Lebanon, Israel and the United States signed a “Trilateral Framework” agreement in Washington on Friday, establishing a phased process that links any Israeli military withdrawal from Lebanese territory to the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups. The accord, reached after five rounds of direct negotiations mediated by the US, designates two initial pilot zones in southern Lebanon where the Lebanese Armed Forces are to assume full security responsibility once Hezbollah and other militias are disarmed and their infrastructure dismantled. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Israel Katz stated that Israeli forces will remain in a security zone inside Lebanon, including the Beaufort ridge, until Hezbollah is completely disarmed across the entire country, and that Israel retains freedom of military action to counter threats.

Viewed from Beirut, the government of Prime Minister Nawaf Salam presented the framework as a first step toward restoring state sovereignty, enabling the return of displaced civilians and unlocking international reconstruction aid. The Lebanese Army command, while calling for responsible protest, warned it would not permit any breach of civil peace, road blockages or attacks on property. In Washington, Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the agreement as the beginning of a path toward lasting peace and security, and the State Department released the full text, which commits Lebanon to the exclusive control of arms by the state and bars any third party from using force on its behalf without explicit authorisation.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem issued a written statement on Saturday rejecting the framework as “null and void,” a “humiliation” and a “surrender of sovereignty.” He argued that conditioning Israeli withdrawal on the disarmament of the resistance crosses all red lines and legitimises a prolonged occupation that could lead to annexation. Qassem insisted that the Iran-US memorandum of understanding, which he said guaranteed an immediate and permanent ceasefire and Lebanon’s territorial integrity, must be the basis for any settlement, and he vowed that Hezbollah would not abandon its weapons. The group’s parliamentary bloc likewise condemned the agreement as a gift to the enemy and warned that the government could not impose it without risking civil war. Protests erupted in Beirut, and the Lebanese Army deployed to prevent unrest.

From Tehran’s perspective, as reflected in Iranian state-linked media, the framework is portrayed as a concessionary deal that undermines the “resistance axis” and disregards the Iran-US understanding that had already secured a ceasefire. Israeli officials, by contrast, frame the agreement as a strategic blow to Iran’s influence, asserting that Tehran failed to force an Israeli withdrawal through threats. The United Arab Emirates welcomed the accord, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the next step must be the disarmament of non-state groups. Implementation now hinges on a security annex to be drafted with US support, the establishment of a trilateral military coordination group, and the gradual handover of the pilot zones. Further direct negotiations toward a comprehensive peace agreement are expected, though the fundamental dispute over the sequencing of disarmament and withdrawal leaves the process in a fragile state.