Hezbollah halts fire following US-Iran truce as Netanyahu excludes Lebanon from ceasefire

Hezbollah has ceased fire in Lebanon following the announcement of a two-week truce between the United States and Iran, yet Israeli forces continued their offensive, creating fresh uncertainty across the Lebanese front. According to three Lebanese sources close to the group who spoke to Reuters, Hezbollah halted fire against northern Israel and Israeli units within Lebanon early Wednesday; however, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the ceasefire does not extend to Lebanon.

Following this development, the Israeli military maintained its strikes in southern Lebanon and issued new evacuation orders. Simultaneously, the Lebanese army urged civilians not to return to villages along the border.

While the US decision to suspend strikes against Iran for two weeks has established a new diplomatic landscape regarding the trajectory of the regional war, the scope of the ceasefire on the Lebanese front became a subject of contention within its first hours.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif announced that the US, Iran, and their allies had reached an agreement for an “immediate ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon and elsewhere.” Shortly thereafter, however, Netanyahu declared that the truce was not applicable to Lebanon.

In a statement released via X, Netanyahu noted that Israel supports initiatives by US President Donald Trump aimed at ensuring “Iran no longer poses a nuclear, missile, and terror threat to America, Israel, Iran’s Arab neighbors, and the world.”

Despite this, Netanyahu explicitly emphasized in the same statement that the two-week ceasefire “does not include Lebanon.”

Notwithstanding Netanyahu’s position, three Lebanese sources informed Reuters that Hezbollah has stopped firing on the ground. These sources added that Hezbollah is expected to issue a formal declaration outlining its official stance regarding the ceasefire and Netanyahu’s comments excluding Lebanon.

The Israeli side, meanwhile, opted to continue its offensive. Lebanese media reported fresh Israeli strikes targeting the south of the country, as the Israeli military issued another evacuation call for the southern coastal city of Tyre.

Military spokesperson Avichay Adraee warned residents, particularly those in the Shabriha area, to “evacuate your homes immediately,” sharing a map pinpointing the specific building to be targeted.

It was noted that the entirety of Tyre already falls within the broad evacuation zone covering southern Lebanon, and the Israeli military has repeatedly called on residents to leave the area in recent weeks.

Prompted by the activity on the ground, the Lebanese army issued a public warning to civilians. The army command stated that news of a ceasefire had created an expectation of return among the public; however, it warned that such a move carries serious security risks while Israeli attacks continue. Consequently, the military requested that citizens refrain from returning to southern villages and towns.

The statement emphasized that civilians must not approach areas where Israeli forces have advanced, warning that they would otherwise risk their lives due to the ongoing strikes.

According to Lebanese officials, more than 1,500 people have been killed and over 1 million displaced in Israeli attacks on Lebanon since March 2.

The Israeli military, having launched an invasion in the south of the country, previously announced its intention to seize more territory to expand an area it defines as a “buffer zone.”

According to Al Jazeera correspondent Nida Ibrahim, the possibility of an agreement with Iran or a potential de-escalation places Netanyahu in a difficult political position.

Ibrahim noted that Netanyahu feels compelled to demonstrate to the Israeli public that the war continues on at least one front, leading him to keep the Lebanese front active.

In this context, the deployment of additional troops to Southern Lebanon and the maintenance of military pressure are linked not only to security calculations on the ground but also to the need to project a message for domestic politics. Ibrahim stated that Israel’s primary concern is a scenario where hostilities end, a basis for an agreement with Iran is formed, or the war rapidly dissipates.

At the onset of the conflict, Netanyahu had promised the public “absolute victory,” “regime change,” and the “elimination of the Iranian threat.”

The fact that none of these objectives have been met at this stage increases the pressure on Netanyahu. Consequently, the Lebanese front serves a political function in addition to its military role.

Indeed, opposition leader Yair Lapid targeted Netanyahu directly, describing the process as “a political catastrophe of a magnitude never seen in our history.” Lapid stated that Israel was not even at the table when decisions concerning the core of national security were being made.

In his statement, Lapid noted that the military had done everything asked of it and that the public had shown great resilience.

Conversely, the opposition leader asserted that Netanyahu has failed both politically and strategically. Lapid stated that Netanyahu had not achieved a single one of the goals he set for himself and remarked that repairing the resulting political and strategic damage would take years.