Israel has agreed to explore a ceasefire framework directly with the Lebanese government, despite Beirut’s failure to uphold the 2024 agreement requiring Hezbollah to disarm and withdraw north of the Litani River.
“In light of Lebanon’s repeated requests to open direct negotiations with Israel, I instructed at the Cabinet meeting yesterday to open direct negotiations with Lebanon as soon as possible,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a statement on Thursday. “The negotiations will focus on the disarmament of Hezbollah and the establishing of peaceful relations between Israel and Lebanon.”
The move appears intended as a gesture of coordination with U.S. President Donald Trump ahead of diplomatic contacts linked to talks in Islamabad. Yet it is difficult to imagine that the Lebanese government—unable even to expel the Iranian ambassador—can guarantee peace with Tehran’s most aggressive Shi’ite proxy. The international community’s desire for calm risks overlooking Hezbollah’s persistent determination to continue fighting on behalf of its patron, Iran.
Hezbollah follows directives from Tehran, yet it also possesses its own deeply rooted history of violent confrontation, a reality that seems temporarily forgotten amid the global desire for quiet. The conflict between Israel and Lebanon is not a matter of rhetorical formulas but of decisions that affect life and death.
Some 600,000 Israeli citizens remain displaced from their homes, deprived of normal work and schooling. In recent days alone, hundreds have been killed, the majority Hezbollah operatives, alongside civilians caught in the conflict and young Israeli soldiers who have fallen confronting the Iranian-backed force launching missiles and drones toward Israeli communities.
South of the Litani River lies a landscape marked by tunnel entrances used to store weapons and supplies for a planned invasion of Israel—an attack Hezbollah sought to initiate the day after Oct. 7, 2023.
The Shi’ite terrorist militia attempted to create a deadly two-front war designed to encircle Israel. Only Israel’s rapid decision to confront jihadist aggression on multiple fronts prevented a far greater catastrophe. Under the 2024 agreement, Lebanon committed to disarming Hezbollah and removing its forces from the border area, yet these commitments were never implemented.
Israeli civilians in the north have endured daily rocket fire and remain unable to return to their homes. The state has an obligation to restore security and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure that relies heavily on missiles and drones.
While Netanyahu has indicated readiness to engage in discussions with Lebanon, Hezbollah remains the most prominent instrument of Iran’s hostility toward Israel and the West. It represents the most active arm of Tehran’s regional strategy.
Hezbollah’s ideological roots reflect a broader jihadist framework. At a 2003 conference in Stockholm attended by Sunni Muslim Brotherhood figures, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi declared jihad against Israel a religious necessity. While Shi’ite tradition historically framed jihad as a matter of interpretation, Hezbollah embraced it as an obligation aimed at “liberating territory from foreign presence.”
Since the 1980s, the organization has adopted Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as the foundation of its political doctrine, rejecting the legitimacy of the Lebanese state while receiving financial and military support from Iran. Its objectives have consistently included the declared goal of “liberating Jerusalem,” linking military confrontation with political domination of Lebanon.
Alongside its military buildup, Hezbollah developed extensive global criminal networks, including drug trafficking operations, while establishing a record of international terrorism: the 1983 bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut that killed 300 people; the 1992 and 1994 attacks in Buenos Aires, including the bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center that killed 85; systematic kidnappings; intervention in Syria in support of Bashar Assad; and the 2006 Second Lebanon War initiated through cross-border abductions and killings. Throughout these decades, Hezbollah has maintained a continuous campaign of missile attacks against Israel.
The group’s consolidation of influence within Lebanon relied not only on armed force but also on extensive social welfare networks financed by Iran, as well as targeted assassinations, most notably the 2005 murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and 21 others.
Hezbollah’s armed takeover of parts of Beirut in 2008 further demonstrated its dominance, and the pattern of coercion has continued ever since. Lebanon has increasingly borne the consequences of this reality. Hassan Nasrallah’s leadership of the terror group represented one of the most influential and dangerous centers of jihadist power globally.
Until now, Israel has sought to separate the Iranian ceasefire track from the Lebanese front. Yet diplomatic pressure—particularly through Pakistani mediation—suggests that prospects for progress with Iran may depend on some degree of Israeli flexibility.
Nevertheless, Israel has fundamental obligations to its citizens, including the farmers and families of northern communities, many of whom remain displaced and unable to rebuild their lives. Once again, the central issue confronting the Jewish state is one that many prefer to overlook: survival.
