The US-Iran peace agreement may have ended active hostilities between the two countries, but analysts warn that Israel could use Lebanon as a pressure point to undermine a deal it views as a major strategic setback.
The first paragraph of the memorandum of understanding signed by US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian commits both sides and their allies to the "immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon," while reaffirming Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
But experts told Anadolu that Israel is deeply unhappy with the deal and could seek to derail it by escalating tensions in Lebanon.
"Netanyahu will try to do all he can to derail the deal. If not now, then in the coming weeks and months. His tool will be Lebanon," Ahron Bregman, a senior teaching fellow in the Department for War Studies at King's College London, told Anadolu.
Trump and Pezeshkian electronically signed the 14-point memorandum this week, a framework for ending the conflict that includes sanctions relief, nuclear negotiations and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz ahead of a final agreement to be negotiated within 60 days.
Analysts, however, warned that implementation remains uncertain as Israel weighs the implications of a deal that could ease Iran's economic isolation and strengthen Tehran's regional position.
Although the memorandum commits all parties to ending military operations in Lebanon, Israel has continued near-daily strikes in the country despite a ceasefire that took effect earlier this year. Strikes continued Thursday, after the deal was signed.
Since March 2, the Israeli attacks have killed and wounded thousands while displacing around 1 million.
Bregman argued that Lebanon offers Israel the most effective avenue for challenging the agreement without directly confronting Washington over the broader US-Iran negotiations.
"Netanyahu will look for reasons to escalate in Lebanon, in order to provoke Iran to defend Hezbollah by hitting Israel,” he said. “This way, there will be a crisis and, hopefully, as the Israelis see it, a derailment of the deal and the negotiations.”
Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the RANE Network, said Israel is using attacks in Lebanon as a strategy to weaken regional rivals and keep them from rebuilding.
"They had done this with Hamas since the ceasefire last year,” he said. “They'll continue to do it with Hezbollah because if there's a ceasefire, then they can rearm and rebuild their infrastructure.”
Analysts said Israeli concerns extend beyond military considerations and into the political and economic benefits Iran could gain if the agreement moves forward.
"The idea is to provoke Hezbollah or Iran into reacting in a way that pushes America back into a hawkish position," said Bohl.
Rather than seeking a direct US military confrontation with Iran, he argued, Israel's primary objective may be to undermine Washington's willingness to deliver the sanctions relief outlined in the memorandum.
"Even if America is not bombing Iran, what they (Israel) want to do is convince Washington not to provide the sanctions relief to the Iranians,” he said.
Bohl said Israeli actions in Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen could be aimed at provoking a response from Tehran that would undermine confidence in the agreement.
For Iran, however, economic relief is likely to take precedence over retaliation, he added.
"The Israeli goal is to undermine the process of sanctions relief and to undermine America's confidence that it can trust the Iranians," said Bohl.
The emerging agreement has also highlighted growing tensions between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Speaking at the G7 summit this week, Trump suggested he had urged Netanyahu to show greater restraint in Lebanon.
"We have a little dispute over Lebanon," Trump said. "You can do a little softer touch, Bibi. You don't have to knock down a building every time somebody walks into it that's from Hezbollah."
In a separate interview, Trump said of Netanyahu: "He'll do whatever I want him to do."
Bregman said the comments suggest Trump is increasingly wary of actions that could jeopardize the diplomatic process.
"Trump will keep an eye on Netanyahu,” he said. “Given the tense relations between Trump and Netanyahu, I'm expecting a growing rift between the two.”
Bohl said Trump's criticism may influence Israeli behavior at the margins but is unlikely to alter its broader strategy.
"It can get Netanyahu to be less willing to violate the ceasefire in really blatant ways,” he said. “It's not going to end the imperative for Israel to violate the ceasefire as many times as it can."
He noted that previous US administrations were most successful in changing Israeli behavior when they used military assistance as leverage.
"It's still a little bit hard to see Trump doing the same thing, because that's the only physical real way that you can get the Israelis to change their behaviors to deny them those direct arms."
However, Bohl predicted that if the violations are big enough to restart the war, Trump could get more assertive.
Analysts also pointed to domestic political pressures on Netanyahu, whose coalition remains heavily dependent on far-right parties deeply opposed to concessions toward Iran.
Israel is due to hold legislative elections in October, adding further pressure on the prime minister.
"The war is helping hold together Netanyahu's coalition ahead of the election," Bohl said. "His far right wants to ignore these ceasefires entirely."
According to Bohl, Netanyahu has built a political narrative around being the leader most capable of confronting regional threats and managing Israel's relationship with Washington.
However, the prime minister now faces criticism from both ends of the political spectrum.
"Netanyahu is politically stuck between a rock and a hard place,” said Bohl. “He's getting slammed from his far-right over this deal that they assume that he's the one who can actually shape and sabotage and change, and he's getting slammed from the centrists and the left for having even started the war to begin with."
Bohl said this is probably the toughest spot Netanyahu has ever been in politically, having sold a war that was supposed to solve all of Israel's problems.
Bohl said many Israeli officials may view the agreement as an even greater setback than the 2015 nuclear deal because it offers broader economic relief while leaving Iran's regional posture largely unchanged.
"If it is actually implemented, it is a significant setback for Israeli interests," he said. “It will mean that Iran will break out of a lot of its economic isolation and keep its nuclear program largely intact and be able to reconstitute and rehabilitate.”
Bohl argued that the agreement falls far short of the transformative outcome many in Israel had hoped for at the start of the conflict, including an Iranian government that would end support for groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
“This government absolutely will not do that,” he said. “That is also a setback for the Israelis as they set the stage for the slow annexation of the West Bank."
news_share_descriptionsubscription_contact
