Netanyahu Presents US-Brokered Lebanon-Israel Framework Deal as Opposition Grows

A US-brokered framework agreement signed by Lebanon and Israel in Washington on 26 June has triggered widespread political opposition in Lebanon, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presenting it as an achievement for Israel and intensifying backlash over sovereignty and accountability.

Under the framework, the Lebanese army would assume control of designated “pilot zones”, dismantle the infrastructure of non-state armed groups and verify their disarmament before Israeli forces gradually redeploy, while Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam have defended the agreement as the start of a process intended to restore state sovereignty and secure a complete Israeli withdrawal.

Al Jazeera

Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem described the agreement as “a humiliation, a disgrace and a surrender of sovereignty”, declaring it effectively null and void, while the Higher Islamic Shia Council called it an “agreement of submission” imposed under American pressure.

The dispute has also been framed around Lebanon’s relationship with Iran, with a Lebanese presidential source saying the Lebanese state wanted to say “it is not a card in Iran’s hands, that it has a different path, and that we are the decision-makers, not Iran.”

Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said he was “not seeking a confrontation” with Hezbollah, while insisting the government would not abandon its goal of restricting the possession of arms to the state.

Salam told reporters that “we must do everything possible to avoid an armed confrontation with Hezbollah,” but added that “we will not yield to blackmail or threats of civil war, and we will not retreat from the objective of limiting weapons to the state,” as he rejected criticism that Lebanon was responsible for enforcing the cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel.

Al-Hurra

He said he had called, together with France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other partners, for a conference in Paris on March 5 to support the Lebanese Army, and he recalled that Lebanon had committed under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 to make south Lebanon a demilitarized zone while warning, “Yet today, we are discovering tunnels and weapons.”

Salam also responded to criticism from Walid Joumblatt by saying the 1949 Armistice Agreement remains a “fundamental reference,” and he said the cease-fire agreement of Nov. 27, 2024, ended the previous escalation and “also did not refer to the Armistice Agreement.”

The framework agreement is described as creating a phased framework for the Lebanese Army to restore the state’s authority across the whole of Lebanon’s territory through phased deployments to “pilot zones” in the south, in parallel with disarmament of non-state armed groups and dismantling of their military infrastructure to enable the gradual exit of Israeli forces.

Arab News reported that Hezbollah insisted that Iran should remain its sole negotiating party to secure an Israeli withdrawal within the 60-day deadline outlined in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding reached on June 18, while the Lebanese government pressed ahead with the course set during the fifth round of US-mediated negotiations with Israel.

The same reporting said the framework agreement and its security annex sparked warnings that the US-backed deal could deepen internal divisions and even risk renewed civil war, and it described the domestic dispute as centered on Lebanon’s relationship with Iran and the question of who negotiates with Israel.

In the implementation phase, Arab News said Maj. Gen. Joseph Clearfield and Admiral Brad Cooper arrived in Beirut on Monday and met President Aoun and Army Commander Gen. Rodolphe Haykal to discuss next steps, as the US Embassy in Beirut said the agreement provides “a realistic path out of the current conflict and establishes a clear and structured process to restore Lebanon’s sovereignty and disarm Hezbollah.”