Lebanon and the Zionist entity signed a framework agreement on Friday in Washington aimed at ending hostilities between the Zionist entity and Hezbollah, following several days of negotiations brokered by the United States. The trilateral document, signed by Lebanese Ambassador Nada Moawad, Zionist counterpart Yechiel Leiter, and US officials at the State Department, outlines initial steps toward de-escalating the conflict and restoring Lebanese sovereignty, though key details remain undisclosed.
Zionist Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the deal permits Zionist forces to maintain a military presence in southern Lebanon as long as Hezbollah remains armed. He described the agreement as allowing the Lebanese army to begin reclaiming control over territories currently occupied by Zionist forces, starting with two designated “pilot zones” from which Zionist troops would withdraw. These zones mark the first formal acknowledgment of Zionist “redeployment” from southern Lebanon, where its forces have operated in a self-declared “security zone” designed to prevent Hezbollah attacks.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio characterized the agreement as the beginning of a complex and necessary process, emphasizing Washington’s commitment to facilitating implementation through a trilateral Military Coordination Group for Lebanon. He announced an immediate allocation of $100 million in humanitarian aid in cooperation with the United Nations and reaffirmed plans to enhance Lebanese Armed Forces capabilities with over $30 million in funding to bolster national sovereignty.
Lebanese officials welcomed the accord as a step toward restoring territorial integrity. Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun highlighted the prospect of Lebanese citizens returning to areas deemed “fully liberated” and rebuilding destroyed homes. Ambassador Moawad expressed optimism about diminishing Iranian and Hezbollah influence in favor of peace.
However, the agreement has faced significant opposition from Hezbollah and its allies. Hezbollah deputy leader Naim Qassem denounced the pact as a “grave blunder” that legitimizes Zionist occupation and constitutes a unilateral concession undermining Lebanese sovereignty. He rejected linking Zionist withdrawal to Hezbollah’s disarmament, calling the condition a crossing of “red lines,” and affirmed the group’s commitment to maintaining armed resistance. Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah warned that implementation might provoke internal conflict, a concern echoed by Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who cautioned against domestic strife.
Tensions remained high despite the ceasefire preceding the agreement. On Friday, the Zionist military reported striking and killing seven Hezbollah members near the occupied zone, an event unverified by independent sources. The Zionist military also issued warnings to residents of Mansouri, a southern Lebanese town recently incorporated into the occupation zone, instructing civilians to leave the area to avoid harm. A drone strike attributed to Zionist forces targeted a location in Nabatieh Al-Fawqa outside the designated security zone, intensifying concerns over ongoing violence.
Experts have highlighted the uncertain future of the deal, noting that without firm commitments from the Zionist entity regarding full withdrawal, the security and reconstruction of southern Lebanon remain in question. The division between the Lebanese government’s engagement with the Zionist entity and Hezbollah’s rejection illustrates the fragile domestic political environment.
The US-brokered framework follows a recent Iran-US memorandum of understanding intended to end broader hostilities in the region. Hezbollah insists that agreement should serve as the foundation for peace rather than the new pact, underscoring the complex interplay of regional actors in resolving the conflict. As discussions continue, the implementation of the agreement and its capacity to bring lasting peace to Lebanon remain uncertain.