network accounts late Sunday, as efforts to reach a deal appeared to be unraveling.
“We are in a very problematic situation,” Col. (ret.) Dr. Jacques Neriah, a senior fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, told The Media Line. “The US wants to cause a major blackout in Iran and blow up all its bridges—will Trump really do this remains a question. The US is planning a major blow to Iran to make it clear that they are better off coming to the negotiating table and agreeing to American terms, but this doesn’t mean that the Iranians will raise a white flag.”
The 40-day US-Israeli campaign against Iran was an intensive air and naval operation focused on systematically degrading Iran’s military infrastructure without putting boots on the ground. In the opening attack of the campaign, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, was killed in an airstrike on his residence.
Thousands of strikes targeted missile launchers, drone facilities, air defense systems, naval assets, and command-and-control posts across Iran. Assessments vary as to how much of Iran’s ballistic missile infrastructure was destroyed or rendered inoperable, but the Islamic Republic is still believed to retain substantial capabilities. Hundreds of drone storage and production sites were hit, along with the killing of several senior military leaders. Early in the war, Israel and the US struck dozens of air defense systems, helping establish air superiority over parts of Iran. Yet Iran continued to launch missiles and drones throughout the conflict, targeting Israel, the Gulf states, and American bases in the region, a sign both of the depth of its infrastructure and of the limits of the campaign’s ability to deliver a decisive blow.
“Any other country that got such a slap in the face would have thought the time is right for negotiations, but the Iranians have no problem continuing the war for years,” Neriah said, citing the decade-long Iran-Iraq war as an example of Iranian perseverance and patience.
“The regime in Iran is built in such a way that it prepared itself for sustained pressure, and in order to destabilize it, there is need for major treatment and massive pressure, with continuation of targeted killings and hurting Iran’s missile program,” said Mansharof. “I doubt Trump has the patience for this—Trump likes quick wins.”
At the heart of the current negotiations are several well-known but deeply contentious issues that have long defined the conflict among Iran, the US, and Israel. First is Iran’s nuclear program, with Washington demanding zero uranium enrichment and more intrusive international inspections, while Tehran insists on its right to enrich uranium. It also refuses to hand over the roughly 440 kilograms of enriched uranium it already possesses.
“The Iranians will not back down from this, leaving little room for flexibility,” said Mansharof. “On the other issues, there appears to be a greater chance for an agreement.”
Still, it is difficult to see how the two sides will reach a middle ground on this issue.
Both sides are also divided over Iran’s regional influence, including its support for terrorist groups across the Middle East, which the US views as destabilizing.
Maritime security in the Gulf remains another major sticking point, with the Strait of Hormuz still badly disrupted. Hundreds of ships and about 20,000 seafarers remained stranded in the Gulf on Tuesday, while a maritime security firm warned that fraudulent messages were circulating offering vessels supposed Iranian “clearance” for cryptocurrency payments.
Ultimately, the core conflict lies in a mutual lack of trust. The US is seeking verifiable guarantees that Iran will abandon both its nuclear ambitions and its regional agenda, while Iran is looking for assurances that any future agreement will not be abandoned by Washington, as previous deals were.
“Iran wants assurances both in the agreement and with UN Security Council guarantees that the US and Israel will no longer attack it,” Mansharof said.
Beyond Iran, another volatile front is Lebanon and Israel’s ongoing conflict with Hezbollah. After a ceasefire between the sides was reached at the end of 2024, Hezbollah resumed rocket fire on Israel, prompting an immediate Israeli counterattack.
On Sunday, the Israeli military published a map showing its deployment line inside southern Lebanon, bringing dozens of mostly abandoned villages under Israeli control. Reuters reported that the line ran roughly 5 to 10 kilometers inside Lebanese territory, reinforcing Israel’s message that it intends to maintain a forward position there for now.
For Israel, Hezbollah’s intervention is part of Iran’s broader regional strategy, with the group serving as a key Iranian proxy.
“Hezbollah is a strategic asset for Iran,” said Mansharof. “Hezbollah joined the current war to serve the Iranian interest of survival, as it recognized the threat to the survival of the Iranian regime. Therefore, Iran will not abandon Hezbollah.”
Yet a permanent ceasefire between Iran and the US would not necessarily bring calm to the Israeli-Lebanese front.
“For Israel, the presence of Hezbollah in southern Lebanon is unbearable,” Mansharof added. “Israel may be able to accept limitations to its military operations in the depth of Lebanon, but it will not accept a ceasefire in southern Lebanon and in the areas in which Iran smuggles weapons to Hezbollah, which will enable Hezbollah to rebuild itself.”
Meanwhile, as long as Israel remains on Lebanese territory, Hezbollah retains a justification for continuing the fight, Neriah said.
Efforts to open a higher-level diplomatic channel between Israel and Lebanon remain in the background, including discussion of what could become a historic meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun. For now, the more immediate track is lower-level but still unusual: a second round of ambassador-level talks between Israel and Lebanon is scheduled for Thursday in Washington, following the first direct talks between the two countries in decades on April 14 under US auspices.
The proposed agenda centers on a ceasefire, border security arrangements, and—most controversially—Israel’s demand that Hezbollah be disarmed as part of any long-term agreement. Aoun, though, faces serious internal constraints. Hezbollah’s influence over large segments of Lebanese politics and society, combined with its continued armed presence and its framing of negotiations as capitulation, leaves Beirut in a precarious position, caught between international pressure to engage diplomatically and domestic pressure not to legitimize Israel or undermine Hezbollah’s self-declared role as Lebanon’s protector.
Even if talks between Washington and Tehran do resume, deep mistrust and irreconcilable demands—especially over Iran’s nuclear program, regional influence, and maritime access—make a breakthrough look far from certain. At the same time, the Lebanon front and the continuing disruption in the Strait of Hormuz show how quickly parallel crises could intensify, even if a broader US-Iran deal remains alive.
Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
