The ceasefire agreement takes effect and then breaks — Israel airstrikes Lebanon; who is the true destroyer?

Less than 24 hours after the US and Iran announced a ceasefire, Israel launched its largest-scale airstrikes on Lebanon since the start of this round of fighting—50 fighter jets dropped about 160 bombs on 100 targets within 10 minutes, causing at least 303 deaths and 1,150 injuries. Lebanon’s civil defense department said this was the deadliest day in terms of civilian casualties in Lebanon since the fighting between Lebanon and Israel reignited in early March. The Israeli military also destroyed the last bridge connecting southern Lebanon with other parts of the country.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu then made it clear in a video address that the US-Iran ceasefire agreement does not involve Hezbollah in Lebanon. “We will continue to strongly strike them.” He emphasized that the US-Iran ceasefire “is not the end of the war,” but only a stage in the process for Israel to achieve all its objectives; Israel is “ready to return to the battlefield at any time,” with “a finger always on the trigger.”

Iran reacted strongly. Iran’s parliamentary speaker, Kalibaf, said in a statement that 3 of the 10 ceasefire provisions from the Iranian side had been violated, including the breach of the Lebanon ceasefire commitment, a drone entering Iranian airspace being shot down, and the United States denying Iran’s right to uranium enrichment—“the negotiation basis has been openly undermined.” Iranian President Pezeshkian also posted a condemnation, saying that Israel’s strikes were a “dangerous signal of deception and failure to comply with potential agreements,” adding that “Iran will never abandon Lebanon’s brothers and sisters.”

The international community has voiced concerns one after another. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Turk said the strike was “incredible.” Leaders from multiple countries, including the UK, France, Germany, and Spain, strongly condemned Israel’s airstrikes on Lebanon and called for the ceasefire agreement to cover Lebanon. The EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kallas, also explicitly stated that “the Iran ceasefire should extend to Lebanon.”

The United States’ stance in this matter appears ambiguous. In an interview, Trump said he had asked Netanyahu to be “more low-key” in Lebanon operations, to support US diplomatic efforts to push for a ceasefire agreement with Iran, and said Netanyahu agreed to “lower the intensity of the operation.” However, Trump also made it clear that Lebanon was not included in the US-Iran ceasefire scope. This stance was interpreted by the media as “tacit approval of Israel’s actions, not coordination.”

Experts believe that Israel’s intense strikes on Lebanon have deeper strategic intentions. Wang Jin, Director of the Center for International Strategic Studies at Northwestern University, pointed out that Israel did not endorse the ceasefire announced by the United States, because Israel could not directly participate in communications between the US and Iran. Against this backdrop, Israel needed to use its actions to demonstrate its position that “the ceasefire does not include Lebanon.” At the same time, Israel also hopes to take advantage of the ceasefire window to thoroughly weaken Hezbollah in Lebanon, change the balance of power, and ensure Hezbollah is in a weaker position in any future agreement, while also sending a signal to Iran: the US-Iran ceasefire cannot protect Hezbollah—thereby forcing Iran to make bigger concessions in ceasefire negotiations.

This airstrike puts the US-Iran ceasefire agreement to a real test. Iran has already clearly told the mediator, Pakistan, that before a ceasefire is achieved in Lebanon, the Iranian delegation will not participate in talks with the United States. An informed source said that if Israel continues to violate the ceasefire agreement and keeps striking Lebanon, Iran will consider withdrawing from the agreement.
#Gate廣場四月發帖挑戰